• 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?

does Iran have a right to nukes?

Would you give a known terrorist a batch of nerve gas?

Would you give skinheads an arsenal of high explosives?

Would you give a known threat a weapon capable of changing the power structure of the planet?

I don't know. I don't think anybody was discussing giving Iran anything. I do know that only one country has ever used its nukes, on a civilian target. So your lofty pretense doesn't move me. And what again does John, the isle of Patmos and the book of revelation have to do with an Iranian nuclear power program?
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I heard someone make the argument that Obama doesn't believe the US has any rightful role in preventing or hindering Iran from developing and maintaining nuclear weapons. I don't know that that's true, and nobody but the President can answer to what he believes, so I'll ask what you believe. If Iran has the ability, does it have the "right" to nuclear weapons? (By "right", I mean the U.S. and other nations would not be unjustified in trying to prevent it.)

working on the poll

Depends on what level of morality we are talking about.

In the highest sense, all nuclear weapons are wrong because mass murder, threats, and violence are wrong. In the second highest sense, the proliferation of nuclear weapons is wrong because it could end all human life and civilization as we know it. In the lowest senses, anything goes because their power is as much of a currency as our power and etc.

In a Kierkegaardian context, you might say that abstaining from all nuclear weapons would make you a "knight of the faith", trusting in god to see to the affairs of the world. The second level makes you ethical and honorable. The third makes you a cretin.
 
Last edited:
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I heard someone make the argument that Obama doesn't believe the US has any rightful role in preventing or hindering Iran from developing and maintaining nuclear weapons. I don't know that that's true, and nobody but the President can answer to what he believes, so I'll ask what you believe. If Iran has the ability, does it have the "right" to nuclear weapons? (By "right", I mean the U.S. and other nations would not be unjustified in trying to prevent it.)

working on the poll

Does the U.S. have the right to have nuclear weapons while denying other sovereign nations to same right? And because the NPT says so is not a good enough answer - that justifies the double standard of the haves and the have nots but does not make it right
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Does the U.S. have the right to have nuclear weapons while denying other sovereign nations to same right? And because the NPT says so is not a good enough answer - that justifies the double standard of the haves and the have nots but does not make it right

The NPT explicitly enshrined a double standard in the interest of reducing the potential for use of nuclear weapons.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

No country has the "right" to nuclear weapons as it has nothing to do with rights. The question is does the country have the ability to obtain them - and does it want them? There are pros and cons to doing so.

That is NOT the question to the USA, West and other countries of the world. The question is that of which is worse for us - what it takes to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons and the risks of pursuing Iran not having such weapons versus what are the risks of Iran having them.

The risks of Iran having them is that the government would use, or covertly allow others to use, or export, or extort with, and militant religious zealots obtaining control of them - and using them VERSUS all it will take to try to stop that risk from existing.

Thus, the risk if a nuclear attack against Israel, the risk of a nuclear arms race across the world among countries that don't have nuclear weapons - and those risks - and the risk of a nuclear terrorist attack against the USA.

In my opinion, those are such horrific potentials that nearly anything done to prevent it makes it worth while to try to prevent that risk from existing.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Does the U.S. have the right to have nuclear weapons while denying other sovereign nations to same right? And because the NPT says so is not a good enough answer - that justifies the double standard of the haves and the have nots but does not make it right

The issue has NOTHING to do with "fairness," and accordingly "double standard" is irrelevant.

In fact, it is absurd to claim that is the issue. Does every country have the "right" to have the means to totally destroy the USA in a nuclear attack or to irradiate the entire world in such an attack against another country? Do you think that such "rights" exist or ever have among and between nations?

Such a level of being naïve and so zippy pinhead lost in platitudes it is difficult to believe any adult could even think in those terms.

Does Vatican City - a country - have a "right" to 5,000 intercontinental ballistic missiles with MIRV warheads? What about Tulavu with 12,000 people? Apparently some people think so.

What about a state or a city? Do the citizens of Mosul have a "right" to nuclear weapon?

