• 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!

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

Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?


  • Total voters
    118
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Giangreco's account is now accepted as definitive.

Sorry, but no it's not. Not by everyone. Americans who have accepted responsibility for the immoral act, have rejected his argument. Warmongers, hawks, apologists and those that will hate a neighbor, cheat a friend, and justify it in the end, sure, they're clinging to it like a life jacket.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

No Japanese nuclear attack on two cities in the US could have tipped the war in Japan's favor.

However many civilian targets needed to be struck to accomplish their goal would have been justified, is the point. As a matter of fact, who ever uses one next, will be justifying it. Btw, I don't recall you commenting, or I missed it if you did, does Iran have a right to nuclear weapons?
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I suppose a right could exist although it was being suppressed. So who do you think determines what rights a nation legitimately has?

I'm thinking unfortunately that might makes right. For example, no nation could stop the US from acquiring them or compel the US to rid themselves of them.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Sorry, but no it's not. Not by everyone. Americans who have accepted responsibility for the immoral act, have rejected his argument. Warmongers, hawks, apologists and those that will hate a neighbor, cheat a friend, and justify it in the end, sure, they're clinging to it like a life jacket.

Please cite a historian who has taken issue with his account.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

However many civilian targets needed to be struck to accomplish their goal would have been justified, is the point. As a matter of fact, who ever uses one next, will be justifying it. Btw, I don't recall you commenting, or I missed it if you did, does Iran have a right to nuclear weapons?

Take the last first: yes.

No matter how many farfetched hypotheticals you concoct, you can't get away from the fact that in 1945, in the circumstances actually prevailing, use of the bombs saved lives.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Take the last first: yes.

No matter how many farfetched hypotheticals you concoct, you can't get away from the fact that in 1945, in the circumstances actually prevailing, use of the bombs saved lives.

Jack........did you see the in thread warning?? I'm well versed in your views on the use of nuclear weapons on Japan!
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I'm thinking unfortunately that might makes right. For example, no nation could stop the US from acquiring them or compel the US to rid themselves of them.

Well might definitely determines what rights a nation can exercise as a practical matter. That said, honestly, I am not so sure who determines the LEGITIMATE rights in a practical sense. That is part of the problem. Therefore, as you have indicated, it ends up being a matter of might makes right.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Well might definitely determines what rights a nation can exercise as a practical matter. That said, honestly, I am not so sure who determines the LEGITIMATE rights in a practical sense. That is part of the problem. Therefore, as you have indicated, it ends up being a matter of might makes right.

Yes, that's it. And because men aren't angels, this will always be the case. And.............someone will always be the dominant and as a result will oppress others. The US happens to be the dominant one at present, and we all know the histories of predecessors. I don't know if all world powers March forward with their citizens brainwashed that they are the righteous ones, justifying all manner of atrocity and exploitation, or whether that's unique to America. But it's a bleak situation.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Yes, that's it. And because men aren't angels, this will always be the case. And.............someone will always be the dominant and as a result will oppress others. The US happens to be the dominant one at present, and we all know the histories of predecessors. I don't know if all world powers March forward with their citizens brainwashed that they are the righteous ones, justifying all manner of atrocity and exploitation, or whether that's unique to America. But it's a bleak situation.

Indeed. Furthermore all of the major world powers brainwash their citizens in this way.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Indeed. Furthermore all of the major world powers brainwash their citizens in this way.

Probably so. And the predatory "us verses them" mentality is institutionalized from cradle to grave in everything from sports to religion. And, it works, really well.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Probably so. And the predatory "us verses them" mentality is institutionalized from cradle to grave in everything from sports to religion. And, it works, really well.

I think Prussia was largely responsible for the form that it takes today. The whole educational system was structured around being able to "manufacture consent", as Chomsky would put it, and mobilize the nation for war.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Who has made that divine decree*?
It's pretty much the sentiments of most of the industrialized world; with the exceptions of Russia, China and North Korea_

ie; Only those who view the United States as their adversary appear to believe that a nuclear capable Iran is not a threat_

(*god usually has a policy of nonintervention and to the best of my knowledge hasn't decreed anything pertaining to nukes)

If by deeds,
By "deeds"; I was referring to Iran's contributions to global terrorism, murder, and human rights violations_

then the only power to have used nukes on civilian targets has forfeited its "rights"!
You should read your history books before posting a ridiculous argument such as this one Monty!

The Hiroshima/Nagasaki death toll was minuscule compared to the estimated U.S. casualties those 2 small nukes averted_

And after Japan's surrender and later its sovereignty restored by the U.S. it became an economic success in the world market_

The nuclear equipped nations of Western Civilization have more than demonstrated a lack of desire for world domination_

The only 20th/21st Century nations to have demonstrated such a desire have been Islamic and Socialist/Communist nations_
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

It's pretty much the sentiments of most of the industrialized world; with the exceptions of Russia, China and North Korea_

ie; Only those who view the United States as their adversary appear to believe that a nuclear capable Iran is not a threat_

(*god usually has a policy of nonintervention and to the best of my knowledge hasn't decreed anything pertaining to nukes)

By "deeds"; I was referring to Iran's contributions to global terrorism, murder, and human rights violations_

You should read your history books before posting a ridiculous argument such as this one Monty!

The Hiroshima/Nagasaki death toll was minuscule compared to the estimated U.S. casualties those 2 small nukes averted_

And after Japan's surrender and later its sovereignty restored by the U.S. it became an economic success in the world market_

The nuclear equipped nations of Western Civilization have more than demonstrated a lack of desire for world domination_

The only 20th/21st Century nations to have demonstrated such a desire have been Islamic and Socialist/Communist nations_

Yes, with few exceptions the right will seek to trivialize and justify targeting innocent civilians while condemning others and ever pushing for the next war.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Yes, with few exceptions the right will seek to trivialize and justify targeting innocent civilians while condemning others and ever pushing for the next war.

