Re: Iran
 

[ QUOTE ]
A one sided balance of power in the middle east is detrimental to the US.

[/ QUOTE ]

Get a grip.

Re: Iran
 

Good post!!! Pithy on point and full of reason.

Re: Iran
 

They have as much right as they do to electricity or mechanical ploughs. Off course they have a right if they have the knowledge and the capability. The point is to try and give them incentives not to build them. Invading one of their neighbors, screwing it up royally, stretching your military and pissing off all your allies so your attempts at fearful rhetoric become ridiculous are maybe not the right way to go?

Re: Iran
 

[ QUOTE ]
Good post!!! Pithy on point and full of reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you think that it makes sense that we wouldn't want Israel, our democratic ally to dominate the region strategically instead of a situation where our undemocratic enemies had an equal power, then my injunction to you stands.

Re: Iran
 

[ QUOTE ]
it's perfectly correct for every piss-ant small nation to have nukes cause "it's their right!".

[/ QUOTE ]

Nuclear proliferation is one of the only ways i see to make war impossible. Also natural rights are impossible to forfiet. There is nothing you can do that takes away your right to free speach. Likewise every nation on the face of the earht has an equal right to self defense. Since Iran's holding of nukes does not infringe on any ones elses rightto self defense they must be allowed to have them.

Keep in mind that to most of the world America is viewed as a theocratic, tolitarian state whose goals are nothing less than world economic domination. Calling another governmetn a totalitarian state is competely subjective to whose doing the name caling

Re: Iran
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well, Superleeds: do YOU think that totalitarian, tyrannical governments should have the right to possess doomsday weapons? Weatherman seemed to think that such regimes have as much right as any other country to have them. Do you agree with him?



[/ QUOTE ] They have as much right as they do to electricity or mechanical ploughs. Off course they have a right if they have the knowledge and the capability.

[/ QUOTE ]

So how do you define "having a right"...merely as "being capable of doing something"? Anything one is capable of doing, one has a right to do? Just because a regime has the know-how, they have a RIGHT to do it? Would Hitler have had a RIGHT to build nuclear weapons? Maybe you think so; I certainly don't. I think "right" encompasses morals as well as pure abilities. I don't think there is anything moral about a dastardly regime attaining doomsday weapons, as what they might well do with them could be truly evil (again, imagine the Nazis if they were first to gain nukes). Regimes that have zero respect for human rights have zero right to possess nukes.

Re: Iran
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well, Superleeds: do YOU think that totalitarian, tyrannical governments should have the right to possess doomsday weapons? Weatherman seemed to think that such regimes have as much right as any other country to have them. Do you agree with him?



[/ QUOTE ] They have as much right as they do to electricity or mechanical ploughs. Off course they have a right if they have the knowledge and the capability.

[/ QUOTE ]

So how do you define "having a right"...merely as "being capable of doing something"? Anything one is capable of doing, one has a right to do? Just because a regime has the know-how, they have a RIGHT to do it? Would Hitler have had a RIGHT to build nuclear weapons? Maybe you think so; I certainly don't. I think "right" encompasses morals as well as pure abilities. I don't think there is anything moral about a dastardly regime attaining doomsday weapons, as what they might well do with them could be truly evil (again, imagine the Nazis if they were first to gain nukes). Regimes that have zero respect for human rights have zero right to possess nukes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Any nation has the absolute right to have the same technology other nations have. If iran somehow created an antimatter destructor beam then maybe they dont have a right to that. But nuclear weapons is a 100%right of every nation on this planet.

Adolf Hitler was a democratically elected leader of a European nation. You may not like his policies, but he is no more dastardly than any other leader. (Remember when the US systematically destroyed an entirerace of people? The Native Americans? Maybe we shouldnt have any nukes!)

Dastardly regimes is a made up term. Forthis to have any meaning there needs to be a clearly defined absolute morality. Until then you may say that you feelthat a government was evil and/or dastardly. But certainly none exist.

What if the Nazis had nukes first? Geez, they would probably do something terrible like drop them on civilian populations, not once, but TWICE!! Oh wait the US did that and no one batted an eye

Re: Iran
 

[ QUOTE ]
Since Iran's holding of nukes does not infringe on any ones elses rightto self defense they must be allowed to have them.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is not that their possession of nukes would infringe on another nation's right of self defense, but on their right to be free from fear of an unjustified attack or be subject to the actual attack itself.

Re: Iran
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Since Iran's holding of nukes does not infringe on any ones elses rightto self defense they must be allowed to have them.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is not that their possession of nukes would infringe on another nation's right of self defense, but on their right to be free from fear of an unjustified attack or be subject to the actual attack itself.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is Iran made to be fearful of attack but Isrrael is immune from it? Since none of you will admit it i will just tell you.

There is clearly a double standard between the rich nations and the poor ones. Without a doubt Iran is kept in a position where its growth is stifled by the western powers.

Re: Iran
 

I said it in an earlier post and I'll try to make this real clear for you. Read it slooooooooooow.

1. If Iran neither a) supports terrorists who attack Israel, nor b) develops nuclear weapons, then Iran has no justifiable fear of Israeli attack.

2. Iran has made a threat to wipe out Israel and thus is shown to be the true threat.

So the only reason left that you can have to excuse Iran developing nukes is because you think they also have a right to support terroristic attacks on Israel and should be able to defend themselves from Israeli retaliation for same.