Discussing this in terms of rights is absurd.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I heard someone make the argument that Obama doesn't believe the US has any rightful role in preventing or hindering Iran from developing and maintaining nuclear weapons. I don't know that that's true, and nobody but the President can answer to what he believes, so I'll ask what you believe. If Iran has the ability, does it have the "right" to nuclear weapons? (By "right", I mean the U.S. and other nations would not be unjustified in trying to prevent it.)

working on the poll

Iran signed the Non-Proliferation treaty. As such, even if a country could have such a "Right", Iran signed their Right to it away by agreeing to and signing the NPT. As such, all other signatories to the NPT have the Right to interfere with Iran getting nuclear weapons technology.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I think the answer really depends on your point of view.

Should they have them?

Absolutely ****ing not.

I think that we as a collection of nations (The West) in our best interests should not allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon.

But lets not kid ourselves.

Their desire for a Nuclear Weapon isn't entirely to do with some apocalyptic desire to incinerate Israel and all non believers or whatever colorful language the regime decides to use for the day... it's about the survival of the regime.

For North Korea and Iran it's more about gaining the ultimate deterrence against what they perceive as an imminent invasion and destruction of their governments as well as gaining influence of course.

Ultimately both governments are extremely abhorrent to any civilized order or proliferation of basic human rights in the world and must one day, face the axe... especially in the case of the North Koreans.

But to do that... is no easy task.

Lots of blood, lots of treasure.

From a Realist perspective, they have the "right" to whatever they can get away with.

We, in turn, have the "right" to impede them in such pursuits if it goes against our own interests.

At the end of the day, it's really as simple as that. Iran has an agenda, and we have an agenda. Unfortunately, those agendas simply happen to be mutually incompatible.

May the best nation win. :shrug:

These two posts sum up my answer well enough.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Iran has as much right to nukes as anyone else. Nations with nukes don't get invaded, so it is understandable that they want them. I know of no principal that denies their right to have them while others have them. In my opinion, no one has a right to have them or use them. Using them is genocide.

If they want nukes then we have the right to continue with the sanctions, increase the sanctions, support opposition groups within their nation, and generally keep them relegated to the pariah state that they are, if on the other hand they wish to become members of the global community then they will give up trying to gain the most destructive weapon ever conceived.

On a more realistic note, anyone who really expects the US to allow a nation whose national motto is "death to America" to obtain a literal doomsday weapon is delusional.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Heck, I probably trust our own government, with the yahoo Jesus squad anywhere near the big red button, less than I would trust Iran.

:roll: Call me when the "Jesus squad" starts publicly executing gays, denying the holocaust, and stating that they don't mind seeing the US burn if it means the triumph of Christianity over the world.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I heard someone make the argument that Obama doesn't believe the US has any rightful role in preventing or hindering Iran from developing and maintaining nuclear weapons. I don't know that that's true, and nobody but the President can answer to what he believes, so I'll ask what you believe. If Iran has the ability, does it have the "right" to nuclear weapons? (By "right", I mean the U.S. and other nations would not be unjustified in trying to prevent it.)

working on the poll

That would be Ronald Reagan's position, but define right? Do we believe a sovereign nation has the right to act as it sees fit within it's borders? Or de we believe all nations should be subjected to the control of another entity? It seems to me Reagan was at least consistent and many republicans and others are less so today. We can't allow the UN to guide us at all, but we can tell Iran what they can and can't do. It's not about Iran and the UIS being the same, outside of being sovereign nations, but being consistent in our ideology.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

If Israel does, then so does Iran.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

So you have No REAL answer to Iran having Signed AWAY that 'Right'. (Reaffirmed under the Revolutionary Govt)
Just your usual Empty Hostility/Deflection after getting Gutted again.
What's that now.. 0-fer-4612?

And they are not making nukes. There is nothing in the treaty that prevents them for conducting experiments with nuclear materials... just dont make nukes. Iran says it wants nuclear power and be self sustaining.. why is that wrong? And Iran could just leave the treaty .. would that make the US and west shut up?
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Iran signed the Non-Proliferation treaty. As such, even if a country could have such a "Right", Iran signed their Right to it away by agreeing to and signing the NPT. As such, all other signatories to the NPT have the Right to interfere with Iran getting nuclear weapons technology.
So if Iran abrogates the NPT then you wont have a problem with that?
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

So if Iran abrogates the NPT then you wont have a problem with that?

