• 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!

Israel Plans Iran Strike; Citizens Say Government Serious [W:52]

We do get to decide what is good for the world as the major Democratic power and leader of a coalition of democratic powers. I don't care what the Iranian government wants or thinks is fair. Their acquisition of a nuclear weapon is harmful and cannot be allowed.

Funny how our magnanimity is reserved for areas with lots of oil.

Money is what determines who "needs" democracy and who needs a strong man dictatorship.
 
Funny how our magnanimity is reserved for areas with lots of oil.

Money is what determines who "needs" democracy and who needs a strong man dictatorship.

It isn't, and it shouldn't be. I don't recall their being much oil in Kosovo, Bosnia, Uganda, Somalia, Syria, Haiti, Lebanon etc. yet we have had robust pro-democratic policies in all three of those countries, though I admit the current administration has been incredibly lackluster in taking advantage of these opportunities as they have arisen, and yes we have debased ourselves by refusing to be more aggressive on a variety of issues. Yet we are still the power of democracy promotion, and we still generally pursue a liberal agenda. It is in our moral and strategic interests.
 
Money is what determines who "needs" democracy and who needs a strong man dictatorship.

Money is a big factor. We cannot just go nation-building willy-nilly and run clean out of cash. A country targetted for liberation having natural resources to pay for modern democratic infrastructure (sanitation, education, etc) has got to be higher on the List than a country that will break the bank to get it into the 20th century.
 
It isn't, and it shouldn't be. I don't recall their being much oil in Kosovo, Bosnia, Uganda, Somalia, Syria, Haiti, Lebanon etc. yet we have had robust pro-democratic policies in all three of those countries, though I admit the current administration has been incredibly lackluster in taking advantage of these opportunities as they have arisen, and yes we have debased ourselves by refusing to be more aggressive on a variety of issues. Yet we are still the power of democracy promotion, and we still generally pursue a liberal agenda. It is in our moral and strategic interests.

You are aware of our history in regards to Iran, right.

Modern Iran is a problem of our creation.

They voted for the wrong guy and we fixed it for 'em.
 
You are aware of our history in regards to Iran, right.

Modern Iran is a problem of our creation.

They voted for the wrong guy and we fixed it for 'em.

Yes, I am more than aware. It is also an incredibly leap to jump from the overthrow of Mossadegh to ascribing total US culpability for the actions and incarnation of Iran today. We are not a parent responsible for our forlorn child. We made mistakes, and we have some guilt in the water with regard to our relationship with them. But pushing it further than that obviates Iran's own independence as an actor which I think is silly.
 
Yes, I am more than aware. It is also an incredibly leap to jump from the overthrow of Mossadegh to ascribing total US culpability for the actions and incarnation of Iran today. We are not a parent responsible for our forlorn child. We made mistakes, and we have some guilt in the water with regard to our relationship with them. But pushing it further than that obviates Iran's own independence as an actor which I think is silly.

You endorse imperialism why try and rationaize it by talking about democracy. Although you seem to admit operation ajax was a bad idea you say we should intervene in Iran becasue they aren't doing what we want. The exact same reasoning for Operation Ajax.


Imperialism, as defined by the Dictionary of Human Geography, is "the creation and/or maintenance of an unequal economic, cultural, and territorial relationship, usually between states and often in the form of an empire, based on domination and subordination."
 
You endorse imperialism why try and rationaize it by talking about democracy. Although you seem to admit operation ajax was a bad idea you say we should intervene in Iran becasue they aren't doing what we want. The exact same reasoning for Operation Ajax.

I endorse imperialism? I don't remember saying that. It isn't Imperialism to prevent a country to acquire nuclear weapons. If I invaded Iran, set up a provincial governor, and ruled them as an extended colonial fief, yeah I'd be an Imperialist. What I'm saying is Iran should not acquire nuclear weapons, and the US should support the opposition in Iran and aspire to overthrow the ruling religious junta and establish true democratic rule. Agitating for liberalism and democracy promotion is positive. If you want to call that Democratic Imperialism, I'm fine with that.
 
I endorse imperialism? I don't remember saying that. It isn't Imperialism to prevent a country to acquire nuclear weapons. If I invaded Iran, set up a provincial governor, and ruled them as an extended colonial fief, yeah I'd be an Imperialist. What I'm saying is Iran should not acquire nuclear weapons, and the US should support the opposition in Iran and aspire to overthrow the ruling religious junta and establish true democratic rule. Agitating for liberalism and democracy promotion is positive. If you want to call that Democratic Imperialism, I'm fine with that.

Of course Iran is most likely to elect a more moderate theocracy. The younger generation is ok with an islamic state, just a far more moderate one.

How long do we have to pay for mistakes made during the Cold War?

When are we going to stop doing the same crap?
 
I endorse imperialism? I don't remember saying that. It isn't Imperialism to prevent a country to acquire nuclear weapons. If I invaded Iran, set up a provincial governor, and ruled them as an extended colonial fief, yeah I'd be an Imperialist. What I'm saying is Iran should not acquire nuclear weapons, and the US should support the opposition in Iran and aspire to overthrow the ruling religious junta and establish true democratic rule. Agitating for liberalism and democracy promotion is positive. If you want to call that Democratic Imperialism, I'm fine with that.
what gives us the right to have a nuclear weapons stockpile while insisting iran can't do the same?
ditto for israel
 
Of course Iran is most likely to elect a more moderate theocracy. The younger generation is ok with an islamic state, just a far more moderate one.

How long do we have to pay for mistakes made during the Cold War?

When are we going to stop doing the same crap?

That isn't true in the slightest. The current generation has been bleeding in the streets to oppose the regime, and came out in their millions to contest the last election before being beaten down by the government. I don't have a problem with Islamic political parties, and I fully and sincerely support Muhammed Morsi in his efforts to reform Egypt, so long as he remains faithful to the democratic roots which lifted him to power. But once democracy is obviated, there is no real legitimacy.

When are we going to stop agitating for democracy? When the last autocracy is cast down, and we have a new world order of democratic states. A goal that we have been accelerating towards for almost a century, and may be in reach within the next one.
 
what gives us the right to have a nuclear weapons stockpile while insisting iran can't do the same?
ditto for israel

What gives us the right? I don't understand that question. I support our retention of nuclear weapons because I believe the United States is an important actor for moral good in the world, and it is required for our defense. I'd prefer it if we could abolish nuclear weapons and take advantage of our conventional superiority, but that is a digression. Why is it fair? It isn't fair, why on earth would I care if its fair? This isn't some toy that the teacher says we all have to share. I don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon because I think they have a terrible government, aggressive regional ambitions inimical to sound interests, and will cause instability in an important region with the potential for aftershocks elsewhere. This is an outcome I want the United States government to prevent.
?
 
That isn't true in the slightest. The current generation has been bleeding in the streets to oppose the regime, and came out in their millions to contest the last election before being beaten down by the government. I don't have a problem with Islamic political parties, and I fully and sincerely support Muhammed Morsi in his efforts to reform Egypt, so long as he remains faithful to the democratic roots which lifted him to power. But once democracy is obviated, there is no real legitimacy.

When are we going to stop agitating for democracy? When the last autocracy is cast down, and we have a new world order of democratic states. A goal that we have been accelerating towards for almost a century, and may be in reach within the next one.

Sorry, i simply dont believe in the benevolent America bringing justice and democracy to the world.

We impose our will as we see fit, and if we're better of with you living under a horrible despot, then thats what you get. And if theres nothing in it for us you dont even enter our radar.

I dont think we're evil, just completely self serving. I would be less annoyed if we just admitted it instead of pretending we want genuine democracy everywhere in the world
 
Sorry, i simply dont believe in the benevolent America bringing justice and democracy to the world.

We impose our will as we see fit, and if we're better of with you living under a horrible despot, then thats what you get. And if theres nothing in it for us you dont even enter our radar.

I dont think we're evil, just completely self serving. I would be less annoyed if we just admitted it instead of pretending we want genuine democracy everywhere in the world

America is the only democratic power who has the means, opening, and ability to do so. We have been the only power that has done so, and continues to do so. We have made deals on a utilitarian basis sure enough, but we have shorn our own interests in favor of the democratic option many times before. It is something we should do more of in the future a la Egypt where many neoconservatives argued vigorously to support the overthrow of Mubarak, despite his utility to the US. It is betting on the long term interests of the United States in democracy, rather than short term regional gain. Depending of course on geopolitical circumstance and context, the Cold War being an excellent example.
 
I endorse imperialism? I don't remember saying that. It isn't Imperialism to prevent a country to acquire nuclear weapons. If I invaded Iran, set up a provincial governor, and ruled them as an extended colonial fief, yeah I'd be an Imperialist. What I'm saying is Iran should not acquire nuclear weapons, and the US should support the opposition in Iran and aspire to overthrow the ruling religious junta and establish true democratic rule. Agitating for liberalism and democracy promotion is positive. If you want to call that Democratic Imperialism, I'm fine with that.

No! This is what you said

But I like America being able to intervene and excercise influence in countries and regions like this, hence why I do not want Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon


You want influence over other countries therefore they can't have a nuke. Imperialism
 
No! This is what you said




You want influence over other countries therefore they can't have a nuke. Imperialism

Yes, for the reasons listed above. Influence and Intervention are not equal to Imperialism.
 
Yes, for the reasons listed above. Influence and Intervention are not equal to Imperialism.

You're kidding right. They do want we want or we bomb them until they do. That's democracy and self determination? Yikes!
 
You're kidding right. They do want we want or we bomb them until they do. That's democracy and self determination? Yikes!

I never said they wanted us to bomb them. You are conflating two different things. I do not believe Iran should have a nuclear weapon and that if necessary military force should be utilized. I do believe that Iranian democracy should triumph and that it is what the people desire, the US should use the means at its disposal to try and effect that where possible. In the meantime containment of the regimes influence and regional power is of paramount importance.
 
What gives us the right? I don't understand that question. I support our retention of nuclear weapons because I believe the United States is an important actor for moral good in the world, and it is required for our defense. I'd prefer it if we could abolish nuclear weapons and take advantage of our conventional superiority, but that is a digression. Why is it fair? It isn't fair, why on earth would I care if its fair? This isn't some toy that the teacher says we all have to share. I don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon because I think they have a terrible government, aggressive regional ambitions inimical to sound interests, and will cause instability in an important region with the potential for aftershocks elsewhere. This is an outcome I want the United States government to prevent.
?
you referred to iran but you actually described israel
the country we assisted in its nuclear weapons development
iran has not initiated a war on another nation in 200 years
for israel it has been less than 200 months
and yet you pretend it is ok for israel to possess nuclear weaponry and not iran
totally an emotional response devoid of any basis in reality
 
you referred to iran but you actually described israel
the country we assisted in its nuclear weapons development
iran has not initiated a war on another nation in 200 years
for israel it has been less than 200 months
and yet you pretend it is ok for israel to possess nuclear weaponry and not iran
totally an emotional response devoid of any basis in reality

Israel is a liberal democracy with whom you and many people have political disagreements. Even at the worst ends of its human rights record which has admittedly been patchy at times it is incomparable to Iran. Or do we really want to start putting Meggio Prison and Evin Prison side by side? Secondly the US did not really assist in Israel's acquisition of nuclear weapons, that was primarily facilitated by France with some support from Britain, and a reliance upon a large and resourceful Jewish diaspora. Thirdly, yes I think there is a world of difference between an Israeli nuclear weapon and an Iranian one, because I'm not so emotionally invested as to think that there is actually a real parity between the two states.
 
I never said they wanted us to bomb them. You are conflating two different things. I do not believe Iran should have a nuclear weapon and that if necessary military force should be utilized. I do believe that Iranian democracy should triumph and that it is what the people desire, the US should use the means at its disposal to try and effect that where possible. In the meantime containment of the regimes influence and regional power is of paramount importance.

