Why Iran needs the Nuke

[Pope Joan]

Any of Israel's neighbors are perfectly justified in trying to keep pace with the Zionist threat.

You seem to conveniently forget that Saudi Arabia hates Iran as much as it hates Israel and is also willing to acquire nuclear weapons to counter the threats posed by Iran. A nuclear monopoly in this case is a good thing because it prevents an arms race which creates more instability. And in the current situation in the Middle East, any further instability is very, very detrimental.

Which is why both Sunni Arabia and Israel seem to be supplying the "rebels" in Syria with arms, in order to do dirt to Shiites and establish a presence against Iran.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgznlLHb-44

[Allrule]

You seem to conveniently forget that Saudi Arabia hates Iran as much as it hates Israel and is also willing to acquire nuclear weapons to counter the threats posed by Iran. A nuclear monopoly in this case is a good thing because it prevents an arms race which creates more instability. And in the current situation in the Middle East, any further instability is very, very detrimental.

Which is why both Sunni Arabia and Israel seem to be supplying the "rebels" in Syria with arms, in order to do dirt to Shiites and establish a presence against Iran.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgznlLHb-44

the "rebels"

Sidenote, but I'm goddamn tired of this. Here's the dictionary definition of "rebel":

rebel (plural rebels)

A person who resists an established authority, often violently.

So how do the FSA and other groups in Syria not qualify for that label?

Oh right, they're against a government which doesn't like the US, so they're obviously stooges of the evil Zionist imperialist Amerikkkan empire

[Ralkovia]

Remind me where you live?

~*the british isles*~

That's really kind of sad. Though I guess you tend to forget that the relation of you not having been invaded by Germany and then probably the USSR are related to the variable known as America lending you weapons.

[Alyakia]

~*the british isles*~

That's really kind of sad. Though I guess you tend to forget that the relation of you not having been invaded by Germany and then probably the USSR are related to the variable known as America lending you weapons.

WE SAVED YOUR ASS IN WWII!!!

ah fuck it

[Ralkovia]

That's really kind of sad. Though I guess you tend to forget that the relation of you not having been invaded by Germany and then probably the USSR are related to the variable known as America lending you weapons.

WE SAVED YOUR ASS IN WWII!!!

Not really. The fact that you had bullets to fire at the Germans is because we sent our boats across the sea, avoiding German U-Boats to deliver the weapons that you needed.

[Costa Fiero]

Which is why both Sunni Arabia and Israel seem to be supplying the "rebels" in Syria with arms, in order to do dirt to Shiites and establish a presence against Iran.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgznlLHb-44

Quoting prestv.ir is not a good thing. It's worse than RT in terms of fact checking and is basically a propaganda network. Also, Israeli made arms aren't that difficult to come across, seeing as a lot of the weapons in use by the rebels are smuggled across from Lebanon, where, if memory serves me correctly, quite a few small arms and ammunition was left behind when Israel withdrew from its occupation of Lebanon. So it's entirely logical that a few Israeli made weapons would find their way into the hands of the Syrian rebels.

[Ralkovia]

Which is why both Sunni Arabia and Israel seem to be supplying the "rebels" in Syria with arms, in order to do dirt to Shiites and establish a presence against Iran.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgznlLHb-44

Quoting prestv.ir is not a good thing. It's worse than RT in terms of fact checking and is basically a propaganda network. Also, Israeli made arms aren't that difficult to come across, seeing as a lot of the weapons in use by the rebels are smuggled across from Lebanon, where, if memory serves me correctly, quite a few small arms and ammunition was left behind when Israel withdrew from its occupation of Lebanon. So it's entirely logical that a few Israeli made weapons would find their way into the hands of the Syrian rebels.

It's also extraordinarily easy to buy Israeli made weapons.

[Alyakia]

WE SAVED YOUR ASS IN WWII!!!

