View Poll Results: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

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

    108 49.77%
  • No

    70 32.26%
  • Maybe/not sure

    26 11.98%
  • Other

    13 5.99%
Page 56 of 86 FirstFirst ... 646545556575866 ... LastLast
Results 551 to 560 of 852

Thread: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?[W:296, 650]

  1. #551
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    03-19-17 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,818

    Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    Please cite a review or journal article that challenges Giangreco's account.
    "What is important is whether, when the bomb was used, the President and his top advisers understood that it was not required to avoid a long and costly invasion, as they later claimed and as most Americans still believe."

    (snip)

    But, Mr. Alperovitz argues, Truman and his Secretary of State, James F. Byrnes, were struck by the notion that ending World War II without dropping the atomic bomb would not have brought added strength to American diplomacy against the Soviet Union in Europe.

    (snip)

    The debate goes on.

    Did We Need to Drop It? - NYTimes.com

    The US decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 was meant to kick-start the Cold War rather than end the Second World War, according to two nuclear historians who say they have new evidence backing the controversial theory.

    Hiroshima bomb may have carried hidden agenda - science-in-society - 21 July 2005 - New Scientist

    Some military analysts insist that Japan was on its knees and the bombings were simply unnecessary.

    The Decision to Drop the Bomb [ushistory.org]

    In the end, none of these alternatives were chosen. However, it does not rule out their possible efficacy nor does it mean that the atomic bomb was the only way to produce surrender by the Japanese.

    Understanding the Decision to Drop the Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki | Center for Strategic and International Studies

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  2. #552
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    50,472
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    "What is important is whether, when the bomb was used, the President and his top advisers understood that it was not required to avoid a long and costly invasion, as they later claimed and as most Americans still believe."

    (snip)

    But, Mr. Alperovitz argues, Truman and his Secretary of State, James F. Byrnes, were struck by the notion that ending World War II without dropping the atomic bomb would not have brought added strength to American diplomacy against the Soviet Union in Europe.

    (snip)

    The debate goes on.

    Did We Need to Drop It? - NYTimes.com

    The US decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 was meant to kick-start the Cold War rather than end the Second World War, according to two nuclear historians who say they have new evidence backing the controversial theory.

    Hiroshima bomb may have carried hidden agenda - science-in-society - 21 July 2005 - New Scientist

    Some military analysts insist that Japan was on its knees and the bombings were simply unnecessary.

    The Decision to Drop the Bomb [ushistory.org]

    In the end, none of these alternatives were chosen. However, it does not rule out their possible efficacy nor does it mean that the atomic bomb was the only way to produce surrender by the Japanese.

    Understanding the Decision to Drop the Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki | Center for Strategic and International Studies
    Sorry, but Gar Alperowitz is no longer regarded as credible. His work has been superseded for decades now, and predates Giangreco by decades. Your next two links also predate Giangreco's work. I can't tell when the ushistory.org link originated, but it does not seem really on point. Finally, the CSIS link is puzzling. The author demonstrates no familiarity at all with Giangreco's work, so I have to conclude he's not to be taken seriously.
    "It's always reassuring to find you've made the right enemies." -- William J. Donovan

  3. #553
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    28,120

    Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?[W:296]

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    I use my own morals, as I suppose everyone else does. I don't care if any other nation disagrees with U.S. policies. My only concern is that those policies advance the interests of this country. Nor do I care about seeing things from the point of view of any nation that is antagonistic to us. And I could just as easily call your biases absurd, if I wanted to personalize the issue.
    So you're selfish and self-centered. Did it ever occur to you that people in those other countries and in other societies feel the same way you do, they only care about advancing the interests of their own countries? They see the U.S. as antagonistic to their interests and in many cases, they demonstrably are. You're just spouting a bunch of nationalistic, jingoistic BS and pretending that you're right, just because you want to be right. And when someone calls you on it, you get mad. Imagine that.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  4. #554
    Guru
    brothern's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,098
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?[W:296]

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    So you're selfish and self-centered. Did it ever occur to you that people in those other countries and in other societies feel the same way you do, they only care about advancing the interests of their own countries? They see the U.S. as antagonistic to their interests and in many cases, they demonstrably are. You're just spouting a bunch of nationalistic, jingoistic BS and pretending that you're right, just because you want to be right. And when someone calls you on it, you get mad. Imagine that.
    Good point in your post.
    Help fight Zika, TB, HIV/AIDs and water pollution by donating your CPU's excess processing time to scientific research.
    A self-serving billionaire engaging in historically massive personal corruption #NotMyPresident

  5. #555
    Sage
    Glen Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, here I am...
    Last Seen
    12-27-16 @ 05:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    14,748

    Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?[W:296]

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    If there is any reason to believe the Khomeinists would do that--or if they did that their plea would be sympathetically received--you don't say what it is. It sound like nothing but the product of an active imagination, fed on a diet of third-rate disaster movies.
    You presented a hypothetical situation, and I presented one in return. And no, the situation I presented is not unlikely. There's a reason for the old saying, "Politics makes for strange bedfellows". Why do you think Russia has a naval base in Syria?

    The backing down over Cuba in fact took place in late October and November of 1962.
    My date might have been wrong, but that detracts not at all from the points I made.

    You've offered no reason to think they would even be involved.
    Apparently you don't remember the Cold War. I remember it very well - those who didn't like America found themselves very friendly with the Soviets. Again, explain the Russian base in Syria.

    Calm yourself. The sky is not really falling.
    You've got no clue how far it can go. Is it unlikely? Sure...UNLESS Russia happens to be ruled by someone who is not a "rational actor". Do you really want the fate of the world to hang on whether the Russian president happens to be sane?

