Iran - Should they or shouldn't they?

[cska80]

I'm curious. This isn't a question of whether their intentions are good or evil in reguard to nuclear technology (energy or weaponized?). This is just a simple question.

[mconder]

They should possess peaceful nuclear technology, at the very least.

[Andrew Ryan]

Why shouldn't they be able to own nukes?

[Kludge]

They should not be allowed to produce or own nuclear weapons, nor should any other country...

[cska80]

I understand the nuances, but I just wanted to see what everyone thought about nuclear weapons only. Should they be allowed to build and own nuclear weapons.

[Kludge]

Why shouldn't they be able to own nukes?

It's virtually impossible to miss civilians with nuclear weapons. It is a weapon of terror, not a weapon of war.

[Micah Dardar]

I really don't think that is any of our business. The U.S. and Israel are very threatening nations. If someone wants to protect their nation, they should be allowed to. Just imagine if you were a citizen of a little country with the big bully U.S. always up your tail.

[gls]

If Iran does not wish to be attacked and/or invaded, it should acquire nuclear weapons ASAP.

[olehounddog]

Iran is a soverign nation. We have no more authority over them than they do us.

[cska80]

I really don't think that is any of our business. The U.S. and Israel are very threatening nations. If someone wants to protect their nation, they should be allowed to. Just imagine if you were a citizen of a little country with the big bully U.S. always up your tail.

In the same, I believe Israel has every right to do what it wants to defend it's own country with no help from us. No more welfare for Israel as well as no more welfare for their enemies. If Israel believes that Iran is close to creating nuclear weapons, I think they have every right to stop them. I don't think we have the right, but they do. Iran is not a threat to us.

BUT! That wasn't the question

[Kludge]

Iran is a soverign nation. We have no more authority over them than they do us.

We have no authority to FORCE them to disarm, but we can do it through peaceful diplomacy and it should be a priority. And, if we call on Iran to disarm, we ought to ourselves.

[berrybunches]

I have talked to a lot of Iranians who DO NOT in any way want their country to acquire nuclear weapons. I am all for a non-interventionist foreign policy but I think its in everyone's best interest if measures are taken to help sway the Iranians away from acquiring Nukes. I do understand why they would want nukes...with Nukes you gain a lot more influence. But if we stopped threatening them, along with Israel they would not be so desperate for the leverage.

[powerofreason]

Nukes are not for war. They are for deterrence. Iran is surrounded by nuclear nations. Maybe they are a little afraid Israel will find an excuse to glass them one day? The leaders of Iran might be a little kooky, but that doesn't mean they're suicidal. And its not just suicide. We're talking about Iran being unlivable for 50-100 years and being completely obliterated. Sean Hannity loves to parrot that line from Ahmedenijad saying he wants to wipe Israel off the map. The translation really means he just wants to wipe the word Israel off the map, not actually destroy the country. Anyways, if governments really cared about their people they'd all simultaneously disarm immediately. But, since that isn't gonna happen we're stuck with nukes for the meantime.

[mello]

Here's an interesting story about how Halliburton sold Nuclear technology to Iran while
Cheney was the CEO:

http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/2-halliburton-charged-with-selling-nuclear-technologies-to-iran/

I also remembered reading somewhere that Cheney still has stock in Halliburton & that it
increased over 1000%. I wonder whose idea it was to have no-bid contracts go to
Halliburton? Hmmmm...

[MelissaCato]

If Iran does not wish to be attacked and/or invaded, it should acquire nuclear weapons ASAP.

Iran is a soverign nation. We have no more authority over them than they do us.

I think so too.

[durden0]

the question isn't phrased right. It should have been:

Do we have the right to tell anyone whether they can, or can't aquire nuclear weapons?

[malibuu]

Israel has had it's nuclear opaqueness since the late 1940's . . .

[abc123]

Absolutely not.

[Sematary]

I understand the nuances, but I just wanted to see what everyone thought about nuclear weapons only. Should they be allowed to build and own nuclear weapons.

They should be able to build and own any weapon they want. In fact, I'd go further - I would HELP them build the damn things. That way, we know they won't be beholding to some terrorist organization who will require them to build them a nuke as well for their assistance.

[Sematary]

the question isn't phrased right. It should have been:

Do we have the right to tell anyone whether they can, or can't aquire nuclear weapons?

And, of course, the answer is no.

[CasualApathy]

This is simple.

No

They signed the treaty - and we believe in contracts.

[SeanEdwards]

Iran is a soverign nation. We have no more authority over them than they do us.

Actually, we have as much authority over them as we choose to take by force, and they have exactly the same authority over us.

There is no international law.

[SeanEdwards]

Do we have the right to tell anyone whether they can, or can't aquire nuclear weapons?

That question is meaningless. Nations don't have rights. Nation states are the highest level of human organization, there is no higher authority that can grant rights, or revoke them.

[Sematary]

This is simple.

No

They signed the treaty - and we believe in contracts.

You mean like the Geneva Conventions?