Not really. The fact that you had bullets to fire at the Germans is because we sent our boats across the sea, avoiding German U-Boats to deliver the weapons that you needed.

thanks for selling britain your old boats at inflated prices

can we end this egotistic self-fellation and talk about iran now

[Ralkovia]

Not really. The fact that you had bullets to fire at the Germans is because we sent our boats across the sea, avoiding German U-Boats to deliver the weapons that you needed.

thanks for selling britain your old boats at inflated prices

can we end this egotistic self-fellation and talk about iran now

Actually, we lent them to you for 31.4 Billion dollars. You paid us back 1.2 billion dollars. We gave you some of the most advanced equipment the US could produce.
This isn't about egotistic self-fellation. The fact that your calling it egotistic, proves that you really have lost the point I was trying to make.
This is about Iran. I want you to think, would Iran ever support Britain if it went to war?
The fact of the matter is you said the US Hegemony was bad, my argument is your entire life and situation is directly tied to our hegemony.

[Ulvena]

thanks for selling britain your old boats at inflated prices

can we end this egotistic self-fellation and talk about iran now

Actually, we lent them to you for 31.4 Billion dollars. You paid us back 1.2 billion dollars. We gave you some of the most advanced equipment the US could produce.
This isn't about egotistic self-fellation. The fact that your calling it egotistic, proves that you really have lost the point I was trying to make.
This is about Iran. I want you to think, would Iran ever support Britain if it went to war?
The fact of the matter is you said the US Hegemony was bad, my argument is your entire life and situation is directly tied to our hegemony.

The U.S owes 16 Trillion

[Myrensis]

Do you think a nuclear Iran would have let the US go into Afghanistan? As an American citizen, this is doubly bad.

What exactly do you think they would have done to stop us? The nuclear deterrent essentially boils down to "If X goverment sees the end coming anyway, they might say screw it and press the button to take down as many as they can with them.". It is hardly credible that a nuclear armed Iran would have been willing to engage in a nuclear exchange with the United States to protect the Taliban. Russia and China both having the bomb did not prevent the US from going into Vietnam. Russia and China having the bomb doesn't seem to be doing a whole lot to deter the US from a possible military conflict with Iran. So in what scenario do you really see the US being cowed by a nuclear Iran and refusing to go into Afghanistan?

However, there are other consequences, two of which are laid out in Global Trends 2025 (PDF Warning). If Iran gets the bomb, then that creates a security dilemma in the Middle East. Countries (not just Israel) will feel threatened, and perhaps even abandoned by the US, and will then pursue the bombs themselves. It's conceivable that a scenario will eventually develop where a nuclear weapon gets set off in the Middle East, be it in a low yield attack or accident, should multiple nations develop nuclear weapons. The other consequence is that a nuclear Iran may grow emboldened by the prospect of a bomb. The US will be limited in how it can respond to a nuclear Iran, as will Israel, so what's to stop Iran from launching attacks, especially through indirect means?

That's tremendously convenient for us. US policy in the Middle East has largely been one of creating instability and conflict in the ME carefully orchestrated to benefit us, and now we have to maintain that self-serving balance because the wrong push could set the whole thing ablaze. But then again, you probably view this as a good thing.

The World, like most individual ends up following the guy who can do the most for them. America isn't big into "Murder an entire organization and repress them into the dirt" type of hegemony,

Of course not, that would be messy, we fund and arm proxies to do that for us. There was this thing in the 80's you might have heard of, Iran Contra? Where we sold weapons to the iredeemably evil Iranians so we could provide funds for assorted little paramilitary groups that had a fondness for the use of torture, rape, kidnapping and arson as 'military tactics', but that was all peachy because they were fighting the dirty Commies.

We're more into assassinate your leader, so he stops making threats. You might not like that we'll kill your leader or start a war because someone is threatening America, but understand the repercussions of a more powerful Iran. You're tied to our economy, no matter how much you put your fingers in your ears and scream "LALALA."

That argument is kind of weak, considering that America generally considers anything up to and including "costing us money", "not letting US corporations do whatever the fuck they want", and "having communist leanings." to be "threats" worthy of assassination and violence.

[Alyakia]

thanks for selling britain your old boats at inflated prices

can we end this egotistic self-fellation and talk about iran now

Actually, we lent them to you for 31.4 Billion dollars. You paid us back 1.2 billion dollars. We gave you some of the most advanced equipment the US could produce.
This isn't about egotistic self-fellation. The fact that your calling it egotistic, proves that you really have lost the point I was trying to make.
This is about Iran. I want you to think, would Iran ever support Britain if it went to war?
The fact of the matter is you said the US Hegemony was bad, my argument is your entire life and situation is directly tied to our hegemony.

I can't remember the specific incident, but at the start, no.

Yes. It is. Continue enjoying having electricity!!!

Probably not. Every single interaction I can think of between Britain and Iran from the Anglo-Soviet invasion to Operation Ajax and beyond has been trying to fuck them over. Why?

I said I'm not that sympathetic to the viewpoint of "what about our hegemony?!".

[EnragedMaldivians]

Wrong. Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons. It has ballistic missiles which are capable of carrying nuclear warheads. We would know if they did because the Saudis would have acquired them and they haven't.



They've come perilously close a few times. And that is something we want to avoid.

When? The US and the USSR might have come close over Cuba in the early 60s, but when else?

The Able Archer exercises and the (post cold war) Norwegian rocket incident were actually much closer calls than the Cuban crisis.

[Ralkovia]

Actually, we lent them to you for 31.4 Billion dollars. You paid us back 1.2 billion dollars. We gave you some of the most advanced equipment the US could produce.
This isn't about egotistic self-fellation. The fact that your calling it egotistic, proves that you really have lost the point I was trying to make.
This is about Iran. I want you to think, would Iran ever support Britain if it went to war?
The fact of the matter is you said the US Hegemony was bad, my argument is your entire life and situation is directly tied to our hegemony.

The U.S owes 16 Trillion

True, but that's national debt. Not foreign held debt.

[Ralkovia]

That argument is kind of weak, considering that America generally considers anything up to and including "costing us money", "not letting US corporations do whatever the fuck they want", and "having communist leanings." to be "threats" worthy of assassination and violence.

Indeed, but that translates over to the markets. Meaning you might end up paying 20 dollars for gas, if the US wasn't friends with OPEC nations.

Actually, we lent them to you for 31.4 Billion dollars. You paid us back 1.2 billion dollars. We gave you some of the most advanced equipment the US could produce.
This isn't about egotistic self-fellation. The fact that your calling it egotistic, proves that you really have lost the point I was trying to make.
This is about Iran. I want you to think, would Iran ever support Britain if it went to war?
The fact of the matter is you said the US Hegemony was bad, my argument is your entire life and situation is directly tied to our hegemony.

I can't remember the specific incident, but at the start, no.

Yes. It is. Continue enjoying having electricity!!!

Probably not. Every single interaction I can think of between Britain and Iran from the Anglo-Soviet invasion to Operation Ajax and beyond has been trying to fuck them over. Why?

I said I'm not that sympathetic to the viewpoint of "what about our hegemony?!".

You can't remember the specific incident, because it didn't exist. If your talking about the very start, that makes sense, considering we gave you everything we had in our current stockpile. You needed it immediately, we gave what we had immediately. What we had immediately were WWI ships. Because Iran has been a rut in the gear of progress. Do you really think that now by being nice to them and 'not agreeing' with the US trying to stop them from getting a nuclear weapon, they'll turn around and say "All is forgiven Britain. We won't stop your oil."

I apologize, my point is you should be extremely worried about the US hegemony, since you are tied to it.

[Vetalia]

When? The US and the USSR might have come close over Cuba in the early 60s, but when else?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Archer_83

I think we were even closer to war then than we were during the Missile Crisis but fortunately cooler heads prevailed.

EDIT: Maldives beat me to it.

[Common Territories]

So let me get this strait. You want to give a rouge nation a nuclear bomb? One that constantly threatens other countries, fully supports and aids terrorism, and main goal is not only to kill Israel but kill every other western country? Are you kidding me?

The US and other countries have it because they are actually responsible enough to not want to use it. Only Pakistan is a bad nuke holder, a big mistake thanks to the US. The US made the nuke to end a war faster and it has regretted it ever since then. The main point is that the US, France, Britain, Russia, and other possessors are responsible nations that ether wouldn't use them nor do they ever want too. Iran is a completely different story. Iran says it just wants nuclear power but it's dead obvious they want nukes just to be feared more. There is even a good chance they want it to just bomb its enemies to the maximum. Their excuses and reasons are all bull crap, "We just want nuclear power for electricity.", ''We need it as a deterrence of attack.", "We feel threatened and desperately need it." ect. You wanna know what will happen as soon as they get the ability to produce nuclear bombs? Israel and other countries will be bombed no doubt, every other nation in the area and possibly world will want them too, terrorists will be given nuclear weapons by the Iranian government (their main supporter and backer).

