RE: Iran not building nukes (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events



Message

stamper_ben -> RE: Iran not building nukes (4/11/2008 11:09:05 AM)

That isn't the topic of the article posted which is about deterrence regarding Iran. Please stick to the matter at hand.



Jhud -> RE: Iran not building nukes (4/11/2008 11:10:38 AM)

quote:

We've had to deal with other nuke nations. We just need to get over ourselves and take a dose of reality.


The difference here is that we dealt with other 'nuke nations' through the concept of Mutual Assured Destruction; the fear with Iran (which I think has legitimacy) is that they won't be all that deterred by the thought of being destroyed, giving the eternal bliss that follows.

I guess in this respect it was good that the Soviets and Chinese were atheists; they only had this life to worry about.

Also of course is the fact that once Iran has nukes it has almost untouchable leverage to exercise hegemony in the region, which it seems to want.



stamper_ben -> RE: Iran not building nukes (4/11/2008 11:13:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

We've had to deal with other nuke nations. We just need to get over ourselves and take a dose of reality.


The difference here is that we dealt with other 'nuke nations' through the concept of Mutual Assured Destruction; the fear with Iran (which I think has legitimacy) is that they won't be all that deterred by the thought of being destroyed, giving the eternal bliss that follows.

I guess in this respect it was good that the Soviets and Chinese were atheists; they only had this life to worry about.

Also of course is the fact that once Iran has nukes it has almost untouchable leverage to exercise hegemony in the region, which it seems to want.

That is one of the things Krauthammer deals with is that there are those in Iran who are working toward regime change and that deterrence will work with them.



TheosCentric -> RE: Iran not building nukes (4/11/2008 11:24:59 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: stamper_ben

That isn't the topic of the article posted which is about deterrence regarding Iran. Please stick to the matter at hand.


I always love your avoidance tactics. Nice. [8D]



stamper_ben -> RE: Iran not building nukes (4/11/2008 11:33:42 AM)

And I love rabbit trails at the appropriate times...



TheosCentric -> RE: Iran not building nukes (4/11/2008 11:39:13 AM)

point being, you can believe one NIE which had purposely false information, but not another which has accurate information.



stamper_ben -> RE: Iran not building nukes (4/11/2008 11:50:17 AM)

Chris, I'm not going to get into a debate with you over which NIE - separated by many years and about different matters - is right. The question I brought up by posting the article is WHAT TO DO ABOUT THE NUCLEAR PROGRAM THAT IRAN NOW HAS. Do something or nothing?



stamper_ben -> RE: Iran not building nukes (4/17/2008 9:24:15 AM)

Yes, there are Jews in Iran.

But it seems the synagogues in Tehran are being destroyed.
quote:

Seven ancient synagogues in the Iranian capital, Tehran, have been destroyed by local authorities.

The synagogues were in the Oudlajan suburb of Tehran, where many Iranian Jews used to live.

"These buildings, which were part of our cultural, artistic and architectural heritage were burnt to the ground," said Ahmad Mohit Tabatabaii, the director of the International Council of Museums’ (ICOM) office in Tehran.
Another part of Jewry wiped out.
Link here



RichLP -> RE: Iran not building nukes (4/17/2008 9:53:00 AM)

I do not believe that Iran would follow through with a nuclear strike believing they will all go to paradise.

Every nation-state's leadership has its own interests and it will use its country's money, army, and citizenry in ways it can to achieve its goals. If it includes using propaganda or any system of belief, so be it.

Furthermore, while history shows some leaders have been less rational than others, Iran hasn't shown itself to be irrational - it has fought for its own interests, and it logically expanded its influence over its western neighbor after the western-led deposition of Saddam Hussein (which the senior Iranian leaders are probably still chuckling at us for - we call them and Iraq part of the 'axis of evil' but create a new reality where Iran is the winner). Iran has improved ties with Russia. It has invested in its conventional military. In short, it's taking care of itself.

The Iranian leadership would not, IMO, sacrifice its huge country, gigantic oil and natural gas reserves, and people just to deal a nuclear blow against the west - not when so many of its own people like the west (witness the Tehran public's candlelight vigils following 9/11) or when there are at least some politicians who favor a rapprochment with the United States (the Iranian assistance to US forces in their campaign to topple the Taliban and al-Qaeda - YES, al-Qaeda - in Afghanistan).

