Should Iran be allowed to develop nuclear ...

[Turin]

Thought I'd start a lively debate, because this part of the forum seems a bit underused.

I'm sure you've all been following *cough* the current situation with Iran developing Nuclear capabilities, by which is meant, ability to create Nuclear Weapons and long ranged misiles.

Although, as it goes, Iran has the right to develop nuclear facilities for generating domestic energy, the world's superpowers don't want it acquiring nuclear capabilities.

That's all I'll put in for now, and see what you guys can come up with.

Turin

 

[Vannaroth]

No. What a waste of time and money

 

[Turin]

Iran is surrounded by China, Pakistan, Russia, India, Israel, US, all of which have nuclear weapons and are on tipsy-diplomacy with the countries. They have a natural instinct in pulling their defences up to scratch, especially after the Iraq/Afghan war and the ongoing Palestine-Israel conflict.

I don't buy their story of need for domestic energy, after all they have a vast amount of petroleum. A good counter-argument I've heard for this is that they have an impure load, which is only economical if sold rather than used.

I'll counter you, I believe Iran has the right and can, if they see it in their country's interest to develop Nuclear Weapons.

 

[ENOZEGAR]

america developes nukes, and yet lets nobody else.. this must tell you something.

 

[Turin]

Well USA and UK etc are excpetions, because they had the weapons prior to the nuclear proliforation treaty was made. They are also meant to work towards destroy the load of weapons they already have, but as you said USA have blatantly invested even more money on developing more destructive/effective weapon systems.

As I said, if it is in the interest of a country, especially for defensive reasons and using the weapons as a deterrent, then that country should be allowed to develop them. I mean in an ideal world, everyone would get rid of these abhorrant items, but it is unfair and totally against common values to be hypocritical.

Israel for exmaple are criticizing Iran because of their not-so-transparent history, meanwhile they ignored the fact that they break every rule in the world, constantly, not to mention developing their own innitial nuclear weapons secretly and jailing one of their own citizens for 18 years for trying to reveal the fact.

Double standards...
Turin

 

[Blaminator]

I am the intardnet, and I deem this thread, Blam Worthy

 

[Atomicide]

First Point: The whole detterent thing is bull****. Nuclear vs Nuclear as a detterent wont really work when it comes to the crunch. It will take a real idiot to launch a nuke at any country, someone who is stupid enough to luanch a nuke is going to lunch it regardless of any other affecting factor.

Second Point: Countries working towards the destuction of nuclear missiles should have a right to try and stop others from developing them, its entirely against what they are trying to do, and in this instance, its not a conflict of veiws that matters. The point is, nothing good can come from developing Nuclear Missiles, but good DOES come from decomissioning them.

For anyone thats going to point out "BuT ATMONICSIDE america is azzzholes trying to fight to steal petrol prices down lololalal they are the evills" NO. Crazy as it sounds, although it isnt, the reason Iraq and countries like that are invaded are becuase of weapons. Oil factors into the equation because countries that produce oil, amass the wealth needed to develop nuclear programs....

Oil -- Becomes ---> Cash --- Becomes --> Nuclear Programs.

Take some of the poor African Countries we send aid to "The Third World". These countries used to be rich from Gold, Diamond, etc Exports. Untill they decided to invest in nuclear weapons and other idiotic things, they soon realised they couldnt sustain the programs, so borrowed money from other countries to .... and here comes the good bit.... TRY AND CONTINUE DEVELOPMENT. They gambled with a countries Economy and lost, then they went and got loan and instead of trying to rebuild the economy, they gambled and lost again.... and now they are in debt.

I doubt its possible for any country, apart from those in the G8 to run a succesful Nuclear program, any other country that tries to will fail, end up in debt, and join the list of countries the G8 has to bail out.

 

[Turin]

First Point: The whole detterent thing is bull****. Nuclear vs Nuclear as a detterent wont really work when it comes to the crunch. It will take a real idiot to launch a nuke at any country, someone who is stupid enough to luanch a nuke is going to lunch it regardless of any other affecting factor.

I'm sorry m8, but detterance works very well. Other world powers do not want Iran to develop these weapons, because then they'd be put in a similar situation as they are with Russia/Pakistan and India. America is all lovey-dovey with them aren't they? When is the last time you saw them place sanctions on either of the aforementioned?

Second Point: Countries working towards the destuction of nuclear missiles should have a right to try and stop others from developing them, its entirely against what they are trying to do, and in this instance, its not a conflict of veiws that matters. The point is, nothing good can come from developing Nuclear Missiles, but good DOES come from decomissioning them.

Except no one is decomissioning. America on the other hand is developing more and more weapons. It spent around 550 billion USD on the Iraq War alone. The double standards occur, not with countries in possession of Nuclear weapons prior to the proliferation treaty, but those that developed them secretly, and now don't want others to develop them. USA and for that matter any other country, will think twice about attacking Iran or placing any sanctions if they possessed nuclear capabilities.

For anyone thats going to point out "BuT ATMONICSIDE america is azzzholes trying to fight to steal petrol prices down lololalal they are the evills" NO. Crazy as it sounds, although it isnt, the reason Iraq and countries like that are invaded are becuase of weapons.

This is a whole other debate. But the innitial defence of the Bush Administration in covering the cost of the war , was that the post profit of oil sales would generate enough surplus income. Also, theres the whole ordeal with Iraq refusing to sell oil to the West in response to hostility and sanctions.

Oil factors into the equation because countries that produce oil, amass the wealth needed to develop nuclear programs....

Oil -- Becomes ---> Cash --- Becomes --> Nuclear Programs.

Cash does not equal nuclear weapons. It is immensley difficult in procuring the equipment to develop a nuclear weapon. You need the support of the international community, or those already in possession of nuclear technology. You can't generate the equipment out of thin air, especially when everything from the blueprints to raw material is censored from your country. As well as the deterrent force of other countries with nuclear capabilities who don't want you developing them.

Take some of the poor African Countries we send aid to "The Third World". These countries used to be rich from Gold, Diamond, etc Exports. Untill they decided to invest in nuclear weapons and other idiotic things, they soon realised they couldnt sustain the programs, so borrowed money from other countries to .... and here comes the good bit.... TRY AND CONTINUE DEVELOPMENT. They gambled with a countries Economy and lost, then they went and got loan and instead of trying to rebuild the economy, they gambled and lost again.... and now they are in debt.

What the hell are you talking about!??!?!

The "third world countries" if you're generalising Africa, are a result of colonialist plundering and deserting. Once we were done sucking the life out the place and reaping slaves, we left the countries with unstable and lacking proper governments. I mean look at the bloody borders of the countries, they're like drawn with a ruler.

I doubt its possible for any country, apart from those in the G8 to run a succesful Nuclear program, any other country that tries to will fail, end up in debt, and join the list of countries the G8 has to bail out.

Iran has the economy, knowledge and equipment. All that's stopping it from continueing is pressure from other superpowers and the fact that they have so far obeyed every rule of the UN i.e. they have endured over 2 years of inspection and a further five years of mediation. They're just getting annoyed now that 'negotiating' with hypocrits isn't working.

Discuss,
Turin

ps - appologies for typos and spelling/grammar mistakes, very very tired at the moment

 

[urbanfox]

Iran's president:

*If we had nuclear weapons, we would have Israel "wiped out from the map."
*The holocaust never happened, it's Israel's "Myth"


Ye, absolutely, this guy is totally sane, let's let him develop a nuclear weapons program...

 

[Turin]

Iran's president:

*If we had nuclear weapons, we would have Israel "wiped out from the map."
*The holocaust never happened, it's Israel's "Myth"


Ye, absolutely, this guy is totally sane, let's let him develop a nuclear weapons program...

Misquotes of the century.

Israel's legitemacy is also a good topic to talk about but nonetheless, if you can effectively answer:

Why is Israel pardoned for creating a uranium enrichment facility secretly, when Iran is actively denied the same technology on basis of extremism? What part of the recent Sharon constituency showed anything but extreme Zionism?

Turin

ps - by the creation of an Israeli state, Palestinian terroritory being wiped off the map is not only rhetoric but reality...

pps - btw Urban, I'm sure anyone as intelligent as yourself should already have scratched on the explanation of why Mr. Ahmadinejad called the Holocaust a "myth". It was in context of the fact that Zionist and Israel-Supporters (not neccesarily Jews) hide behind the image of anti-semetism to get what they want, when they want. They pull on the strings attached to the cause of the holocaust - a very European incident, to gain support. It seems Israel doesn't need to obey any international law, because the Holocaust happened and everyone is so sad and repentful. You get the idea of the "Myth of the Holocaust"?