So can you live with the possibility of Iran bombing Israel and other countries? Wide spread nuclear technology for any crack pot thanks to Iran selling the tech? Terrorists armed with nuclear weapons? How will you react when instead of Iran just threatening to destroy the west, it turns into "We will destroy the west with our powerful nuclear arms!" instead of just using some new lame missile they come up with every few months? You give that government nuclear weapons and your signing the death warrant for hundreds of millions of people.

[Alyakia]

That argument is kind of weak, considering that America generally considers anything up to and including "costing us money", "not letting US corporations do whatever the fuck they want", and "having communist leanings." to be "threats" worthy of assassination and violence.

Indeed, but that translates over to the markets. Meaning you might end up paying 20 dollars for gas, if the US wasn't friends with OPEC nations.

I can't remember the specific incident, but at the start, no.

Yes. It is. Continue enjoying having electricity!!!

Probably not. Every single interaction I can think of between Britain and Iran from the Anglo-Soviet invasion to Operation Ajax and beyond has been trying to fuck them over. Why?

I said I'm not that sympathetic to the viewpoint of "what about our hegemony?!".

You can't remember the specific incident, because it didn't exist. If your talking about the very start, that makes sense, considering we gave you everything we had in our current stockpile. You needed it immediately, we gave what we had immediately. What we had immediately were WWI ships. Because Iran has been a rut in the gear of progress. Do you really think that now by being nice to them and 'not agreeing' with the US trying to stop them from getting a nuclear weapon, they'll turn around and say "All is forgiven Britain. We won't stop your oil."

I apologize, my point is you should be extremely worried about the US hegemony, since you are tied to it.

No. It did exist. All I can find is Cash and Carry though.

The solution to "they hate us because we've been dicks constantly" is not to say "well! they might still hate us if we stop! may as well continue to be dicks!".

Even if we didn't have the largest oil reserves in the EU, didn't export electricity (not necessarily UK wide here) and weren't investing in renewable energy I still probably wouldn't be peeing myself over Iran turning a comically oversized wheel and stopping all the oilz.

[Ralkovia]

So let me get this strait. You want to give a rouge nation a nuclear bomb? One that constantly threatens other countries, fully supports and aids terrorism, and main goal is not only to kill Israel but kill every other western country? Are you kidding me?

The US and other countries have it because they are actually responsible enough to not want to use it. Only Pakistan is a bad nuke holder, a big mistake thanks to the US. The US made the nuke to end a war faster and it has regretted it ever since then. The main point is that the US, France, Britain, Russia, and other possessors are responsible nations that ether wouldn't use them nor do they ever want too. Iran is a completely different story. Iran says it just wants nuclear power but it's dead obvious they want nukes just to be feared more. There is even a good chance they want it to just bomb its enemies to the maximum. Their excuses and reasons are all bull crap, "We just want nuclear power for electricity.", ''We need it as a deterrence of attack.", "We feel threatened and desperately need it." ect. You wanna know what will happen as soon as they get the ability to produce nuclear bombs? Israel and other countries will be bombed no doubt, every other nation in the area and possibly world will want them too, terrorists will be given nuclear weapons by the Iranian government (their main supporter and backer).

So can you live with the possibility of Iran bombing Israel and other countries? Wide spread nuclear technology for any crack pot thanks to Iran selling the tech? Terrorists armed with nuclear weapons? How will you react when instead of Iran just threatening to destroy the west, it turns into "We will destroy the west with our powerful nuclear arms!" instead of just using some new lame missile they come up with every few months? You give that government nuclear weapons and your signing the death warrant for hundreds of millions of people.

It's really and truly sad, that people are just so anti-US, that they would rather support a nation that has on several occassions promised the destruction of another nation the tools to carry it out.

Unlike the internet, the World isn't a pocket of bubbles. Everything is interlinked. Giving Iran a nuclear weapon doesn't just affect the US. It affects you and billions of people world wide.

[Costa Fiero]

So can you live with the possibility of Iran bombing Israel and other countries? Wide spread nuclear technology for any crack pot thanks to Iran selling the tech? Terrorists armed with nuclear weapons? How will you react when instead of Iran just threatening to destroy the west, it turns into "We will destroy the west with our powerful nuclear arms!" instead of just using some new lame missile they come up with every few months? You give that government nuclear weapons and your signing the death warrant for hundreds of millions of people.

The main concern people have is not whether or not Iran will nuke Israel (and it any case, technologically wise, Iran still has a long way to go to develop a functioning long-range ballistic missile), but the consequences of the subsequent arms race which will inevitably occur once Iran acquires nuclear weapons as the Saudis have already said that they would do so if Iran did.

[Vetalia]

It's really and truly sad, that people are just so anti-US, that they would rather support a nation that has on several occassions promised the destruction of another nation the tools to carry it out.

Unlike the internet, the World isn't a pocket of bubbles. Everything is interlinked. Giving Iran a nuclear weapon doesn't just affect the US. It affects you and billions of people world wide.

I'm more mystified that people believe in a concept as ridiculous as "fairness" in international relations. It is against our interests for Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon, therefore we should act to prevent them from getting one. Similarly, it would be in our interests to overthrow the Iranian government and replace it with a pro-US regime, much like we did in 1953 were such a thing possible. Moral and ethical considerations are simply irrelevant, what matters is acting in a way that is most strategically beneficial to the power and influence of the USA. Like it or not, that's the way it works and that's the way all of its power players have acted in the entire history of international diplomacy and ever will act.

[Ralkovia]

Indeed, but that translates over to the markets. Meaning you might end up paying 20 dollars for gas, if the US wasn't friends with OPEC nations.


You can't remember the specific incident, because it didn't exist. If your talking about the very start, that makes sense, considering we gave you everything we had in our current stockpile. You needed it immediately, we gave what we had immediately. What we had immediately were WWI ships. Because Iran has been a rut in the gear of progress. Do you really think that now by being nice to them and 'not agreeing' with the US trying to stop them from getting a nuclear weapon, they'll turn around and say "All is forgiven Britain. We won't stop your oil."

I apologize, my point is you should be extremely worried about the US hegemony, since you are tied to it.

No. It did exist. All I can find is Cash and Carry though.

The solution to "they hate us because we've been dicks constantly" is not to say "well! they might still hate us if we stop! may as well continue to be dicks!".

Even if we didn't have the largest oil reserves in the EU, didn't export electricity (not necessarily UK wide here) and weren't investing in renewable energy I still probably wouldn't be peeing myself over Iran turning a comically oversized wheel and stopping all the oilz.

That's a non-issue. There is no solution to getting Iran to like you, other than immediately switching your position and supporting it in everything it does. If you support Iran's nuclear claim, it really won't matter after that. It's not about Iran cutting off the oil. If you think that that's the primary worry here, you're quite mistaken. It's about enforcing the current economic status. If Iran gets a nuke, Saudi arabia will want one too. Guess what happens, they won't need their US allies anymore. Or repeat the same for Egypt.

Without the need of the US as allies, maybe they close the suez canal. Now trade in the World is slowed a gigaton. Hundreds of billions of dollars lost. Millions of jobs lost. The middle east becomes a powder keg. Proxy wars break out all over the place. Maybe they bomb an embassy or two. Maybe they drive a nuke into France, because France banned the veil. The current status of the Middle East is as fantastic as you can get it. By allowing it to change, your allowing Iran to directly change the current course.

[Alyakia]

It's really and truly sad, that people are just so anti-US, that they would rather support a nation that has on several occassions promised the destruction of another nation the tools to carry it out.

Unlike the internet, the World isn't a pocket of bubbles. Everything is interlinked. Giving Iran a nuclear weapon doesn't just affect the US. It affects you and billions of people world wide.

I'm more mystified that people believe in a concept as ridiculous as "fairness" in international relations. It is against our interests for Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon, therefore we should act to prevent them from getting one. Similarly, it would be in our interests to overthrow the Iranian government and replace it with a pro-US regime, much like we did in 1953 were such a thing possible. Moral and ethical considerations are simply irrelevant, what matters is acting in a way that is most strategically beneficial to the power and influence of the USA. Like it or not, that's the way it works and that's the way all of its power players have acted in the entire history of international diplomacy and ever will act.

it's just the way the world works. realpolitik. and that's why doing immoral things is ok. because everyone does them. do you see how that works, lefty?