    Testosterone again. It seems to occupy a prominent place in your thoughts.
    I'm only pointing out what apparently rules your own thought-making process.
    To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what hes doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn

    "...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump

  6. #556
    Sage
    Born Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Sonny and Nice
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,164

    Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?[W:296]

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    What we liberals understand that you apparently have no clue about is that diplomacy involves using carrots and sticks, and not just sticks. Diplomacy is not "do this or we bomb you" - such never works in the long run. Diplomacy consists of, "These are the benefits you reap if you work with us, and this is how life gets harder if you don't". The threat of a military strike need not be even mentioned - both sides KNOW it's there and KNOW it we have that option unless we specifically state that military force if "off the table"...and we almost never do that.
    Only when it comes to your liberal leader Obama, who has no clue about anything. You also say we don't have to mention our military option. You constitly show how naive you are. Military strength is the only thing some of these regimes understand. You liberals don't get that.

    Where did I say that diplomacy is the ONLY way to solve a conflict? I never did - that's just you making up crap...just like when you falsely claimed that I said that we entered WWII because of a failure of diplomacy. You have lied at least twice in your past few posts. Here's a clue, guy - the more a person tells lies, the LESS that person is able to discern when the other person is telling the truth. You lie, and because you lie, you assume that the other guy must be lying, too.
    Now you back up and say diplomacy is NOT the only way to solve a conflict. Maybe try explaining what is the other way other than diplomacy.

    When you grow up and learn to stop making crap up about what other people do and don't say, then come back and talk to me. Until then, I won't reply to your asinine posts.
    Your just full of yourself. In fact as naive as you've proven to be, I hope you don't reply. Communicating with "naive" is a wast of time.
    Last edited by Born Free; 03-19-15 at 06:02 PM.
    Liberals - Punish the Successful, Reward the Unsuccessful
    Liberals - Tax, Borrow, Spend, and Give Free Stuff
    Obama's legacy - President Donald Trump

  7. #557
    Sage
    Glen Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, here I am...
    Last Seen
    12-27-16 @ 05:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    14,748

    Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?[W:296]

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    It's "its."
    That's called a "typo"...and everyone makes typos once in a while, as you did below:

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Your suggestion that this country is morally equivalent to the regime of jihadist curs that rules Iran is disgusting. I don't care about hypothetical situations that will never come about. The United States should long ago have destroyed ever part of Iran's nuclear weapons program from the air, and its ballistic missile facilities as well. There may still be time to do this, after the current president has retired to the golf course for good.
    In other words, unless you yourself are perfect, please refrain from expecting utter perfection in others.
    To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what hes doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn

    "...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump

  8. #558
    Sage
    Born Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Sonny and Nice
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,164

    Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?[W:296]

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    So you're selfish and self-centered. Did it ever occur to you that people in those other countries and in other societies feel the same way you do, they only care about advancing the interests of their own countries? They see the U.S. as antagonistic to their interests and in many cases, they demonstrably are. You're just spouting a bunch of nationalistic, jingoistic BS and pretending that you're right, just because you want to be right. And when someone calls you on it, you get mad. Imagine that.
    Of course all countries have their own self interest. That has been going on for thousands of years and many wars in-between to protect those interest or to advance them. It's really simple, when a country wants to advance their self interest at the expense of others that generates conflicts. Example, take Iran wanting to advance it's self interest by getting nuks, which would only be at the expense of others as they have promised to wipe another nation off the face of the map.
    Liberals - Punish the Successful, Reward the Unsuccessful
    Liberals - Tax, Borrow, Spend, and Give Free Stuff
    Obama's legacy - President Donald Trump

  9. #559
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    28,120

    Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?[W:296]

    Quote Originally Posted by Born Free View Post
    Of course all countries have their own self interest. That has been going on for thousands of years and many wars in-between to protect those interest or to advance them. It's really simple, when a country wants to advance their self interest at the expense of others that generates conflicts. Example, take Iran wanting to advance it's self interest by getting nuks, which would only be at the expense of others as they have promised to wipe another nation off the face of the map.
    Frankly, I have no problem seeing Israel wiped off the face of the map, I've got no horse in this race, I don't really give a damn about either country and they can both vanish as far as I'm concerned. That still doesn't change anything about what I've said and the obvious bias that I've pointed out.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  10. #560
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 10:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    "What is important is whether, when the bomb was used, the President and his top advisers understood that it was not required to avoid a long and costly invasion, as they later claimed and as most Americans still believe."

    (snip)

    But, Mr. Alperovitz argues, Truman and his Secretary of State, James F. Byrnes, were struck by the notion that ending World War II without dropping the atomic bomb would not have brought added strength to American diplomacy against the Soviet Union in Europe.

    (snip)

    The debate goes on.

    Did We Need to Drop It? - NYTimes.com

    The US decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 was meant to kick-start the Cold War rather than end the Second World War, according to two nuclear historians who say they have new evidence backing the controversial theory.

    Hiroshima bomb may have carried hidden agenda - science-in-society - 21 July 2005 - New Scientist

    Some military analysts insist that Japan was on its knees and the bombings were simply unnecessary.

    The Decision to Drop the Bomb [ushistory.org]

    In the end, none of these alternatives were chosen. However, it does not rule out their possible efficacy nor does it mean that the atomic bomb was the only way to produce surrender by the Japanese.

    Understanding the Decision to Drop the Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki | Center for Strategic and International Studies
    Targeting a civilian (non military) social center, and whipping out every last breathing person, plant and animal not once, but twice has been justified by the apologists of US atrocity. Now then anybody can justify anything.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

Page 56 of 86 FirstFirst ... 646545556575866 ... 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
  •