• 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!

Should we bomb Iran to prevent their getting nuclear weapons

Should we bomb Iran to prevent their getting nukes?

  • yes

    Votes: 9 18.8%
  • no

    Votes: 39 81.3%

  • Total voters
    48
  • Poll closed .

listener

Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Messages
52
Reaction score
4
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
That is the question
 
No more than they should bomb us because we already have them.
 
We should try bribery first. Its not like we don't owe them an apology for our past shenanigans. Maybe if we let them be part of the world, they would lose their nuclear ambitions.

We can out-bomb them later but certainly try other strategies first.
 
Why should we bomb someone because they could get nuclear weapons? Did we bomb India, China, Russia, Israel, the UK, France, North Korea, or Pakistan when they did get them?
 
We should try bribery first. Its not like we don't owe them an apology for our past shenanigans. Maybe if we let them be part of the world, they would lose their nuclear ambitions.

We can out-bomb them later but certainly try other strategies first.
Haven't their actions over the last 30 years proved that our past "shenanigans" were a justifiable policy intended to prevent such a barbaric people from being turned loose on the world?
Going back 2600 years, that country has cast a cruel shadow over its neighbors. Did the 300 die for nothing?
 
That is the question



Absolutely.


Moral equivalency isn't at work here... Iran's leadership is, by western standards, not rational.

Even if it did, when it is US or THEM I vote in favor of "us"....
 
Absolutely.


Moral equivalency isn't at work here... Iran's leadership is, by western standards, not rational.

Even if it did, when it is US or THEM I vote in favor of "us"....


Which country, between the "us and them" has actually used a nuclear/atomic weapon against another country? \
Which country, in the last decade has invaded another country? Or two?

Why haven't we invaded/bombed North Korea?
 
I have no problem with Iran having nukes, in fact, I'd be a lot more comfortable with them having nukes than half of our so-called allies.
 
Which country, between the "us and them" has actually used a nuclear/atomic weapon against another country? \
Which country, in the last decade has invaded another country? Or two?

Why haven't we invaded/bombed North Korea?


Your first two bits: I don't care. Again, us vs them.

Second bit: We haven't invaded NK because of China. We're not ready to take on China at this time, if we can avoid it. Also SK fears they'd lose their capitol in the first 20 minutes of war, due to all the conventional artillery NK has stationed within a few miles of it.
 
Absolutely.


Moral equivalency isn't at work here... Iran's leadership is, by western standards, not rational.

Even if it did, when it is US or THEM I vote in favor of "us"....

It's not between US and THEM. They're no threat to our national security, their missiles can only hit their neighbors at best.
 
It's not between US and THEM. They're no threat to our national security, their missiles can only hit their neighbors at best.



Today, yes. Tomorrow? :shrug:

And having the middle east go up in flames from a nuke exchange between Iran and Israel would not be good for US interests...
 
Your first two bits: I don't care. Again, us vs them.

Second bit: We haven't invaded NK because of China. We're not ready to take on China at this time, if we can avoid it. Also SK fears they'd lose their capitol in the first 20 minutes of war, due to all the conventional artillery NK has stationed within a few miles of it.

You don't care because you're an American who thinks we can never do anything wrong.

Fact is, Iran is not our problem.

They are not our neighbor.

It's not us or them.

Europe has a much bigger stake in what Iran does than we do. let them worry about Iran.

Iran is in no position to invade or attack the USofA so we should not be striking first based on little more than assumptions and fear-mongering.
 
You don't care because you're an American who thinks we can never do anything wrong.


WAY wrong. Mind-reading is not your forte sir.



Fact is, Iran is not our problem.

They are not our neighbor.


Their missles are getting better every year. They're trying to put stuff in orbit. They're getting help from NK, Russia and China. They could be within a few years of some kind of ICBM.

Even if it were not so, again, it is not in America's interests to let the mideast go up in flames from an Iran-Israel nuke exchange.





Iran is in no position to invade or attack the USofA so we should not be striking first based on little more than assumptions and fear-mongering.


Far more than that. I know people who know more about this than Joe Average, and what they know has them worried.
 
We shouldn't be worrying about Israel, they're not us, we're not them.


Middle east: Major oil supplier to Europe, Russia and the USA.

Middle east in nuclear flames: Bad Thing for everyone.
 
I have no problem with Iran having nukes, in fact, I'd be a lot more comfortable with them having nukes than half of our so-called allies.

That one requires some explanation. Who among our allies do you trust less than Iran?
 
Middle east: Major oil supplier to Europe, Russia and the USA.

Middle east in nuclear flames: Bad Thing for everyone.

Generally yes, so why do we spend so much time supporting Israel and pissing off the nations that actually provide our oil?
 
Generally yes, so why do we spend so much time supporting Israel and pissing off the nations that actually provide our oil?


Izzy is an ally; almost everyone else in that region hates us, somewhere between casual hate and hate-your-guts-dogs-and-children hatred.
 
Middle east: Major oil supplier to Europe, Russia and the USA.

Middle east in nuclear flames: Bad Thing for everyone.

It would depend on the size of the warhead. I doubt either side would have anything too devastating. And the majority of oil comes from countries that wouldn't be involved in the war. Oil prices would go up, but not drastically.
 
Even if it were not so, again, it is not in America's interests to let the mideast go up in flames from an Iran-Israel nuke exchange.

And what do you think will be the first thing Iran will do if you bomb them? That's right, attack Israel!
Why are Americans willing to start WW3?
 
Back
Top Bottom