That being said, would Iran not retaliate to the extent it can if attacked first? Absolutely, as any normal nation-state would. Iraq, with its dilapidated military, tried to fight back against the US-led coalition in 2003 (fierce resistance surprised some US troops); if Mexico or Canda launched a full-scale military attack on the US, our country would strike back as well. It is the same with every country - self-interest. And in this regard, the Iranians are no less rational than any other country.



mapachito13 -> RE: Iran not building nukes (4/17/2008 10:19:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

We've had to deal with other nuke nations. We just need to get over ourselves and take a dose of reality.


The difference here is that we dealt with other 'nuke nations' through the concept of Mutual Assured Destruction; the fear with Iran (which I think has legitimacy) is that they won't be all that deterred by the thought of being destroyed, giving the eternal bliss that follows.

I guess in this respect it was good that the Soviets and Chinese were atheists; they only had this life to worry about.

Also of course is the fact that once Iran has nukes it has almost untouchable leverage to exercise hegemony in the region, which it seems to want.


The interesting point is that Iran being a Shiite nation would be resisted in this endeavor by all the Sunni nations which would probably think we'd be doing them a favor by wiping out the apostates of Islam. The only thing I can see them doing is creating a greater Iran or Persia by annexing parts of surrounding countries with Shiite populations (ie eastern Iraq and western Pakistan) or exerting more control of the Straits of Hormuz. They might also want to protect themselves from Pakistan their Sunni neighbor to the east who is the only Muslim nation with nukes so far.



cow451 -> RE: Iran not building nukes (4/17/2008 11:09:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mapachito13

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

We've had to deal with other nuke nations. We just need to get over ourselves and take a dose of reality.


The difference here is that we dealt with other 'nuke nations' through the concept of Mutual Assured Destruction; the fear with Iran (which I think has legitimacy) is that they won't be all that deterred by the thought of being destroyed, giving the eternal bliss that follows.

I guess in this respect it was good that the Soviets and Chinese were atheists; they only had this life to worry about.

Also of course is the fact that once Iran has nukes it has almost untouchable leverage to exercise hegemony in the region, which it seems to want.


The interesting point is that Iran being a Shiite nation would be resisted in this endeavor by all the Sunni nations which would probably think we'd be doing them a favor by wiping out the apostates of Islam. The only thing I can see them doing is creating a greater Iran or Persia by annexing parts of surrounding countries with Shiite populations (ie eastern Iraq and western Pakistan) or exerting more control of the Straits of Hormuz. They might also want to protect themselves from Pakistan their Sunni neighbor to the east who is the only Muslim nation with nukes so far.

And Pakistan is a staunch ally in the WOT.[8|]



mapachito13 -> RE: Iran not building nukes (4/17/2008 3:08:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cow451

quote:

ORIGINAL: mapachito13

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

We've had to deal with other nuke nations. We just need to get over ourselves and take a dose of reality.


The difference here is that we dealt with other 'nuke nations' through the concept of Mutual Assured Destruction; the fear with Iran (which I think has legitimacy) is that they won't be all that deterred by the thought of being destroyed, giving the eternal bliss that follows.

I guess in this respect it was good that the Soviets and Chinese were atheists; they only had this life to worry about.

Also of course is the fact that once Iran has nukes it has almost untouchable leverage to exercise hegemony in the region, which it seems to want.


The interesting point is that Iran being a Shiite nation would be resisted in this endeavor by all the Sunni nations which would probably think we'd be doing them a favor by wiping out the apostates of Islam. The only thing I can see them doing is creating a greater Iran or Persia by annexing parts of surrounding countries with Shiite populations (ie eastern Iraq and western Pakistan) or exerting more control of the Straits of Hormuz. They might also want to protect themselves from Pakistan their Sunni neighbor to the east who is the only Muslim nation with nukes so far.

And Pakistan is a staunch ally in the WOT.[8|]


I'd call them more of a reluctant ally in the WOT. They are still most likely hiding Osama in the Pushtun north-west. Pakistan was one of the biggest state sponsors of terrorism before 9-11 and I'm sure they still are involved in that but not so overtly as before.



Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI