Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon  I thought we were discussing proliferation not nuclear exchange. |
you listed possible consequences of invasion, I'm listing possible consequences of ignoring Iran. Let's not have a double standard here.
Quote:
Yes, you are right many things are not as bad as nuclear heck.
But, that's kind of an empty discussion as there's no guarantee that either nuclear heck will occur or will not occur anyway.
|
There's no gurantee of food riots or massive economic collapse either.
Quote:
|
Actually, the blocking of the Straight of Hormuz is a proximal result of attacking Iran - pretty much an assured event.
|
What do you think the outcome will be when our enemy Iran has nuclear weapons or even nuclear technology?
Why do you think the Saudis are buying weapons from us in unprecedented quantities? Who do you think they are afraid of?
The status quo has been in our favor because we possess nuclear weapons and have the restraint NOT to use them (see korea, vietnam, iraq, cuba, russia, or any other conflict post WW2). Its in Irans best interest to upset this balance of power.
Where do you draw the line and start taking action? When the bombs are dropping? When the threats of "mass destruction" are made? When the threats of nuclear proliferation are made? When stateless militias magically acquire dirty bombs and/or nuclear weapons?
Nuclear technology is far too dangerous to be considered a right. It is a priviledge and if you can't convince the world powers you are capable and responsible with such power and your intentions you shouldn't have it. Its sickening how apathetic Europe is about this. This mentality of "let's wait and see" and petty sanctions is provably not working. Its sad but its going to take someone getting nuked or a massive loss of life for the Europe and other parts of the world to wakeup. Just like it took planes flying into our towers to get us to take stateless miltias seriously. Have we learned nothing?