- Joined
- Dec 1, 2010
- Messages
- 61,745
- Reaction score
- 32,385
- Location
- El Paso Strong
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
I heard someone make the argument that Obama doesn't believe the US has any rightful role in preventing or hindering Iran from developing and maintaining nuclear weapons. I don't know that that's true, and nobody but the President can answer to what he believes, so I'll ask what you believe. If Iran has the ability, does it have the "right" to nuclear weapons? (By "right", I mean the U.S. and other nations would not be unjustified in trying to prevent it.)
working on the poll
From a Realist perspective, they have the "right" to whatever they can get away with.
We, in turn, have the "right" to impede them in such pursuits if it goes against our own interests.
Their desire for a Nuclear Weapon isn't entirely to do with some apocalyptic desire to incinerate Israel and all non believers or whatever colorful language the regime decides to use for the day... it's about the survival of the regime.
You might as well ask if Nazi Germany had a right to take over most of Europe to gain lebensraum. Sometimes you only have a right to a thing if you can make it stick.
I heard someone make the argument that Obama doesn't believe the US has any rightful role in preventing or hindering Iran from developing and maintaining nuclear weapons. I don't know that that's true, and nobody but the President can answer to what he believes, so I'll ask what you believe. If Iran has the ability, does it have the "right" to nuclear weapons? (By "right", I mean the U.S. and other nations would not be unjustified in trying to prevent it.)
working on the poll
From a Realist perspective, they have the "right" to whatever they can get away with.
We, in turn, have the "right" to impede them in such pursuits if it goes against our own interests.
At the end of the day, it's really as simple as that. Iran has an agenda, and we have an agenda. Unfortunately, those agendas simply happen to be mutually incompatible.
May the best nation win. :shrug:
Iran could conceivably already possess several nuclear devices and possibly a means to deliver.
Well, I find it a bit odd that people express so much fear about Iran possessing nuke capabilities and don't see the need to shut down Pakistan's nuke bomb program. That's a disaster waiting to happen. In fact, I would worry much more about Pakistan than say North Korea or Iran (at this particular moment). Radical groups like ISIS - already know where their prize is. They don't have to wait for nuke programs to be developed in the Middle East. It's there for the taking. Pakistani government officials don't have all that much control over the bombs they have. And Pakistan has, on a number of occasions, threatened to nuke India.
But to answer the poll. No, Iran shouldn't have a nuke bomb program.
You're privy to knowledge unknown to both US and Israeli intelligence services?
No one has the right to have nukes.
But if one country has the "right", then all must have the "right".
Actually, the answer is a Clear Cut "No".Iran has as much right to nukes as anyone else. Nations with nukes don't get invaded, so it is understandable that they want them. I know of no principal that denies their right to have them while others have them. In my opinion, no one has a right to have them or use them. Using them is genocide.
So God gave men the "right" to defend themselves.
But governments have the right, assuming they have the power, to take that God-given "right" away.
Don't let the folks over in the 2A forum know that a "very conservative" fella like yourself is spewing this liberal hogwash.
:mrgreen:
The best? Or the militarily strongest nation, the one with nukes and a history of using them?
I heard someone make the argument that Obama doesn't believe the US has any rightful role in preventing or hindering Iran from developing and maintaining nuclear weapons. I don't know that that's true, and nobody but the President can answer to what he believes, so I'll ask what you believe. If Iran has the ability, does it have the "right" to nuclear weapons? (By "right", I mean the U.S. and other nations would not be unjustified in trying to prevent it.)
working on the poll
Well, actually... That's the whole reason the 2A exists in the first place. :lol:
If Government ever tries to exercise the power to oppress the people, the Founders hoped to ensure that they would be armed, so that they could (in theory, anyway) effectively resist that tyranny.
Both. Obviously, I view the United States as being objectively superior to Iran both with regards to prevailing ideological and long term motivations.
However, "victory" in this particular struggle will, undeniably, ultimately boil down to which side actually has the will, clout, and power to impose their own desires on the situation one way or another.
I know the history of Iran's relationship with Russia, China , Pakistan and North Korea....all nuclear powers.
Then there's this:
Iran Unveils New Ground-Based Cruise Missile System > Strategic-Culture.org - Strategic Culture Foundation
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?