Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Geneva deal reached

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
    There's a reason they were never put through the wringer like Iran. India got the bomb to deter Pakistan and China. Pakistan got the bomb to neutralize India's deterrent. Now, why does Iran want the bomb? To deter or attack Israel? Maybe. To deter the Saudis, the Iraqis, the Kuwaitis--all of the ME--the Russians, the US, China, Afghans? From what? Iran's only possible motive, other than to deter Israel, is regional hegemony and control of the Straights of Hormuz. And there is a powerful religious motivation in their policies, no matter how much the elected leadership tries to contain it. No wonder most of the world disapproves.
    US didnt posses the WMD's for world hegemony? Control of the world resources, there is no religious motivation for Israel's existence?
    US - Nuclear Armed
    Israel - Nuclear Armed
    Pakistan- Nuclear Armed
    Saudi - Can rent a Nuke,

    Looking at the above, there is a definite need for the Iranians to have the bomb, especially with the crazy sunni expansion and the american support for it

    Comment


    • #77
      [QUOTE=JAD_333;940030]

      The argument that it needs nukes to protect its people because other countries have nukes is circular reasoning. It can only justify having nukes in terms of actual threats to its security. What are those threats? How serious are they. I think you'll come up with a dry hole on that question. The truth is Iran has regional ambitions that would be significantly advanced if it had a nuke force. [/qute]

      1. Israel, a rouge nuclear state who refuses to sign the NPT has made thinly veiled threats to use both conventional and nuclear weapons on Iran. Israel's implied threats are also credible since Israel attacked Iraq even though the Iraqi reactor had almost zero chance of being used for weapons purposes.
      2. They live next door to Pakistan and have border problems with that mostly rouge nuclear state.
      3. The only modern country besides Japan with living members who have experienced a WMD attacks on a massive scale. Attacks facilitated by the US (precursor chemicals, credits to buy precursor chemicals and targeting data) and the USSR (missile technology)
      4. They live between the 3 big jihadi breeding grounds (KSA, A-stan, Pakitan)

      If anyone has a reason to fear attack by WMD, and thus a need to have its own WMD deterrence it is Iran.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Firestorm View Post
        Well then its not really a question of cheating on the NPT is it? If India or Pakistan had been deemed "harmful" by "international powers" (read the US), they would be in the same position as Iran, despite not signing the NPT. Attempts were made with the Sanctions, which were lifted solely because they weren't having the desired effect, not because India/Pakistan's nuclear programs were seen as justified. India and Pakistan escaped because it is easier to weather sanctions when you don't depend on oil exports for your survival. Not being signatories to the NPT isn't what saved them.
        Bingo. But they also never cheated NPT.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Firestorm View Post
          Well then its not really a question of cheating on the NPT is it? If India or Pakistan had been deemed "harmful" by "international powers" (read the US), they would be in the same position as Iran, despite not signing the NPT. Attempts were made with the Sanctions, which were lifted solely because they weren't having the desired effect, not because India/Pakistan's nuclear programs were seen as justified. India and Pakistan escaped because it is easier to weather sanctions when you don't depend on oil exports for your survival. Not being signatories to the NPT isn't what saved them.
          Exactly....NPT was created against India, and it failed miserably

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
            There are 37-62 countries (depending on your measure) who can produce nukes and the rockets to carry them within a year. Not one of these countries have chosen to do so.
            Because they don't need them. The moment they feel threatened by a nuclear power with no third party umbrella to protect them, they will make their own nukes. Some will leave the NPT before making them, some will cheat it and use it to obtain materials, like Iran.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Defcon5 View Post
              Without a full scale war it is not possible to stop it, if Iran wishes it to be so.
              There are other ways to make Iran pay. Sanctions are one method. What's the point of being a nuclear nation if nobody trades with you.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by zraver View Post

                4. They live between the 3 big jihadi breeding grounds (KSA, A-stan, Pakitan)

                .
                All of the Sunni's baying for the blood of shias. As is evidenced in all of these countries. An average 14 Shias are killed everyday in Pakistan

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by ajhax View Post
                  There are other ways to make Iran pay. Sanctions are one method. What's the point of being a nuclear nation if nobody trades with you.
                  That is for Iran to decide. Oil is commodity which is going to run out, some time or the other they would want one of the biggest oil producing countries to part with their oil. All they have to do is wait it out. China and India after sometime will trade with Iran regardless of US and Israel.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
                    Now, why does Iran want the bomb? To deter or attack Israel? Maybe. To deter the Saudis, the Iraqis, the Kuwaitis--all of the ME--the Russians, the US, China, Afghans? From what? Iran's only possible motive, other than to deter Israel, is regional hegemony and control of the Straights of Hormuz.
                    You answered yourself there. Iran has two powerful neighbors that they aren't exactly buddies with, and both of them have access to nukes (Israel has their own, the Saudis have Pakistan). They have more than enough reasons to need their own nukes.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Defcon5 View Post
                      Oil is commodity which is going to run out, some time or the other they would want one of the biggest oil producing countries to part with their oil.
                      Doesn't look like to happen in short run. US has huge shale oil reserves. China probably also has a reserve of its own. I am not sure why strong economy, conventional military and better relationship with west would not help Iran more than a nuclear weapon. A weapon which you can not even use in a war.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Defcon5 View Post
                        Israel never created the nukes for what has transpired in the last 30 years. For what could have happened before,
                        To be threatened by the Soviet juggernaut? You do know that Soviet boomer captains had standing orders to nuke Israel the second she launches a nuke. Your history is lacking.

                        Originally posted by Defcon5 View Post
                        Ego? I see it as national imperative.
                        To be a target?

                        Originally posted by Defcon5 View Post
                        If having nukes is a matter of ego, what gigantic proportions of ego does the US have?
                        Not ego. Fear. You're way too young to understand. Those of us who lived through those years remember the warhead gap. The Soviets outnumbered us by 10,000 to 20,000 nukes. We feared that we would not be able to hit back hard enough to stop them.

                        I have not said this in a long time and you young ones have absolutely no idea. The job of nukes is to burn babies. Do you know how sick and how scared we were when we worry that we could not burn enough of their babies while they burn too many of ours?

                        We got out of that insanity. You want to jump back in.

                        Originally posted by Defcon5 View Post
                        1. Times have changed, security situations have changed. Regimes have changed.
                        Sign out then.

                        Originally posted by Defcon5 View Post
                        2. So says the countries holding the nukes
                        Says the NSG who includes far more non-nuclear countries than weapons power.

                        Originally posted by Defcon5 View Post
                        3. Worked in the favor of the countries holding them.
                        Our technology. Our uranium. Our heavy water. Our rules. Don't like it? Sign out.

                        Originally posted by Defcon5 View Post
                        Not really, Nukes have always prevented all of them crossing the 'lakshman rekha' line.
                        Again, what the hell are you talking about.

                        USSR-China, USSR-Israel, USSR-South Africa, US-China, Pakistan-India, the list of nuclear weapons powers who went to war against one another.

                        Originally posted by Defcon5 View Post
                        Protect itself from Israel, Saudi Arabia and a very possible US attack.
                        Israel is out of range. Saudi Arabia is a military joke. Iranian test devices are going to do squat all before a US attack.

                        Originally posted by Defcon5 View Post
                        We signed it on our own terms. After we achieved our strategic objectives. NPT as far as we are concerned, has failed.
                        Your terms includes no new testing. Three countries out of 62 others is hardly an indication of failure.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Firestorm View Post
                          Because they don't need them. The moment they feel threatened by a nuclear power with no third party umbrella to protect them, they will make their own nukes. Some will leave the NPT before making them, some will cheat it and use it to obtain materials, like Iran.
                          Oh come on! Vietnam, Afgahnistan, Chechnya, Angola, Lebanon all won wars against nuclear weapons powers! And in the case of Vietnam, she can claim to have won wars against 3 nuclear weapons powers.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            wow, 3 pages in only a few hours.

                            Guys, we've beaten this topic to death in earlier threads of whether Iran has a right to nuclear weapons. They don't.

                            The Iranians themselves argue WITHIN the context of the NPT.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                              Oh come on! Vietnam, Afgahnistan, Chechnya, Angola, Lebanon all won wars against nuclear weapons powers! And in the case of Vietnam, she can claim to have won wars against 3 nuclear weapons powers.
                              You referred to countries who have the capability to go nuclear. I was responding regarding the same. The countries you mentioned did not have the capability. If the US, China or Russia had determined that the cost of nuking them was worth the benefit, there is not a thing they could have done to stop them. As you can imagine, not everyone would like to live under such uncertainty.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by Firestorm View Post
                                You referred to countries who have the capability to go nuclear. I was responding regarding the same. The countries you mentioned did not have the capability. If the US, China or Russia had determined that the cost of nuking them was worth the benefit, there is not a thing they could have done to stop them. As you can imagine, not everyone would like to live under such uncertainty.
                                The second a nuke is used in combat, the NPT is null and void. Within context, both NATO and the Warsaw Pact had access to both American and Soviet nukes respectively. The writers of the Treaty deemed the Treaty's aim is to prevent nuclear war ... and that is another thing NOT ONE OF YOU CAN ARGUE AGAINST. The NPT has prevented nuclear war. However, the writers of the Treaty, both Soviet and American, deemed the Treaty to be null and void once nuclear exchange occurs. For any nuclear weapons power to use a nuke, they void the NPT for everybody else.

                                That is how Canada, Turkey, Italy, the Dutch can deliver American nuclear weapons in the event of war.

                                For any power to waste this advantage over Chechnya or Vietnam or Afghanistan is tantamount handing a weapons free to everybody else.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X