• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

RabidAlpaca said:
Guys, since this is obviously such an ominous international threat, why don't we just invade every country in the world, put an American soldier on every street corner, and stockpile all the nukes in the US?

I find it wildly hypocritical for the US to shake their finger at anyone for having a nuke when we have more nukes than the rest of the world combined, and are the only ones who have used them on living beings. If we're so against nukes, maybe we should be making the first step towards our own disarmament. This has far more to do with asserting US dominance than it does with world peace. We're being war mongered.
Click to expand...

While I agree that it is about US dominance I have to disagree that just because the US has nukes it means that we should let those that signed a treaty to not make nukes, have nukes.
 
MKULTRABOY said:
I happen to 'get' what he means. Because an ant says it can bite an elephant... does that mean the elephant should stomp it.
Click to expand...

I get it too ..That was not what he asked.
 
Connery said:
This answer is not an answer by any means.
Click to expand...

Your answer didn't demonstrate a real threat to the US, by any means. That was the point.
 
Last edited:
Kal'Stang said:
While I agree that it is about US dominance I have to disagree that just because the US has nukes it means that we should let those that signed a treaty to not make nukes, have nukes.
Click to expand...

I don't get why its peachy keen for some but not for others?
 
Catawba said:
Your answer didn't demonstrate a real threat to the US, by any means. That was the point.
Click to expand...

Is your position that know better than the the Iranian Ambassador?
 
Connery said:
Is your position that know better than the the Iranian Ambassador?
Click to expand...

Our Generals and the UN have not declared it a military threat vs an Iranian Ambassador that goes boogety-boogety-boo!

And you choose to believe the Iranian ambassador???
 
Catawba said:
Our Generals and the UN have not declared it a military threat vs an Iranian Ambassador that goes boogety-boogety-boo!

And you choose to believe the Iranian ambassador???
Click to expand...

Actually, I expect the same respect and courtesy I afforded you, a source for your position.
 
Connery said:
Actually, I expect the same respect and courtesy I afforded you, a source for your position.
Click to expand...

How do I prove a negative? I've seen no official declaration of military threat to the US. If you claim our Commander in Chief and the UN have declared Iran is a military threat to the US, please provide us your source.
 
Kal'Stang said:
If you signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty then you are bound by it. And Iran did sign it.
Click to expand...

I understand its a technical violation, when or if it happens. States break treaties all the time. I am speaking from a more philosophical perspective in why its okay for some to have nuclear weapons, and others not.
 
Catawba said:
I understand its a technical violation, when or if it happens. States break treaties all the time. I am speaking from a more philosophical perspective in why its okay for some to have nuclear weapons, and others not.
Click to expand...

Well in this particular case...because the government of Iran is batchit crazy. And no crazies should have weapons period...much less nukes.
 
Kal'Stang said:
If you signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty then you are bound by it. And Iran did sign it.
Click to expand...

so, if iran withdraws from the NPT like israel, then it can develop nuclear weapons freely, like israel
 
justabubba said:
so, if iran withdraws from the NPT like israel, then it can develop nuclear weapons freely, like israel
Click to expand...

Yup, Iran can do that. North Korea already did it. Of course, that would be like admitting Iran planned to develop nuclear weapons, after swearing up and down they weren't going to.
 
Catawba said:
How do I prove a negative? I've seen no official declaration of military threat to the US. If you claim our Commander in Chief and the UN have declared Iran is a military threat to the US, please provide us your source.
Click to expand...


I cited the Iranian Ambassador declaring such. You have offered your opinion, which alone is perhaps stronger than an impression, but, no more than that. You asked for a source I provided you with mine. I ask you for a source you give me bupkus.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Well in this particular case...because the government of Iran is batchit crazy. And no crazies should have weapons period...much less nukes.
Click to expand...

I don't follow your reasoning. The US has attacked more nations in modern history than Iran. We have have even used nukes on civilian populations. No other nuclear state has done that.
 
justabubba said:
so, if iran withdraws from the NPT like israel, then it can develop nuclear weapons freely, like israel
Click to expand...

North Korea also withdrew from the NPT. I am guessing that is what Iran will do if they are pushed too hard.

According to section X in the treaty, it just requires a 90 days notice.
 
Connery said:
I cited the Iranian Ambassador declaring such. You have offered your opinion, which alone is perhaps stronger than an impression, but, no more than that. You asked for a source I provided you with mine. I ask you for a source you give me bupkus.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously suggesting that the Iranian Ambassador is more credible than the US military and the UN???
 
EagleAye said:
Yup, Iran can do that. North Korea already did it. Of course, that would be like admitting Iran planned to develop nuclear weapons, after swearing up and down they weren't going to.
Click to expand...

They have grounds, since the US has also violated the treaty.
 
The sooner the better.
 
Catawba said:
They have grounds, since the US has also violated the treaty.
Click to expand...
Well by that standard, a convicted sex offender, and an average Joe both have may have a right to use the internet - but who's more likely to download child porn?
 
Catawba said:
Are you seriously suggesting that the Iranian Ambassador is more credible than the US military and the UN???
Click to expand...

I am saying he has more credibility than you. Sources please.
 
Catawba said:
They have grounds, since the US has also violated the treaty.
Click to expand...

They don't even need to have grounds. They can just do it. When and If, they develop the capacity to weaponize their nuclear fuel, they'll probably drop out of the treaty then.
 
Connery said:
I am saying he has more credibility than you. Sources please.
Click to expand...

The source is the absence of the US or UN declaration that Iran is a threat to the US.
 
EagleAye said:
They don't even need to have grounds. They can just do it. When and If, they develop the capacity to weaponize their nuclear fuel, they'll probably drop out of the treaty then.
Click to expand...

Great, problem solved! :peace
 
Catawba said:
Great, problem solved! :peace
Click to expand...

Legal problem solved. Once they do so, it will be perceived by many as an admission Iran is making nukes. Obama or any future president would never be able to hold Israel back at that point. An attack on Iran by Israel would happen for certain. The US would probably join in. I prefer it as it stands, then an attack by anyone may not be happen at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom