What if Iran gets nuclear weapons?

Oh good, insults. Very mature.

My opinionS (as in two separate but related thoughts) are:

1. Iran should not have nukes.
2. Israel is not the innocent party that some would like to portray them as.

Are they an ally to the U.S.? Yeah. Maybe not the best friend to have, but they're it, and I can get wanting to stand behind them. Could there be other ways of having a presence in the Middle East if you really, truly wanted such a thing? Probably.

Personally, all I see is history repeating itself over and over with regards to that region.
 
I honestly don't get this logic where people think that Iran is suicidal enough to use nuclear weapons against Israel. Just because Iran had one crazy dude who hasn't even been President of that country for two years now, doesn't mean that they're perpetually utterly insane.
 
I honestly don't get this logic where people think that Iran is suicidal enough to use nuclear weapons against Israel. Just because Iran had one crazy dude who hasn't even been President of that country for two years now, doesn't mean that they're perpetually utterly insane.

I guarantee you a good percentage of people who feel we need to listen to Netanyahu believe Iran is is cahoots with Isis. The idea that Iran will do anything to Israel, then have the entire world gang up on them is rather ridiculous, but if you believe Iran is a country full of extreme Islamic terrorists you believe stuff like that
 
Last edited:
I honestly don't get this logic where people think that Iran is suicidal enough to use nuclear weapons against Israel. Just because Iran had one crazy dude who hasn't even been President of that country for two years now, doesn't mean that they're perpetually utterly insane.

With that logic, why are we even in negotiations?

The Supreme Leader of Iran wants to destroy Israel, and you want to make an argument for the country's sanity?

I guarantee you a good percentage of people who feel we need to listen to Netanyahu believe Iran is is cahoots with Isis. The idea that Iran will do anything to Israel, then have the entire world gang up on them is rather ridiculous, but if you believe Iran is a country full of extreme Islamic terrorists you believe stuff like that

We should allow Iran to build nuclear weapons, because they'd never be dumb enough to use them? That's your idea?

Iran does support and fund terrorism. :loco:

The non-existent relationship between ISIS and Iran is completely inconsequential to Netanyahu's speech today.
 
Last edited:
We should allow Iran to build nuclear weapons, because they'd never be dumb enough to use them? That's your idea?

Let's be honest here what right does a country who nuked another country, and a 2nd country that has it's own supply of nukes(bought and paid for by the first country) have to tell a 3rd country they can't have nukes.

Iran does support and fund terrorism.

When has Iran terrorism ever been a threat to the US? And no Oil companies that have there main offices in the US don't count

The non-existent relationship between ISIS and Iran is completely inconsequential to Netanyahu's speech today.

Yet somehow this non-existent relation gets played up by the Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran crowd.


It amazes me considering what a horrible failure Iraq was, we are basically seeing the exact same gameplan used in Iran and many have no problem or see any fault with that(it should be Noted Bibi warned us of Iraq being able to get nukes)

I am sorry shouldn't this guy lose any credibility along with any neocon who was pushing this BS 12+ years ago
 
Last edited:
Let's be honest here what right does a country who nuked another country, and a 2nd country that has it's own supply of nukes(bought and paid for by the first country) have to tell a 3rd country they can't have nukes.

I can't even with this.

When has Iran terrorism ever been a threat to the US? And no Oil companies that have there main offices in the US don't count

The key is state-sponsored terrorism; we'll probably never know how many US deaths Iran has been indirectly responsible for.

Iran's past relationship with Al-Qaeda should give you some idea.

Yet somehow this non-existent relation gets played up by the Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran crowd.

Who's tying ISIS to Iran, and who's saying we should bomb Iran?
 
I can't even with this.

It's a fair question what gives either of these countries the moral high ground when it comes to telling other countries if they should or shouldn't have nukes. I am sorry but if I am Iran I can see why I might feel the need for nukes when Israel has them. Maybe the US should push for a nuke free middle east.

The key is state-sponsored terrorism; we'll probably never know how many US deaths Iran has been indirectly responsible for.

Iran's past relationship with Al-Qaeda should give you some idea.

If the US really wants to go after state sponsored terrorism, maybe they should target Saudi Arabia, they are a much bigger threat in that regard.

Who's tying ISIS to Iran, and who's saying we should bomb Iran?

I've seen many warmongers use the terms Isis and Iran in a same sentence saying we need to stop the terrorism from both as if they somehow tied together.
 
If the US really wants to go after state sponsored terrorism, maybe they should target Saudi Arabia, they are a much bigger threat in that regard.

Saudi Arabia isn't trying to develop a nuclear weapon.

Netanyahu wasn't in Washington to discuss state-sponsored terrorism.

I've seen many warmongers use the terms Isis and Iran in a same sentence saying we need to stop the terrorism from both as if they somehow tied together.

I've not heard anyone tie them together, but they do have similarities.
 
Let's be honest here what right does a country who nuked another country, and a 2nd country that has it's own supply of nukes(bought and paid for by the first country) have to tell a 3rd country they can't have nukes.



When has Iran terrorism ever been a threat to the US? And no Oil companies that have there main offices in

Uh...countless, but one that Bibi brought up and is not talked about enough is the fact Iran tried to assassinate the Saudi ambassador with a bomb in DC which would have killed US citizens as well. Let's not pretend they arent a little bit crazy. The fact that they even tried to do that which would have surely triggered a war shows they really aren't rational players on the world stage.
 
Uh...countless, but one that Bibi brought up and is not talked about enough is the fact Iran tried to assassinate the Saudi ambassador with a bomb in DC which would have killed US citizens as well. Let's not pretend they arent a little bit crazy. The fact that they even tried to do that which would have surely triggered a war shows they really aren't rational players on the world stage.

You do realize the guy who tried to kill the Saudi ambassador was diagnosed as being bi-polar and not in touch with reality.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/us/iran-saudi-arbabsiar-profile/index.html?_s=PM:US

"If they wanted 007, I think they got Mr. Bean," Tomscha said.

"He was very disorganized, he would lose most anything and he would get the dates of the cars wrong," Tomscha said. "He'd tell you it was an '89 and maybe it was an '85. One thing you could be sure, whatever date he told you, it wasn't that year."
You really think if Iran wanted to kill somebody they would send somebody as useless as that to do the job?

I by no means am saying Iran is good, but in all reality they pose minimal threat to the US and even less if we stay out of their business. But hey you can believe Bibi who was more then happy to push us into war with Iraq with all his BS and wants us to fund his personal war on Iran now.
 
So are you dismissing it as a conspiracy then? Something the Obama administration made up? The guy that got away is in the special forces of the Revolutionary guard Btw.
 
Saudi Arabia isn't trying to develop a nuclear weapon.
If Iran gets the bomb, it's guaranteed that Saudi Arabia will start a nuclear weapons program. Take Israel out of the equation, no one wants Iran to have the bomb on the grounds that it would start a Middle East arms race. Saudi Arabia has flat out stated that they will do so if Iran gets the bomb and there are even reports that they have nuclear weapons on order from Pakistan.
 
Last edited:
With that logic, why are we even in negotiations?
For many reasons. Most of it comes to the fear that it would lead to a nuclear arms race in a very unstable region of the world.

But in the end, even if Iran had the bomb, despite all of their rhetoric. They're not going to nuke Israel. Israel is militarily superior to Iran in every way, would easily shoot down any nuke headed to Israel with their Iron Dome shield, and then rain nuclear hell down on Iran in retaliation. Iran knows this.
 
I don't trust Netanyahu anymore than the Ayatollah.

Iran having nuclear weapons is obviously an issue, but let's not go act like this is the first time a country we're not crazy about developed nuclear weapons.

I also question what more can be done about Iran without resorting to serious military force. Air strikes can only do so much. Diplomacy actually seems to be working, but the war hawks don't even want to let that run its course.

Is America going to invade Iran for Israel?
 
I also question what more can be done about Iran without resorting to serious military force.

I say try loosen relations, make a few deals and then put a Starbucks, Apple Store and McDonalds on every corner.
 
If Iran uses nukes against Israel, they would be inviting the wrath of the US. That doesn't sound like a good plan.

Also, do we really believe that Iran doesn't already have nuclear weapons (or at least the capability)?

I just don't see Iran gearing up for a suicidal war.

If Iran nukes Israel, Israeli remnants would wipe out the Middle East in retaliation.

Everyone would be dead before Obama could get our the nuclear football codes.
 
I think the concept of MAD assures that no one is launching nukes anytime soon. Iran just wants nukes for the same reason that everyone who owns them do -- to have deterrence and international leverage.
 
I think the concept of MAD assures that no one is launching nukes anytime soon. Iran just wants nukes for the same reason that everyone who owns them do -- to have deterrence and international leverage.

I would say you have to watch out for Theocracies though. MAD only works with rational players, I don't believe Iran is one.
 
I would say you have to watch out for Theocracies though. MAD only works with rational players, I don't believe Iran is one.

Perhaps, but Iran hasn't shown any aspirations to becoming a death cult. The rhetoric we have been hearing from Khamenei is just par for the course sabre-rattling.
 
Oh good, insults. Very mature.

My opinionS (as in two separate but related thoughts) are:

1. Iran should not have nukes.
2. Israel is not the innocent party that some would like to portray them as.

Are they an ally to the U.S.? Yeah. Maybe not the best friend to have, but they're it, and I can get wanting to stand behind them. Could there be other ways of having a presence in the Middle East if you really, truly wanted such a thing? Probably.

Personally, all I see is history repeating itself over and over with regards to that region.

I wasn't insulting you. You supported your post with the disclaimer "a country that shouldn't even be there". The amount of assumptions required to take that seriously, not to mention ignoring the fact that that kind of thinking turns all Israeli lives into mere statistics, is somewhat laughable.

I agree with both opinions you posted. Israel isn't innocent, but it seems like Israel not being innocent is being used as a justification for some people (not accusing you) to allow Iran to have nuclear weapons. Where does that logic take us? The USA isn't innocent, somebody should have a shot at nuking them. Syria isn't innocent, somebody should have a shot at nuking them?

hippie hunter also mentioned an important detail which is that Iran acquiring nukes will mean that at least one other country in the region is likely to insist on acquiring their own. A tidbit that's gone missing in this topic in favor of flinging feces at Netanyahu is that almost no nation in the Middle East unequivocally supports another. It's a region full of fractured and tense alliances based on convenience or temporary benefit. A lot of countries in the area house radical and extreme exponents that should be treated with caution. I'm fairly sure in August of 2001 if you did a global poll asking whether or not anyone thought the possibility of an extremist group flying two planes into the WTC was likely they'd tell you you were crazy. Allowing Iran to become a hub and potential marketplace for nuclear weapons in the Middle East sounds like lunacy. Tangent again, but still pretty relevant.
 
Perhaps, but Iran hasn't shown any aspirations to becoming a death cult. The rhetoric we have been hearing from Khamenei is just par for the course sabre-rattling.

A problem is that a country having access to nuclear weapons means that whoever comes into power will have access to them. Khamenei won't be there forever, the nukes will. Whose to say he might not be replaced by another Ahmedinejad?

I just think introducing more nukes into that region will destabilize it and turn paranoid leaders into something worse. It's likely to degenerate into a nuclear **** measuring contest where all the unhinged leaders demand the same shiny toy the Iranians are getting. There are already examples of radicals doing things people would have thought impossible, taking that risk with nukes seems ill advised.
 
Shouldn't we be striving for LESS nuclear weapons in the world? Not encouraging more?
 
Oh good, insults. Very mature.

My opinionS (as in two separate but related thoughts) are:

1. Iran should not have nukes.
2. Israel is not the innocent party that some would like to portray them as.

Are they an ally to the U.S.? Yeah. Maybe not the best friend to have, but they're it, and I can get wanting to stand behind them. Could there be other ways of having a presence in the Middle East if you really, truly wanted such a thing? Probably.

Personally, all I see is history repeating itself over and over with regards to that region.

Israel is in a tough spot. I am in awe of their restraint. Could you imagine what would happen if to say Canada, Cuba, or Mexico if they kept attacking the USA with sponsored terrorists activities? That is what Israel has to deal with. Now they must live with the possibility of a nuclear attack once Iran gets them as they have threaten to use them against the nation.

This ISIS group is a virus. Iran is a problem. Many Arab nations agree with Israel and wants Iran not to get Nukes.
 
Israel is in a tough spot. I am in awe of their restraint. Could you imagine what would happen if to say Canada, Cuba, or Mexico if they kept attacking the USA with sponsored terrorists activities? That is what Israel has to deal with.
The whole defense of Israel premise is filled with so many holes.

1. Look at the nations that border Israel. Just like how the United States shares its largest borders with Mexico and Canada, the nations that have the largest borders with Israel are Jordan and Egypt. Both of which have peace treaties with Israel and recognize its existence. Lebanon would most likely have peaceful co-existence with Israel if it weren't for Israel's constant provocations against Lebanon. And Syria is in no position to attack Israel. And to go even further beyond just Israel's borders, many major Arab nations like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Bahrain co-operate with Israel despite their rhetoric and other major ones like Iraq, the United Arab Emirates, and Kuwait are never going to just straight up attack Israel. Israel's borders are not as hostile as Israel likes to make it out to be.

2. Supporters of Israel like to make this strawman argument that just because there should be peace with the Palestinians, that this absurdly means that we are calling for Israel to disarm itself. That is not the case. Every nation has the right to defend themselves and even though the current situation has Israel in a very secure position, it's not worth risking what could happen if Israel disarms. What we're calling for is not for Israel to stop defending itself, but to stop its warmongering campaigns against innocent civilians.

Also, what restraint are you talking about. Under the Netanyahu Cabinet, Israel has shown almost no restraint. Under PMs like Rabin, Sharon, etc. there's been restraint, but not Netanyahu. He's like an even worse Dubya.

Now they must live with the possibility of a nuclear attack once Iran gets them as they have threaten to use them against the nation.
Iran isn't going to launch a nuclear weapon against Israel. Iran may not be the best country in the world, but they're not psychotic the way the North Korean regime is. You also have to take into account that the biggest reasons why Iran started its nuclear program is because it feels that it is threatened by Israel, which has nuclear weapons, and the United States which is also a nuclear power that has interfered in the affairs of almost all of Iran's neighbors.

Asides from Nazi Germany, no country has developed nuclear weapons for their offensive capabilities, they develop them out of fear of nations that they are hostile to and hope the deterrence will keep them safe. This same logic applies to Iran.

If anything, Netanyahu's opposition to any deal with Iran is putting Israel in more danger of a nuclear armed Iran than no deal happening at all.

This ISIS group is a virus. Iran is a problem. Many Arab nations agree with Israel and wants Iran not to get Nukes.
Exactly, which is why a deal needs to happen. A deal that can placate Iran but at the same time ensuring that Iran does not get nuclear weapons. No deal will more than likely result in Iran getting a bomb within a year or two when negotiations collapse.
 
Assuming that letting Iran and North Korea nuke each other out of existence is out of the question, I say lets just keep them from obtaining nukes.

The latter option is best for everyone.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"