[Myrensis]

So let me get this strait. You want to give a rouge nation a nuclear bomb?

"Rogue Nation" is a meaningless buzzword, since the only consistent definition is "not currently serving American interests."

One that constantly threatens other countries

Fun Fact: The Islamic Republic of Iran has fought exactly one war in it's 40 year history...a defensive war against US backed Iraq.

fully supports and aids terrorism

The US is quite happy to support and aid terrorism too. We just call our terrorists "freedom fighters".

and main goal is not only to kill Israel but kill every other western country?

Source?

There is even a good chance they want it to just bomb its enemies to the maximum. Their excuses and reasons are all bull crap, "We just want nuclear power for electricity.", ''We need it as a deterrence of attack.", "We feel threatened and desperately need it." ect. You wanna know what will happen as soon as they get the ability to produce nuclear bombs? Israel and other countries will be bombed no doubt.

You should probably report to the local CIA office immediately, and show them all these massive factories that you've evidently found where Iran is mass-producing ICBM's. They'll probably also want the location of the apparent super-nuclear reactors where Iran is churning out enough weapons grade material to just go bombing the hell out of everybody.

every other nation in the area and possibly world will want them too

There are three kinds of country in the world. Those who have nukes, those who have friends with nukes, and those who don't have the money or the technology to get nukes. There is no nation that simply doesn't want them.

terrorists will be given nuclear weapons by the Iranian government (their main supporter and backer).

Hmm, so now Iran is the main supporter and backer of all terrorists everywhere? Seriously, do you just rip your talking points straight from conservative blogs or something?

So can you live with the possibility of Iran bombing Israel and other countries?

Iran has no reason to bomb Israel or anyone else.

Wide spread nuclear technology for any crack pot thanks to Iran selling the tech?

Iran is despised by most of it's neighbors and it's two biggest backers all ready have more and better nukes. Why would they sell the tech off and thus lose their only ace in the hole?

Terrorists armed with nuclear weapons?

Iran putting a nuke into the hands of a terrorist group would be a monumentally stupid thing to do, and their behavior over the last 4 decades doesn't suggest any particularly greater level of stupidity than any other state. Well, outside of conservative fantasy land, where Iran is simultaneously the greatest threat to world peace in the history of ever and also staggeringly incompetent at everything they do.

How will you react when instead of Iran just threatening to destroy the west, it turns into "We will destroy the west with our powerful nuclear arms!" instead of just using some new lame missile they come up with every few months? You give that government nuclear weapons and your signing the death warrant for hundreds of millions of people.

Damn Iran is good, not only are they developing nuclear bombs, they're developing nuclear bombs with wings? Cause last time I checked they need those "lame missiles" to deliver them anywhere. But since we're taking a trip into bizarro world, I contend that the US must immediately dismantle it's nuclear arsenal, just in case the President spontaneously goes insane tommorow and decides to nuke Europe.

[Ralkovia]

It's really and truly sad, that people are just so anti-US, that they would rather support a nation that has on several occassions promised the destruction of another nation the tools to carry it out.

Unlike the internet, the World isn't a pocket of bubbles. Everything is interlinked. Giving Iran a nuclear weapon doesn't just affect the US. It affects you and billions of people world wide.

I'm more mystified that people believe in a concept as ridiculous as "fairness" in international relations. It is against our interests for Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon, therefore we should act to prevent them from getting one. Similarly, it would be in our interests to overthrow the Iranian government and replace it with a pro-US regime, much like we did in 1953 were such a thing possible. Moral and ethical considerations are simply irrelevant, what matters is acting in a way that is most strategically beneficial to the power and influence of the USA. Like it or not, that's the way it works and that's the way all of its power players have acted in the entire history of international diplomacy and ever will act.

I blame the liberalizing mentality of "Everybody Should Be Equal."

It's leading to the death of society, because we can't honestly use our heads and think that if someone else has the advantage, then we're in the inferior position. Competition is necessary. It's part of the human fiber. Yet, we so eagerly suppress in favor of ideas that we should be economically equal and fair. People confuse individual rights with national rights.