I could've misunderstood part of your position. So if they have democratic elections but want a nuke we shouldn't bomb them? If your answer is yes we should still bomb them because they want a nuke then I didn't misunderstand your position. You are picking and choosing who can do what by military force. There are still holes in the idea that our actions in the world are for the sake of democracy but that's a much larger topic.
 
I could've misunderstood part of your position. So if they have democratic elections but want a nuke we shouldn't bomb them? If your answer is yes we should still bomb them because they want a nuke then I didn't misunderstand your position. You are picking and choosing who can do what by military force. There are still holes in the idea that our actions in the world are for the sake of democracy but that's a much larger topic.

If they are democratic and still desire a nuclear weapon the problem becomes much less severe, but this would be a long evolution and it is still not a desirable outcome. It is also much more likely that a democratic Iran would be much more amenable to nuclear reform agreements that allow for enrichment while dismantling facilities that have no purpose but to progress towards a weapon. It is a situation akin to India, we did not desire an Indian nuclear weapon, but it alarmed us far less than a Pakistani or North Korean bomb. A liberal democracy (if Iran became that) seeking to acquire nuclear weapons is a unique situation that doesn't have much precedent. I'd have to reconsider given the new situation, and look at the variables. But I'd be much, much, much less disposed to military action. But as I said I think the problem would be much easier to resolve peacefully.
 
Flatulence pushs oil prices higher along with oxygen and water...they dont even try to find an excuse to rob us at the pump anymore.
When you feel robbed at the pump I do hope you are blaming your government. The government's take on a gallon of gasoline greatly exceeds oil company profits on the same gallon. And government did nothing other than stand in the way at every step of the process.
 
If they are democratic and still desire a nuclear weapon the problem becomes much less severe, but this would be a long evolution and it is still not a desirable outcome. It is also much more likely that a democratic Iran would be much more amenable to nuclear reform agreements that allow for enrichment while dismantling facilities that have no purpose but to progress towards a weapon. It is a situation akin to India, we did not desire an Indian nuclear weapon, but it alarmed us far less than a Pakistani or North Korean bomb. A liberal democracy (if Iran became that) seeking to acquire nuclear weapons is a unique situation that doesn't have much precedent. I'd have to reconsider given the new situation, and look at the variables. But I'd be much, much, much less disposed to military action. But as I said I think the problem would be much easier to resolve peacefully.

I did misunderstand your position then. I'm all for less nukes but I just don't believe in going to war for it especially when other countries have them. So if Israel bombs Iran next Friday we should or shouldn't get involved militarily?
 
I did misunderstand your position then. I'm all for less nukes but I just don't believe in going to war for it especially when other countries have them. So if Israel bombs Iran next Friday we should or shouldn't get involved militarily?

Depends entirely on what actually happens. That sort of call is entirely contextual I think. We should provide some non-direct assistance like satellite information, early warning detection, targeting coordination, but there is utility not having it be an Israeli venture to begin with, and waiting to see how Iran responds before choosing to step in. It also depends on what is technically feasible.
 
That isn't true in the slightest. The current generation has been bleeding in the streets to oppose the regime, and came out in their millions to contest the last election before being beaten down by the government. I don't have a problem with Islamic political parties, and I fully and sincerely support Muhammed Morsi in his efforts to reform Egypt, so long as he remains faithful to the democratic roots which lifted him to power. But once democracy is obviated, there is no real legitimacy.

When are we going to stop agitating for democracy? When the last autocracy is cast down, and we have a new world order of democratic states. A goal that we have been accelerating towards for almost a century, and may be in reach within the next one.

Things may have changed, but the last i heard a couple years ago was that the youth of Iran (who make up the majority due to the conflict with Iraq) were not dissatisfied with an islamic state, they just want a moderate form so they can join the western world.

They do indeed dislike the harsh, corrupt system they have now.

But the old guard is actually going to simply die off. Almost an entire generation was killed off fighting Iraq. Theres old men and young men and no one in the middle. When the old bastards die off the time of the ayatollahs will end.
 
Back
Top Bottom