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

[TW]Fox;21298346 said:
100% agree.

That said the whole scientist thing is a bit odd. Blatantly obvious, crudely executed operations against low ranking scientists in positions of no influence seem entirely pointless to me. All they've done is... generate sympathy for the Iranian cause....

WAIT... am I doing that conspiracy thing here? :eek:
Click to expand...

That is not a conspiracy theory that is a widely held belief by Iranians. That being this is not Mossad at all but all part of the internal powerplay between the allegedly democratically elected president and the theocracy. I wonder whether the BBC, Guardian and Fox ever bother to mention that Khamenei called a fatwa against nuclear weapons. Would not be convenient for the scaremongering would it especially as those things are taken with quite an irreversible stance. As per the Speakers Corner thread this is not a country with a reasonable unified leadership structure all working towards the same goals.

This is a country which is not as powerful as it would like others to believe, with a history greater than that, trying to find its place in the world and failing miserably. It also has fallen foul of one of the most belligerent nations on this planet that always needs to have an enemy to justify its own military expenditure and production base. Add to this the election and the justification of war for political capital and gain and you end up with a pretty poor situation for the people on the receiving end. Hopefully that will be no one in the UK services or residents of this country falling afoul of any terrorist backlash from any action that may be taken. And I am still hoping there won't be and would be shocked if people are really that stupid. However, they may feel they have boxed themselves into a position where they have nothing left to do but make a stupid action. And that goes to both sides.
 
scorza said:
Well technically Israel never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty along with India and Pakistan, North Korea have but since withdrew.
Click to expand...

which means israel is even more dangerous! if israels nukes arent being monitered how do we know they arent being sold to the highest bidder?
 
The issue with Iran achieving a successful nuclear/thermonuclear detonation is that it could trigger localised proliferation in the region with Israel. These are two countries, admittedly Iran more so, where the considerable resources used in developing offensive weapons should be employed to better the standard of living for their populations.
 
SpeedFreak said:
The issue with Iran achieving a successful nuclear/thermonuclear detonation is that it could trigger localised proliferation in the region with Israel. These are two countries, admittedly Iran more so, where the considerable resources used in developing offensive weapons should be employed to better the standard of living for their populations.
Click to expand...

Well I think Israeli people have a decent standard of living - it's their neighbours they keep in concentration camps that don't do so well. And Iran was doing just find until recently and was quite an open society with great roads being made to raise the standard of living. And here lies the problems with sanctions. They will hit the poor the most who are the ones who will root for the president and the more radical elements more and more.
 
SpeedFreak said:
The issue with Iran achieving a successful nuclear/thermonuclear detonation is that it could trigger localised proliferation in the region with Israel. These are two countries, admittedly Iran more so, where the considerable resources used in developing offensive weapons should be employed to better the standard of living for their populations.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because the Zionists and Elite Islamists will really listen to reason, care about their people and so on.

Not going to happen.

Now although it is redundant at this stage, why doesn't the UK stop spending chunks of money on the trident system and put it to better use?

Nobody is the angel here.
 
StriderX said:
Yeah, because the Zionists and Elite Islamists will really listen to reason, care about their people and so on.

Not going to happen.

Now although it is redundant at this stage, why doesn't the UK stop spending chunks of money on the trident system and put it to better use?

Nobody is the angel here.
Click to expand...

I agree on that, there is very little that can be done to prevent them from continuing with development, it's just sad more than anything else.

Xordium, I am aware than Israel has an okay standard of living but they still have a high level of poverty.
 
Historically the only defence from using nuclear weapons since WWII has been mutual assured destruction, unfortunately it seems the current issues in muslim countries (suicide bombings on an almost daily basis) supports the idea that in the wrong hands MAD would not prevail.
 
A vast majority of Muslims do not associate themselves with suicide bombings, in the name of God, or anything else for that matter.

It just so happens a suicide bomber from a random Middle Eastern country will make the news, because that's what people want to hear. It doesn't constitute as the fact of the matter though that the large population of Muslims living in many countries are pretty well behaved.

For your information Pakistan have nuclear weapons capability, and a history of suicide bombings.
 
deus3x said:
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?
Click to expand...

A stated position of the Iranian leadership is to wipe another country off the map. That in itself should disallow them from ever being able to do so at the push of a button.
 
Flying Gribble said:
A stated position of the Iranian leadership is to wipe another country off the map. That in itself should disallow them from ever being able to do so at the push of a button.
Click to expand...

Not that I agree that Iran should have nuclear weapons, but Iran have never said they'll wipe Israel off the map. They have stated they are against the "Zionist Regime in Occupied Palestine". The problem is direct translation is innacurate, and favours Western media. Farsi and English are very different languages.
 
Ricochet J said:
Not that I agree that Iran should have nuclear weapons, but Iran have never said they'll wipe Israel off the map. They have stated they are against the "Zionist Regime in Occupied Palestine". The problem is direct translation is innacurate, and favours Western media. Farsi and English are very different languages.
Click to expand...
Can't see that obvious a mistranslation in this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...jad-in-the-words-of-the-Holocaust-denier.html

Nor in this al-jazeera article:
http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2005/10/200849132648612154.html
 
Last edited:
From Wiki.....

Our dear Imam (referring to Ayatollah Khomeini) said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world.[2]
Click to expand...

To me he is talking about regime change, something the west recently did in Libya..........
 
Pate said:
Oh and to the guy who said we don't "allow" islamic countries, what about pakistan?
Click to expand...

Pakistan's nuclear programme did not receive permission, they managed to keep theirs secret until they were ready. It caught the West by surprise but they escaped sanctions as the US needed Pakistan's help to keep supply lines open to Afghanistan.
 
Flying Gribble said:
Can't see that obvious a mistranslation in this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...jad-in-the-words-of-the-Holocaust-denier.html

Nor in this al-jazeera article:
http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2005/10/200849132648612154.html
Click to expand...


You understand cultures and sayings aren't universally constant outside the borders you reside in? There are lots of sayings in Farsi, Arabic, Urdu, Punjabi, whatever, which have awful direct translations, such "As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map..." which have different meanings from the source language.

And you also understand Iran does not recognise Israel, but recognises it as "occupied Palestine"? It's part of Iran's wider move to allow everyone to recognise this. In that context can you tell me that what Amhadinejad said is the same as the English understaning of wiping another country off the map?
 
Should Iran have a civil nuclear programme? Absolutely yes.
Should Iran develop nuclear weapons? Absolutely no.
Will Iran develop nuclear weapons? I'll make my mind up following IAEA inspections.
Should Israel give an absolute answer to their nuclear capabilities? Yes.
Should Israel show signs of reducing their nuclear arsenel? Yes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom