I'd first like to thank you for basing this discussion on the premise that Iran has nuclear weapons. I'm glad to see that you're assuming that the theocratic regime is lying about their intentions, which indeed they are.
thank you for making my point
israel, which refuses to be a NPT signatory, whines that iran is not complying with NPT expectations
israel has no standing to point to iran's actions
such hypocrisy
NO. hell no. israel has no right or obligation to hold iran to a standard to which it refuses to adhere
that government's hypocrisy could not be any more profound
Here's an analogy which might help:
There are two American gentlemen named Ben and Ali. Ben is a bachelor. Western society dictates that Ben, like any other bachelor, is not obligated to hold a monogamous relationship. It may be frowned upon by some; hell, it may even be dangerous for Ben, but he can womanize all he wants without violating society's moral, ethical, and legal code against adultery - and I hope that there aren't any states that outlaw fornication.
On the other hand, Ali is a married man. Marriage as we define it is a permanent, monogamous bond between a man and a woman that cannot be violated by extramarital affairs by either of the spouses. If Ali is promiscuous, society is going to hold it against him more than they hold it against Ben, and everyone, including Ben
even if he is promiscuous, can condemn Ali without being hypocrites themselves. Ali willingly put himself in a position where he was
obligated not to womanize, Ben did not; therefore, Ben is not holding Ali to standards that he is not holding himself to because he is not a married man while Ali is,
especially since Ali receives benefits via his marriage that Ben does not get.
If Israel expected Iran to sign the NPT without signing it herself, then her government would be hypocritical. However, expecting Iran to hold herself to standards that the theocracy, of its own free will, decided to hold itself to is not hypocritical, even if Israel is not holding herself to those same standards because she had not agreed to those standards.
cough-bull****!!!!!!!!
iran is without nuclear weaponry
iran, unlike israel, has not initiated warfare with another nation in over two centuries
we cannot say that about israel for two years
I would say that kidnapping our diplomats and holding them hostage qualifies as an act of war. Iran is more of the proxy warfare type, arming and assisting death squads and puppet regimes to achieve its expansionist goals rather than engaging in open warfare. Not one Iranian troop needs to set foot in Lebanon for Iran to
de facto control the country via Syrian death squads and Shia Lebanese terrorist groups.
you miss the point
iran is intimidated by israel's nuclear capacity and reasonably recognizes that either israel must abandon its nuclear arsenal or, barring that outcome, iran must develop one as a mater of sovereign security
What interest has Israel shown in Iran that might even slightly imply that they would use nukes against the Islamic Republic?
you make a good point. israel's nuclear arsenal has resulted in the other ME nations seeking parity
it must be found that israel's possession of nuclear weapons capability is directly responsible for other nations in the region having legitimate reason to pursue nuclear parity
Israel, save the ultra-right political parties and fundamentalist Jews, has no expansionist or imperialist designs. Iran has traditionally been an empire, and it is attempting to reclaim this status to some extent by supporting Shia groups, from Iraq to Yemen.
no, we don't know this
do you have any objection information which would prove this to be true?
You don't know that both Pakistan and India have nuclear capabilities - we've assisted both nations in achieving this?
you are unclear. what is the similar siuation you insist must result?
Basically, this:
1. Tehran succeeds in building nukes; as a result, the regime can essentially do whatever it wants in the Middle East in promoting its own interests without serious opposition from the West and the international community. It will be able to greatly increase its support for the Assad regime and for Hamas, Hezbollah, and other Shia terrorist groups, and will begin to forge dominance over Iraq.
2. Saudi Arabia, fearful of being overshadowed in the region by Iran and frightened by the empowerment of the Iraqi Shia majority whom they despise, will also attempt to achieve nuclear capabilities, likely getting it from the West.
3. Both nations continue to hate each other without using the nukes, but all it would take is a single fanatic on either side to take control of the WMDs and turn basically the entire Gulf into rubble.
We already are in this precarious position with India and Pakistan. The two natural enemies are aware that using one's own nukes will result in the obliteration of a vast majority of their respective civilian populations; since they currently have more pragmatic governments, they refrain from causing this. Pakistan's repeated coups, however, could eventually put the nuclear missiles in the hands of a Sunni extremist party.
that tiny country with the military arsenal supported by the USA
We also support Egypt, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Jordan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bahrain, and Pakistan. It's not as if Israel is receiving some vast favoritism that the Arab world could only dream of.
that tiny country which attacks other nations and the pretends that it was necessary to do so as a pre-emptibe prescription
that tiny country ... the one known for initiating military hostilities
Name one conflict that Israel has ever had that was not provoked by one of its enemies.
fortunately, they have not found a necessity to do so
but if its very existence were to be threatened, we could expect a nuclear response from israel
just as we could from iran once it acquires a nuclear arsenal
Iran faces no existential threat by the mere possession of nuclear missiles by Israel.
I, for one, am not worried about Iran using the nukes on Israel. They're at the moment too clever to do that. I'm worried about their arsenal being used to intimidate any powers who would stand up to their imperialism in the Arab world. I support Israel in this matter for that reason; I don't think that the Jewish state would be in nuclear danger from Iran. I will add, though, that Iran's support for Hamas would probably increase once they got nukes.
if our national leaders were wise we would gift a nuclear warhead with projecting ability to iran. that would be enough to stiffle any future israeli aggression against iran and eliminate that counry's need to develop its own nuclear technology
The moment we gave Iran nukes we'd see our ability to influence events in the Middle East drop drastically.