North Korea did. They pulled out of the NPT a few years back. I said it then and I say it now....The NPT is one treaty that no one should be allowed to back out of unless they are let out by the majority of the other signatories. Simple majority is fine. Partly because by signing the treaty they signed whatever perceived or actual Right they had to make such weapons away. And when it comes to N. Korea and Iran....well...lets just say I wouldn't trust either of them as far as I could throw the sun towards the center of the Milky Way Galaxy. Admittedly I'd trust Iran sooner than N. Korea. But only because N. Korea is FREAKING CRAZY compared to Iran....and well...most other countries to.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

By the by, this is exactly why I like open polls. Not to see who voted for what, but to see if anyone is screwing around with the poll results. And this one has definitely been screwed with.

14 people voted yes...but it says 64 did.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Ok, but I don't get your point. A metaphoric book, written by a dude in a trance a couple thousand years ago has what bearing on Iran's nuclear power program today?

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

I really don't care if Iran has nukes or not. Certainly, they have entirely valid reasons for wanting them, after all, Israel and the west haven't treated them particularly well, they have every reason to distrust us and I don't blame them a bit. Heck, I probably trust our own government, with the yahoo Jesus squad anywhere near the big red button, less than I would trust Iran.

What an utterly idiotic thing to say.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

The issue has NOTHING to do with "fairness," and accordingly "double standard" is irrelevant.

In fact, it is absurd to claim that is the issue. Does every country have the "right" to have the means to totally destroy the USA in a nuclear attack or to irradiate the entire world in such an attack against another country? Do you think that such "rights" exist or ever have among and between nations?

.

Does the U.S. have the right to have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the rest of the world while denying that right to others. Your answer to that questions was lost in a "Such a level of being naïve and so zippy pinhead lost in platitudes" attitude, perhaps you would like to try again
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

The NPT explicitly enshrined a double standard in the interest of reducing the potential for use of nuclear weapons.

But is that the right of the U.S. to dictate to the rest of the world, sounds a lot like colonialism
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

No country has the "right" to nuclear weapons.

Including the U.S., so if we give up ours perhaps others will cease to want them?
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I heard someone make the argument that Obama doesn't believe the US has any rightful role in preventing or hindering Iran from developing and maintaining nuclear weapons. I don't know that that's true, and nobody but the President can answer to what he believes, so I'll ask what you believe. If Iran has the ability, does it have the "right" to nuclear weapons? (By "right", I mean the U.S. and other nations would not be unjustified in trying to prevent it.)

working on the poll

Iran has a right to defend itself like any other nation, and if it deems nukes to be critical to that role, so be it.

It needn't be said that the per-dollar value of nukes has diminished significantly over the years to cyber arms (which may soon completely replace nukes as a deterrent).

O certainly believes its OK for Iran to have nukes, or else he wouldn't be doing what he's doing.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

By the by, this is exactly why I like open polls. Not to see who voted for what, but to see if anyone is screwing around with the poll results. And this one has definitely been screwed with.

14 people voted yes...but it says 64 did.

How do you know only 14 of the 64 voted 'yes'?

And how can someone 'screw' with the results?
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

North Korea did. They pulled out of the NPT a few years back. I said it then and I say it now....The NPT is one treaty that no one should be allowed to back out of unless they are let out by the majority of the other signatories. Simple majority is fine. Partly because by signing the treaty they signed whatever perceived or actual Right they had to make such weapons away. And when it comes to N. Korea and Iran....well...lets just say I wouldn't trust either of them as far as I could throw the sun towards the center of the Milky Way Galaxy. Admittedly I'd trust Iran sooner than N. Korea. But only because N. Korea is FREAKING CRAZY compared to Iran....and well...most other countries to.

National sovereignty empowers nations to enter into treaties, and dissolve treaties as it may be in their interest. No other nation can force a treaty upon another.
 
Back
Top Bottom