It's only a pity publications like the Daily Worker and Soviet Life are no longer with us. They could have used your ability to cook up anti-American propaganda. With few exceptions the left will seek to spread falsehoods such as the one that people whose political views they differ with usually seek to justify war crimes like targeting civilians. You've made very clear you loathe the United States and do not wish it well--but then, that gives you something in common with your Red president.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Iran does not have the right to own nukes because powerful countries said so. How many kids get to dictate what adults can do? I can make many decisions legally that kids of no right to make. Iran through its own behavior took their own right away to possess nukes.

And what gives the rest of the world the right to make such decisions? Simply because we can.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Yes, with few exceptions the right will seek to trivialize and justify targeting innocent civilians while condemning others and ever pushing for the next war.
Not so Monty; I didn't "trivialize" anything but I did "justify" saving American and Allied lives_

I simply stated the cold hard facts of reality pertaining to the struggle between good vs evil, involving millions of lives_

Or maybe you believe Adolf Hitler and Emperor Hirohito were the good guys and the bad ole Americans were the evil?!
 
Last edited:
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

It's only a pity publications like the Daily Worker and Soviet Life are no longer with us. They could have used your ability to cook up anti-American propaganda. With few exceptions the left will seek to spread falsehoods such as the one that people whose political views they differ with usually seek to justify war crimes like targeting civilians. You've made very clear you loathe the United States and do not wish it well--but then, that gives you something in common with your Red president.

I thought he was black. You have no respect for liberty if you seek to suppress dissent, just because it exposes ugly things. Things can be better, and that's very American.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Not so Monty; I didn't "trivialize" anything but I did "justify" saving American and Allied lives_

I simply stated the cold hard facts of reality pertaining to the struggle between good vs evil, involving millions of lives_

Or maybe you believe Adolf Hitler and Emperor Hirohito were the good guys and the bad ole Americans were the evil?!

Ok. I'll have to take this up with you somewhere else another time. There's been a thread warning. My position on Iran if it interests you, is that they have only the rights that they can force. Nukes don't exist in my world, but probably more and more countries will have them.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Iran does not have the right to own nukes because powerful countries said so. How many kids get to dictate what adults can do? I can make many decisions legally that kids of no right to make. Iran through its own behavior took their own right away to possess nukes.

And what gives the rest of the world the right to make such decisions? Simply because we can.

Yep, that's changing though, and Iran will probably have nukes if they ever decide they want them.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I thought he was black. You have no respect for liberty if you seek to suppress dissent, just because it exposes ugly things. Things can be better, and that's very American.

You should know that no poster here has authority to suppress anything any other poster says, even if he were to want to. And as a true liberal, suppressing dissent--or civil debate of any kind--is the last thing I would want. I hope you will continue to make your low opinion of your country clear to everyone reading these forums. And I will continue to say what I think of that low opinion when you express it, as, for example, when you slander people whose political views you disagree with as advocates of war crimes like the intentional targeting of civilians.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

You should know that no poster here has authority to suppress anything any other poster says, even if he were to want to. And as a true liberal, suppressing dissent--or civil debate of any kind--is the last thing I would want. I hope you will continue to make your low opinion of your country clear to everyone reading these forums. And I will continue to say what I think of that low opinion when you express it, as, for example, when you slander people whose political views you disagree with as advocates of war crimes like the intentional targeting of civilians.

No. Not literal power, of course not. But have you missed the topic warning? To Iran and nukes, they probably end up with them, if they ever decide that they want them.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I do not believe any foreseeable government of Israel will allow Iran to get the bomb. Whether Israel takes military action or the United States does depends on how Iran proceeds. I am very sure President Limpwrist will never bomb Iran's nuclear weapons facilities, but in less than two years we may well have a president who would. One danger that is seldom discussed is that an Israeli attack might need to include nuclear weapons. It's far from clear that 5,000 lb. bombs, which are the largest conventional ones Israel could deliver, would make sure of the deeply buried centrifuge gallery at Fordoz. Of course Israel could confine an attack to, say, four other facilities that are very important to Iran's program, but destroying them might not cripple the weapons program for too long.

A lot of silly things have been written about how difficult and dangerous bombing Iran's nuclear weapons facilities would be, how we don't know where they are, and so on. That is somewhat true of an Israeli strike--with their smaller forces, it would be very difficult and uncertain, and it would certainly be limited to only the few most important targets. But as applied to this country's military, the recitals of all sorts of supposedly unimaginable difficulties and supposedly unthinkable risks sound to me like the excuses of alarmists and hand-wringers for doing nothing. The U.S. has the aircraft and the weapons to destroy every significant facility in not only Iran's nuclear program, but also its ballistic missile program and its air defense system, and to do the lion's share of all this in one fell swoop, and without any great risk to our servicemen.

And no matter how badly the regime in Tehran might want to retaliate, it does not have much capacity to do it. To deter them from trying, they might also be put on notice that any attempt at retaliation would be answered with still more attacks on all sorts of other military targets. They might not dare do anything, because they know very well that once Iran had lost its ability to defend its airspace, every bridge, tank, cannon, barracks, naval base, fuel depot, communications center, ammunition dump, etc. in it would be a sitting duck for bombers. That regime could not survive too much humiliation--the power of tyrants depends a lot on their prestige.
 
Back
Top Bottom