What Ahmadinejad was actuall saying is that Israel's right to exist in the place it is at the moment (on Palestinian territory) is illegal from the start, and a myth by definition. He supplemented the quotes you gave by saying that, "the Jews should have been given a home state in Germany..."

Please don't misquote or relay any tabloid rubish.

 

[urbanfox]

Misquotes of the century.

Misquotes? Actually, NO. Go research before posting some BS

Please don't misquote or relay any tabloid rubish.

I'm not, although I can't say you're not twisting the words

 

[Turin]

Misquotes? Actually, NO. Go research before posting some BS

Misquotes:

Ahmadinejad said:

"... they deserve to be wiped off the map ..." [BBC]
" ... they should be wiped off the map ..." [CNN]

I don't see any "... if we had nuclear weapons..." in either of the quotes.

to you to.
Turin

ps -

I'm not, although I can't say you're not twisting the words

:| Does untwisting words count? Those eight words have been sloganed so much over the past few months that no body's actually bothered reading the whole transcript and put them into perspective with the context of the speech.

 

[urbanfox]

Misquotes:

Ahmadinejad said:

"... they deserve to be wiped off the map ..." [BBC]
" ... they should be wiped off the map ..." [CNN]

I don't see any "... if we had nuclear weapons..." in either of the quotes.

to you to.
Turin

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4380306.stm

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/12/14/iran.israel/

"They have invented a myth that Jews were massacred and place this above God, religions and the prophets..."

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2005-12/2005-12-09-voa29.cfm?CFID=3637834&CFTOKEN=23517859

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2005/10/E15E03D6-1013-440F-BDCF-E61D727624ED.html





EDIT

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2005/10/E15E03D6-1013-440F-BDCF-E61D727624ED.html

...

 

[urbanfox]

Iran has the economy, knowledge and equipment. All that's stopping it from continueing is pressure from other superpowers and the fact that they have so far obeyed every rule of the UN i.e. they have endured over 2 years of inspection and a further five years of mediation. They're just getting annoyed now that 'negotiating' with hypocrits isn't working.

The atomic energy council has voted to send them the UN security council to deny them nukes. What did Iran do? They restarted their uranium enrichment program and have reduced inspectors.



The UN, the EU, the USA, everyone is against an Iranian nuclear weapons program.

 

[Turin]

The atomic energy council has voted to send them the UN security council to deny them nukes. What did Iran do? They restarted their uranium enrichment program and have reduced inspectors.



The UN, the EU, the USA, everyone is against an Iranian nuclear weapons program.

They did that after cooperating with stubborn hypocrits who'd do anything to prevent them from achieving nuclear standards.

The links you posted... what were they meant to show? I mean come on:

pps - btw Urban, I'm sure anyone as intelligent as yourself should already have scratched on the explanation of why Mr. Ahmadinejad called the Holocaust a "myth". It was in context of the fact that Zionist and Israel-Supporters (not neccesarily Jews) hide behind the image of anti-semetism to get what they want, when they want. They pull on the strings attached to the cause of the holocaust - a very European incident, to gain support. It seems Israel doesn't need to obey any international law, because the Holocaust happened and everyone is so sad and repentful. You get the idea of the "Myth of the Holocaust"?

What Ahmadinejad was actuall saying is that Israel's right to exist in the place it is at the moment (on Palestinian territory) is illegal from the start, and a myth by definition. He supplemented the quotes you gave by saying that, "the Jews should have been given a home state in Germany..."

I've already explained the context of the message. He explained that "They deserve to be wiped off the map", their existance is unlawful etc.

Those few words cannot be taken as incentive that the moment Iran acquires Nuclear capabilities that it will launch a nuclear war on Israel. I daresay anyone who has nuclear weapons will use them yet it is a statement of power, which acts as an innitial deterrent. The several news articles do not say otherwise. They're simply "expressions of outrage".

You still havn't answered my question:

Why is Israel pardoned for creating a uranium enrichment facility secretly, when Iran is actively denied the same technology on basis of extremism? What part of the recent Sharon constituency showed anything but extreme Zionism?

Hypocrisy is unethical, those countries who do not send Israel to the UNSC, do not have the (moral) right to refer Iran.

 

[Turin]

The Iranian President was addressing (like most politicians) the strongest ethos his nation could appeal to, their religion.

"(It) deals very severely with those who deny this myth but does not do anything to those who deny God, religion, and the prophet."

That basically explains his context in that Israel can get away with anything, as long as it banters on about the Holocaust.

He goes on to say:

"If you have burned the Jews, why don't you give a piece of Europe, the United States, Canada or Alaska to Israel,"

What gives them the right to cut up another soveriegn state, and hand it out in pieces when the crime was commited elsewhere? Wouldn't it be more ideal/rational to have the country which commited the crime pay?

"Our question is, if you have committed this huge crime, why should the innocent nation of Palestine pay for this crime?"

The Counter argument of course, is simply ridiculing the president's point by making it sound insane and irrational. That way the masses ignore the message in the speech and the vital and accusatory questions that are actually asked.

"... together with a distorted sense of reality ...

 

[urbanfox]

They did that after cooperating with stubborn hypocrits who'd do anything to prevent them from achieving nuclear standards.

The links you posted... what were they meant to show? I mean come on:



I've already explained the context of the message. He explained that "They deserve to be wiped off the map", their existance is unlawful etc.


You still havn't answered my question:



Hypocrisy is unethical, those countries who do not send Israel to the UNSC, do not have the (moral) right to refer Iran.

Practically the rest of the world? The EU, The UN, and the USA? Yep, the rest of the world is hypocrites, my bad Iran...

It might help if you read them

You've explained the message in YOUR interpetation. NOBODY agrees with your interpetation. A little odd?

O RLY? Like, quote link, no?

That's not a question, that's a statement.

Also, that's YOUR view. That's not reality.

 

[urbanfox]

Here's the bottom line: the major world powers (as in... all of them) are in unaminous agreement that Iran should not have a nuclear weapons program. They all have also taken the Iranian president's words every seriously.

 

[Turin]

Here's the bottom line: the major world powers (as in... all of them) are in unaminous agreement that Iran should not have a nuclear weapons program. They all have also taken the Iranian president's words every seriously.

Not all of them, Russia and China are leeway. "My interpretation" is actually the "other" argument and since you are not everyone else, I'd like to add that there are quite a few people (i.e. not to mention the 1billion+ Muslims in the world) who agree that a President's words could not have been so bland, without any dimension or meaning.

O RLY? Like, quote link, no?

Sorry I edited my last post (on page 1).

---

In any case what part of my statement about Israel is not reality? The part that they also developed nuclear weapons without the go ahead of the international community, they are so willing to hide behind but also to disobey or maybe that they even now hold internationally disputed territory, but you don't see any sanctions on them? I dunno, you tell me. This is very much real hypocrisy, and not just my opinion.

Turin

ps -

You've explained the message in YOUR interpetation. NOBODY agrees with your interpetation. A little odd?

Read your own links, especially the lower end of the CNN article.

Iran has just as much right to have nuclear weapons as Israel or Pakistan does.

pps - damn you twisted my words, I just realised lol...

Listen, this is how you put the whole speech to get a different dimension:

"Like the mullah [urgh forgot his name] said, Israel must be wiped off the map... why should the Palestinains suffer, when the crime was commited in Europe... Israel must move to Europe..."

Thus by that definition it requires Israel as a nation to move to Europe, rather than a repeat massacre that was the Holocaust.

 

[urbanfox]

Not all of them, Russia and China are leeway. "My interpretation" is actually the "other" argument and since you are not everyone else, I'd like to add that there are quite a few people (i.e. not to mention the 1billion+ Muslims in the world) who agree that a President's words could not have been so bland, without any dimension or meaning.



Sorry I edited my last post (on page 1).

---

In any case what part of my statement about Israel is not reality? The part that they also developed nuclear weapons without the go ahead of the international community, they are so willing to hide behind but also to disobey or maybe that they even now hold internationally disputed territory, but you don't see any sanctions on them? I dunno, you tell me. This is very much real hypocrisy, and not just my opinion.

Turin

Your interpetation (which I wouldn't dare say is held by all muslims) is another side of an argument that cannot and will not prevail just as one could say another side of the argument is to give Iran nuclear privledges and move Israel to Europe.

The UN and the atomic nuclear agency approves their nuclear holdings. You were saying?

This isn't about Israel's legitmacy on anything so stop trying to spin it that way.

Once again, the bottom line is that the UN, the EU, and the USA, and other countries are against an Iranian nuclear weapons program.

Know what that means? No Iranian nuclear weapons program.