Give me a good reason why Iran should NOT have nuclear weapons

deus3x

deus3x

deus3x

Associate
Joined
25 Nov 2009
Posts
857
Location
UK
I have got into a debate with my brother why Iran should not have nuclear weapons. I do NOT what them to have that kind of capability as the region is too unstable as it is.

My brother has come back with the following remarks...

Iran have as much right to Nuclear power as any other country. If he resided next to the bullies that are Israel then he would want to arm myself with nuclear weapons.

Whats your thoughts on why Iran should or should not have that kind of capability?
 
The logical choice for me is either allow everyone in fairness to have Nuclear weaponry, or have a full-scale disarmament. It seems a bit ironic that we're all allowed them but an Islamic country isn't.
 
Iran have as much right to try and develop nuclear weapons as anyone else.

We also have just as much of a right to try and stop them.

:)
 
It's like giving a manchild a box of matches and a couple of fireworks. Even though they are legally allowed to have them, is it sensible to give it to them?
 
[TW]Sponge;21296437 said:
Full of naughty people wanting to do naughty things.
Click to expand...

That could apply to any country and on that basis no one should have nuclear weapons. It can also be argued the US and Britain have contributed to the destabilisation of the region and therefore it makes sense for Iran to do whatever it needs to protect itself.

Countries with nuclear weapon defend their stockpiles as deterrent rather than first strike weapon. In which case why shouldn't Iran be allowed to build a deterrent?
 
deus3x said:
Iran have as much right to Nuclear power as any other country. If he resided next to the bullies that are Israel then he would want to arm myself with nuclear weapons.

Whats your thoughts on why Iran should or should not have that kind of capability?
Click to expand...
Because Iran "hates" Egypt, Saudi, etc. just as much as they "hate" us and having that sort of hold over them would make the rest of them want nuclear weapons as well. They also hate Israel, and even though Israel "has" its own nuclear deterrent... well.
 
Last edited:
Iran is ruled by hard line extremists who make no attempt to hide their ambition to ride the region of particular religious/racial groups. They are pretty much universally loathed, even by most people in Iran. The world will be much safer place with a nuclear free Iran.


shine said:
In which case why shouldn't Iran be allowed to build a deterrent?
Click to expand...
Why should we run the risk of finding out how Iran would use it weapons. Their track record isn't brilliant.
 
Last edited:
shine said:
Countries with nuclear weapon defend their stockpiles as deterrent rather than first strike weapon. In which case why shouldn't Iran be allowed to build a deterrent?
Click to expand...

well as long as it would just be a deterrent.....I don't think everyone else is quite so sure.
 
Because they don't need them? :confused:

Read up on The Manhattan Project, nothing but regret from some of our species' greatest minds. Nobody needs them, they are evil.

Oh, of course that ignores the fact that Ahmedinejad is a grade A lunatic.
 
Throrik said:
The logical choice for me is either allow everyone in fairness to have Nuclear weaponry, or have a full-scale disarmament. It seems a bit ironic that we're all allowed them but an Islamic country isn't.
Click to expand...

This.

We should only use nuclear power for energy if need be, not weaponry.
 
Stretch said:
Israel is ruled by hard line extremists who make no attempt to hide their ambition to rid the region of particular religious/racial groups. They are pretty much universally loathed, even by most people everywhere except the UK and US. The world will be much safer place with a nuclear free Israel.
Click to expand...

Fixed
 
Nuclear weapons development also runs the risk of weapons getting into the hands of terrorists, either as nuclear bombs or radioactive material to be used in a dirty bomb. I think other countries should have a say in who does/doesn't get to make nuclear weapons unless the country that wants to make the bomb can prove certain safeguards are in place.
 
The reason is that nobody should have nuclear weapons and that we should all give them up.

However in practice this is far more difficult - if Russia, the US and the UK gave up nuclear weapons tommorrow and got rid of every single one but other states didn't, then this would be a pretty bad situation.

So the endgame is that eventually nobody has them and everyone reduces how many they have very gradually so we avoid the situation where the major powers dont have them but some people do. Obviously a key part of this is that nobody else decides to become nuclear-armed.

A nuclear arms-race in the Middle East is a particularly bad idea, especially as it would seem to lack the MAD 'pact' that presented us all dying a horrible death in the Cold War.

The other reason Iran shouldn't have them is because it's illegal, given they are signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty. Signing this document made it everyones business.
 
[TW]Fox;21296559 said:
The reason is that nobody should have nuclear weapons and that we should all give them up.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% with this but what about nuclear power? If Iran is just building nuclear reactors for domestic energy production should we let them?
 
shine said:
I agree 100% with this but what about nuclear power? If Iran is just building nuclear reactors for domestic energy production should we let them?
Click to expand...

Absolutely we should. Nuclear Power is excellent and everyone should have the right to safely develop it. I don't think anyone is against Iran developing domestic nuclear energy. If this is all they are doing they should be left alone to do it, however it's prudent to allow the IAEA to first confirm this really is all they are doing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom