Originally posted by JAD_333
View Post
A willingness & determination to suffer whatever because in the end they think the objective is worth it.
Originally posted by JAD_333
View Post
Nobody wants to find out :)
Originally posted by JAD_333
View Post
Originally posted by JAD_333
View Post
It is safe so long as the will for self-preservation applies. Otherwise you're saying that the blackmail option still holds. Iran nukes Israel and then dares the world to obliterate them.
So to prevent this possibility the best path is to prevent the eventuality of a nuclear iran. Nip it in the bud. This would be cheaper and does away with dealing with the worst outcome in the future. The basis of this thinking is it posits as a given that the Iranian regime is irrational today. That is the starting point. And it presumes success in preventing Iran from going nuclear.
Its hard to argue against this position as its not falsifiable. Stuart Slade stated that having nukes makes a regime more responsible but even he wouldn't be able to counter your assertion.
Advocates of deterrence theory will play down irrationality by saying regimes become more responsible.
Detractors of deterrence theory will play up irrationality.
So what happens in the case all attempts fail to interdict Iran from going nuclear ?
How will the world deal with a potential madman. But the idea is to avoid that eventuality.
OOE's already said it would be hard from Iran to recover if they were 'bombed back to the stone age'. That entails taking out C&C. power & sewage countrywide. Would set things back a few decades. Question is whether this is a feasible option. The US would have to be involved in this case along with other allies in an action that would bypass the UN. I cannot imediately see how it could possibly pass in the UN given the difficulty of just getting proper sanctions through.
Comment