Iran "does not need nuclear arms" - Page 7

elstatec · 01-17-2006, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Machette

Iran bans CNN, I love it. happy:

Iran lifts CNN ban after apology
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 617754.stm

haha

Machette · 01-17-2006, 02:35 PM

dance:

Eight Ace · 01-17-2006, 02:55 PM

so what if President Ahmadinejad believes he is surrounded by a green aura
and that world leaders cannot blink while he is speaking, can't he still have
some nuclear weapons?...aww c'mon now, stop being mean. eek:

elstatec · 01-17-2006, 10:52 PM

Iran call for nuclear talks dismissed
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ ... F23FBF.htm
yea great, Iran offer to restart talks which could solve this situation but are denied. hake:

oh and Israel are threatening Iran, like they did before with Iraq when they sent an Israeli attack in 1981 to destroy a nuclear reactor there hake:

Israel: Iran must not acquire nuclear weapons
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/01/ ... index.html

Machette · 01-18-2006, 02:07 PM

Shameful, sure hope a war isn't a resolution.

Madmartagen · 01-18-2006, 04:42 PM

i tried to read into as much as was written in this topic but if i state the obvious then whatever.

I think this has more to do with trust than it has to do with the US being hypocratic in terms of who is allowed to have nukes and who isnt. Does anyone here trust Iran with nukes more than they trust the US? to me, it is a no brainer that the US is more responsible with nuclear technology than Iran, Russia and whoever else could be considered a rogue or renegade nation today. I dont wrap myself up in the flag and i certainly dont approve of how Bush is running foreign affairs, but that isnt the issue. Iraq and Iran are two seperate cases and I dont see how machette, static or whoever can bring up the war in iraq and compare it to whats going on in Iran. I think the US has a rightful concern about Irans real intention and I think it is accurate to say that there is a reason for that distrust.

the world would be a better place if there werent nukes, but its too late for that. whether you agree with america dropping the bomb on Japan, you cant ignore the fact that they would have been invented anyways. every nation involved in ww2 except for maybe China was trying to develope the bomb at the same time. if today, every nation announced that they had liquidated all of their nuclear arsenel, would you have peace of mind? i wouldnt. you just know that someone would have heldback a small stockpile. it doesnt matter if it was bush, clinton, regan, blair, thatcher, putin, stalin, mao or whoever...every nation claiming to have gotten rid of their stockpile would probably held back a few in reserve.

we have a large distrust of iran because we arent friendly with them. the US is an enemy of Iran - and vice versa. Is that not a legitimate reason to block their goal of obtaining nuclear technology??

When i said that we had the bigger end of the stick, i was reffering to the fact that even though it was a hypocritical situation for the US to not want Iran to have nukes, i was arguing that it was ok because it was benefitial for us to have them and for iran to not have them.

elstatec · 01-18-2006, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madmartagen

Iraq and Iran are two seperate cases and I dont see how machette, static or whoever can bring up the war in iraq and compare it to whats going on in Iran..

helllo? what was one of the major factors of invading Iraq? Weapons of Mass Destruction thats right, which may you believe it is what a nuclear weapon is, which in turn is what Iran is being scrutinised for trying to produce, let alone that it is in the same area of the middle east, has a huge percentage of the worlds oil reserve, and has had a turbulent past with the US and UK, and is being threatened with sanctions among a few reasons, that is why it can be compared to the War in Iraq as this situation is so so so similar to Iraqs one that it is just amazing.

Madmartagen · 01-19-2006, 12:47 AM

no one is talking about invading iran, theyre talking about sanctions. the US does not have the manpower or capacity to invade Iran, change its govt and then police it. i dont trust the iranian govt and i would rather have them not pursue nuclear technology. when the world starts talking about war again, then i will change my mind.

elstatec · 01-19-2006, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madmartagen

no one is talking about invading iran, theyre talking about sanctions. the US does not have the manpower or capacity to invade Iran, change its govt and then police it. i dont trust the iranian govt and i would rather have them not pursue nuclear technology. when the world starts talking about war again, then i will change my mind.

no one is talking about invading Iran? did you not hear bush himself publicly on US television say that taking military action against Iran is an option, dammit just think before you type next time.
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/20 ... 7622A.html
http://www.boston.com/news/world/middle ... inst_iran/
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/do ... 410057.htm

elstatec · 01-19-2006, 08:41 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 623810.stm

Johnj · 01-19-2006, 11:02 AM

So what Elstatec is saying is he wants a country, that can't even maintain their aircraft, to have a nuclear reactor.

I guess that way they can blow themselves to hell.

ed:

imported_Fluffy_Bunny · 01-19-2006, 08:05 PM

Iran isn't a responsible enough country to have Nuclear weapons, what kind of leader deserves nuclear weapons & also tells the world he wants to wipe Israel off the map? stupid:

elstatec · 01-19-2006, 08:11 PM

i swear is everybody just dumb here? when has this ever been about Iran wanting nuclear weapons, they want nuclear technology and research and have said against nuclear weapons, but because the leaders of the western world (US UK ETC) accuse Iran of doing it for nuclear weapons, you believe so, but you think you would of learned from the lack of them in Iraq that you should not believe in everything your leaders say stupid:

Coleman · 01-19-2006, 08:20 PM

omgzorz conspiracy theory!!!! They don't want bombs, they want electricity!!!!!!!!111111111

Fuck it, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what Iran would do with nuclear technology.

Trunks · 01-19-2006, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elstatec

i swear is everybody just dumb here? when has this ever been about Iran wanting nuclear weapons, they want nuclear technology and research and have said against nuclear weapons, but because the leaders of the western world (US UK ETC) accuse Iran of doing it for nuclear weapons, you believe so, but you think you would of learned from the lack of them in Iraq that you should not believe in everything your leaders say stupid:

are you so narrowminded? Of course they won't announce their true intentions. If they went out and said, "yea we are making nukes, deal with it," I daresay that they would face war. Right now they have their poker face on, they say they are not producing nukes, and we can't prove 100% that they are, so we are in a stalemate, because sanctions, and in a worst case scenario, war, will be disastrous to both sides, especially over something that hasn't been confirmed as true.

And if American Intelligence says they are producing nukes, I have reason to believe them. Before some smart ass says the intelligence was wrong about Iraq, let me remind you that the CIA said that they knew Iraq had no WMD all along.

Fact is, the minute they have one nuke they will be parading it around, etc, and then, we won't be able to do anything, because it will be too late. we must sieze the moment, or we will lose the oppurtunity.

Will this give Islamic extremists even more reason to hate us? probably. Will it improve our relations with foreign countries? Probably not. However, we are talking about nukes, to this date, the most powerful, and devastating weapon man has ever concieved. We cannot let some crackpot dictator ruling an extremist country that is often at odds with out own country, to come into possession of such weapons.