View Poll Results: Can Iran's nuclear program be stopped by military force alone?

Voters
211. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    13 6.16%
  • No

    198 93.84%
Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 137

Thread: Can Iran's nuclear program be stopped by military force alone?

  1. #111
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Can Iran's nuclear program be stopped by military force alone?

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    Although I appreciate the sentiment here, its not plausible.

    There are nearly 200 countries. Maybe 30-50 of them would be able to afford the infrastructure and expertise to support a strategically meaningful nuclear weapons program (Iran is #27 in GDP and they are just now obtaining the capability for it to be an option). For example, America's nuclear program averages $60,000,000,000 per year, mostly just maintenance (entry level costs are higher). That is 10% of famously wealthy Switzerland's yearly GDP. Scaling their economy to the United States's, it would be comparable to the yearly value of the entire American manufacturing sector. Almost prohibitively expensive unless you go to supernormal lengths like Iran has tried and Israel has done (American subsidies).

    Then you would have countries like Pakistan that can barely keep control of their arsenals, with sympathetic agents in their intelligence communities a finger switch away from sending launch codes to armed Islamic radicals in the country's outlying territories that consider it their highest mission in life to drop a nuke on San Francisco or Mumbai regardless of the consequences. Even if you believe an entire society is reasonable, the most militarily proficient among them aren't necessarily. There is always at least one group of people in almost any society who hate another group of people enough to throw caution to the wind and do anything they can to get the nukes to kill them. Ergo, 90% of Iran might not want to bomb Israel, but the 2% out of the 10% that do serve in the militias that can make that happen under specific conditions that will become more and more likely as the world approaches resource scarcity.
    Not sure I understand your point, MG. Are you saying that it's not economically feasible for every country to have nukes? Do you think that I want every country to have nukes? My preference would be global disarmament. If that's not going to happen, then its understandable that more countries are going to seek to level the field by getting their own. In any event, I don't like the US behaving as though it's our position to declare who gets them and who doesn't.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  2. #112
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Can Iran's nuclear program be stopped by military force alone?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    Those who want to rah rah Netanyahu when he visits should remember how he has deliberately disrespected our leaders when they have visited Israel. Consider



    Biden's Israel visit takes a rocky turn - Los Angeles Times

    So go and rah rah a guy who does not give a damn about what the U.S. thinks or is trying to do.
    And has been ginning up fear for Iran, declaring since at least 1992 that Iran is 3-5 years away from having a nuke.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  3. #113
    Invictus


    Rogue Valley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,132

    Re: Can Iran's nuclear program be stopped by military force alone?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    Yep that's right, right after the Vice President proclaims his love for Israel and promises U.S. support, they spit right in his face. But still, people over here want to rah rah Netanyahu and invite him over to embarrass the President of the United States. Damn!!!!
    Instead of participating in the hijacking of your own thread, why not remain true to the question you posed in the OP ... "Can Iran's nuclear program be stopped by military force alone?"

    Force is not the optimal solution, and it is all but impossible to erase such a competency via force alone. Force would retard Iran's nuclear progress, but not suppress it entirely. The only durable solution is willing cooperation and total transparency by the Iranian government. The global initiative here should be focused on Iranian nuclear-weapons procurement.


    Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet. -- Marine Corps General James 'Chaos' Mattis

    Repeal and Replace Trump.

  4. #114
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Can Iran's nuclear program be stopped by military force alone?

    Quote Originally Posted by Simpleχity View Post
    Instead of participating in the hijacking of your own thread, why not remain true to the question you posed in the OP ... "Can Iran's nuclear program be stopped by military force alone?"

    Force is not the optimal solution, and it is all but impossible to erase such a competency via force alone. Force would retard Iran's nuclear progress, but not suppress it entirely. The only durable solution is willing cooperation and total transparency by the Iranian government. The global initiative here should be focused on Iranian nuclear-weapons procurement.
    I agree with your conclusion.

    That said, the discussion of Netanyahu is indeed relevant because Netanyahu wants to destroy the Obama's efforts to negotiate a deal with Iran concerning it's nuclear program.

  5. #115
    Invictus


    Rogue Valley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,132

    Re: Can Iran's nuclear program be stopped by military force alone?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    I agree with your conclusion.
    Well ... it is the only rational conclusion.

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    That said, the discussion of Netanyahu is indeed relevant because Netanyahu wants to destroy the Obama's efforts to negotiate a deal with Iran concerning it's nuclear program.
    But you could always address that in a separate thread or poll without compromising this one. This topic initially had promise, but now it's pretty much FUBAR.


    Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet. -- Marine Corps General James 'Chaos' Mattis

    Repeal and Replace Trump.

  6. #116
    Guru
    Morality Games's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 10:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,733

    Re: Can Iran's nuclear program be stopped by military force alone?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Not sure I understand your point, MG. Are you saying that it's not economically feasible for every country to have nukes? Do you think that I want every country to have nukes? My preference would be global disarmament. If that's not going to happen, then its understandable that more countries are going to seek to level the field by getting their own. In any event, I don't like the US behaving as though it's our position to declare who gets them and who doesn't.
    Total disarmament isn't possible either. I think you are underestimating the many shades of hatred that exist between peoples of different ethnicities and creeds in the world. As soon as one hegemonic power loses control over the proliferation of nuclear weapons, there are thousands of politically significant right-wing factions that would aggressively pursue the use of, if not nuclear weapons (which not everyone can afford), other weapons of mass destruction. Like say, every nation in Africa or East Asia. The fact the United States and other Great Powers already possess an overwhelming nuclear advantage encourages nation states to seek advantage through diplomacy and economics, with minimal use of force and the threat of worse force featuring as a mere supplement to international relations.

    While I'm not a dyed in the wool believer in Thomas Hobbes, he does articulately explain the advantages of concentrating all power in one person or entity. The risk of the United States having all the power is that the United States will abuse the power. However, since the United States' maintains its power through a globe spanning network of alliances and diplomatic connections, abusing power would result in the gradual loss of that power.

    In contrast, sharing power gives everyone the opportunity to abuse power, which makes the incidence of conflict likelier. And once the conflict occurs, there is no central, overwhelmingly mighty authority that can put a lid on it, resulting in a WW1 scenario.
    If you notice something good in yourself, give credit to God, not to yourself, but be certain the evil you commit is always your own and yours to acknowledge.

    St. Benedict

  7. #117
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Can Iran's nuclear program be stopped by military force alone?

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    Total disarmament isn't possible either. I think you are underestimating the many shades of hatred that exist between peoples of different ethnicities and creeds in the world. As soon as one hegemonic power loses control over the proliferation of nuclear weapons, there are thousands of politically significant right-wing factions that would aggressively pursue the use of, if not nuclear weapons (which not everyone can afford), other weapons of mass destruction. Like say, every nation in Africa or East Asia. The fact the United States and other Great Powers already possess an overwhelming nuclear advantage encourages nation states to seek advantage through diplomacy and economics, with minimal use of force and the threat of worse force featuring as a mere supplement to international relations.

    While I'm not a dyed in the wool believer in Thomas Hobbes, he does articulately explain the advantages of concentrating all power in one person or entity. The risk of the United States having all the power is that the United States will abuse the power. However, since the United States' maintains its power through a globe spanning network of alliances and diplomatic connections, abusing power would result in the gradual loss of that power.

    In contrast, sharing power gives everyone the opportunity to abuse power, which makes the incidence of conflict likelier. And once the conflict occurs, there is no central, overwhelmingly mighty authority that can put a lid on it, resulting in a WW1 scenario.
    Seems like you're arguing that it's better if one country is supreme. And I won't ever buy that. I want to see a balance of power, sufficient that nobody is willing to attack the other, and! mind you, that if America wants to present itself as the "shinning city on the hill", the promoter of democracy, and the bastion of human rights for all, that we ACTUALLY do that!!
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  8. #118
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Can Iran's nuclear program be stopped by military force alone?

    Quote Originally Posted by Simpleχity View Post
    But you could always address that in a separate thread or poll without compromising this one. This topic initially had promise, but now it's pretty much FUBAR.
    The topic has not been compromised as Netanyahu is a leading exponent of the school of thought that believes that violence is the solution. He is dangerous and his absurdity should be pointed out.

  9. #119
    Guru
    Morality Games's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 10:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,733

    Re: Can Iran's nuclear program be stopped by military force alone?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Seems like you're arguing that it's better if one country is supreme. And I won't ever buy that. I want to see a balance of power, sufficient that nobody is willing to attack the other, and! mind you, that if America wants to present itself as the "shinning city on the hill", the promoter of democracy, and the bastion of human rights for all, that we ACTUALLY do that!!
    ... except its clear from all history and logic that the only condition where nobody is willing to attack the other is when one power rules supreme.

    Balances of power in international relations are about as harmonious as the balance of power in American government. Except, instead of vetoes and filibusters we get war.
    If you notice something good in yourself, give credit to God, not to yourself, but be certain the evil you commit is always your own and yours to acknowledge.

    St. Benedict

  10. #120
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Can Iran's nuclear program be stopped by military force alone?

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    ... except its clear from all history and logic that the only condition where nobody is willing to attack the other is when one power rules supreme.

    Balances of power in international relations are about as harmonious as the balance of power in American government. Except, instead of vetoes and filibusters we get war.
    Ha ha, we're getting closer bud. One nation being the sole superpower doesn't comfort me, even if it's my own. I prefer that no nation thinks that they have carte Blanche. I'm glad that China is growing, and will eventually be able to back the US up, and I'm also glad that Russia has proved that they're not worried about US hegemony either.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •