61–69 of 69 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is only illegal if you signed the nuclear non prolifiration treaty. Anyway Iran with the bomb is a good thing if you don't want another war in the middle-east.
> It is only illegal if you signed the nuclear non prolifiration treaty. Which Iran did.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why shouldn't Iran have access to nuclear power, or nuclear weapons for that matter?
Some people and country may hate America for its foreign policy but underlying principle of America is liberty and democracy. Its for this reason other countries willingly at best or grudgingly approve the status of America as super power. But Iran or any other middle east countries are too religious and follow Islam which is violent in its fundamental principle. Even if exceptional leaders emerge and manage to make…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not weird at all. It is what Iran (and almost every country) voluntarily agreed to under the terms of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferatio...
So the US also signed the NPT where all the nuclear states also pledged to eliminate their arsenals... But we built a few more in '07. We also didn't sign the '17 treaty on prohibiting nuclear weapons. Definitely not weird at all.
"Few nations like the idea of Iran enhancing its nuclear capabilities" Lol. No nation in over a decade likes this idea except for maybe North Korea. Sure Israel has always been the most vocal, but Iran having the bomb is an international liability. Even the Sunni Arabs stripes have changed. Common enemies make strange bedfellows. Also, the Iranians have been willing to flex against their neighbors more recently. See…
Why shouldn't Iran have access to nuclear power, or nuclear weapons for that matter?
There's a couple reasons why Iran should not have nuclear weapons:
1) Political Islam can be used to justify the use of nuclear weapons against other countries, both Western and Islamic, whether pre-emptively or in times of war.
Just read the Koran.
Israel is fixated on Iran because Iran is a regional industrial power that is capable of even more than N. Korea can do.
2) For example, Pakistan, an Islamic country run by the military, is unable to control its own army because of Islamic ideology.
(The Taliban in Afghanistan was allowed to take over the country because neighboring Pakistani military commanders were afraid that orders to lower-level officers to intervene would be ignored, or worse.)
3) Pakistan is Sunni and Iran is Shia. One is a heretic.
"Few nations like the idea of Iran enhancing its nuclear capabilities" Lol. No nation in over a decade likes this idea except for maybe North Korea. Sure Israel has always been the most vocal, but Iran having the bomb is an international liability. Even the Sunni Arabs stripes have changed. Common enemies make strange bedfellows. Also, the Iranians have been willing to flex against their neighbors more recently. See…
Why shouldn't Iran have access to nuclear power, or nuclear weapons for that matter?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some people and country may hate America for its foreign policy but underlying principle of America is liberty and democracy. Its for this reason other countries willingly at best or grudgingly approve the status of America as super power. But Iran or any other middle east countries are too religious and follow Islam which is violent in its fundamental principle. Even if exceptional leaders emerge and manage to make…
It's dangerous for countries that are run by demagogues to have nukes. Pakistan is a muslim country, but they've had nukes since 1998 without much fanfare. On the flip side, North Korea has nukes, and that's far more unsettling.
Even more outrageous is when well read muslims migrate to other countries they expect their religious rights to be respected. This is very sad state.
Could some ELI5 what's going on with Iran over last like 3 decades? why they're described like a dangerous country? why there are fights 24/7?
Presumably A) They don't want to play economic ball with Uncle Sam. B) The country can't be conquered by conventional means so can "act out" as much as they like. C) They aren't really that bad, US propaganda is just really, really effective.
E) Their Revolutionary Guard is extremely powerful politically. It's not clear the civilian government is capable of fully reigning in the Revolutionary Guard, and the Revolutionary Guard's political power is propped up by the prospect of war.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Iran voluntarily signed up to the treaty and received various benefits for doing so in return for agreeing not to pursuing nuclear weapons capability (same as every other non-nuclear weapons state signatory).
That is of course true, but also a legalistic take, as Iran not signing on to the NPT, or indeed leaving it, would not make Western powers go "oh ok, so it's fine now". The reality is that most of the non-nuclear states are largely happy with the arrangement of living within the US nuclear umbrella and acknowledge that more nuclear weapon states do not benefit the common good, the nuclear weapon states have no intere…
As far as I know, India recognizes Pakistan's right to exist, and doesn't regularly threaten to wipe Pakistan off the map / drive all of its citizens into the sea.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Presumably A) They don't want to play economic ball with Uncle Sam. B) The country can't be conquered by conventional means so can "act out" as much as they like. C) They aren't really that bad, US propaganda is just really, really effective.
What do you mean? >B) The country can't be conquered by conventional means so can "act out" as much as they like.