• 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?

But we're not talking about renewables, which still have major problems, we're talking about people who magically want cars to go away tomorrow. It just isn't going to happen, any more than nukes are going to go away. They're here to stay. Now we have to find a way to deal with them. Pretending that some magical anti-nuke fairy is going to come around and make them poof out of existence is silly.

well chris reeves did it...
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Who wants cars to go away, and why tomorrow. It's nukes we want to go away, today. But sense the nuke powers won't do that, then we're bound to have more nuke powers.

i dunno if i would want that. From 1950-now there's been unprecedented peace between world powers. At most, there's been proxy wars. Yeah we all fear on some level the destruction from total war with these weapons, but let's not act like conventional war isn't devastating either. Look at WWII *up until* nagasaki and what would've been the land invasion and then look at small scale conflicts since then
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

And nothing has changed since then? Nobody might want to change their mind?

No one HAS to be in the UN. If they dont like the treaty they signed, they can leave it, and its protections.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Who's claiming otherwise, hmm. Do you want to search DP to see if I have. The point here is that you and your brethren project America as righteous, you justify the killing of children and women, you promote American hegemony, violence and exploitation upon some platitude that we are a shinning city on the hill, the bastion of democracy, the promoters of peace, love, equity and justice. When in fact we're just another people seeking wealth and prosperity at the expense of the weak. You know what you can do with your platitude?

I'm sorry to see that your hatred for the U.S. continues to blind you.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Yes, and you promote it. And you lie about nuclear weapons. They're not just weapons, they are indiscriminate and they have no legitimacy. But why would pigs have a problem with them, unless they are in the hands of others of course.

I suspect the coming century will see much broader possession of nuclear weapons. That's not a moral judgment, just an assessment.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

It is in America's interest to have them, and America has been the only country to have used them. It's in my interest to continue to expose you as a freak that justifies the use of nuclear weapons on children, women and old men to prove that you are the victor. One things certain, there are other powers, growing in the world at the moment that seek to arrest American hegemony and imperialism. It won't last forever.

I quite agree. No country's leadership has ever been without end. We did indeed use nuclear weapons when they were essential for victory against a tyrannical aggressor. They will be used again by someone else, likely with much less justification.
 
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

Just as much as anyone else.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

It is in our interest for Iran not to have such weapons. It is in Iran's interest to have them.

And it was in Japan's interest for the U.S> not have nuclear weapons - and it is not up to the U.S. to decide what other nations can and cannot have - that is colonialism
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

true. But Israel's "terrorism" extends only to Gaza -it isn't an Shia fundamentalist state like Iran is.
Or ISIS brand of Salafi jihad. apocalyptic meaning ISIL would gladly let loose a nuke,
Iran...I'm not 100% sure either way, but I'd like to at least not think so

Israel doesn't want war..not even Bibi Netanyahu...the problem is Iran is like ISIL in that regards..
The Iranian regime are a bunch of fundamentalist Shia clerics

Shiite Islam and Islamic Fundamentalism | Martin Kramer on the Middle East

So you are saying some "terrorism" or "aggression" is okay if the U.S> says it is okay and not others.......

Interesting that you see the U.S> in charge of the whole world
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

You'll find in time that Jack and his pals at DP will defend US atrocities at all cost. Filthy as it is.

Atomic Weapons Were Not Needed to End the War or Save Lives

Like all Americans, I was taught that the U.S. dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in order to end WWII and save both American and Japanese lives.

But most of the top American military officials at the time said otherwise.

The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey group, assigned by President Truman to study the air attacks on Japan, produced a report in July of 1946 that concluded (52-56):

Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.

The Atomic Bomb by Barton J. Bernstein | Paperback | Barnes & Noble

Interesting, thanks for sharing that insight (about how things are) and also for the perspective on the WWII aspect of this issue
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

And it was in Japan's interest for the U.S> not have nuclear weapons - and it is not up to the U.S. to decide what other nations can and cannot have - that is colonialism

To be colonialism it would have to have some connection to, you know, colonies. It does not. I think the word you may be looking for is hegemonism. That may be fair. Please keep in mind that the UN was established in such a way as to deliberately enshrine hegemonism via the five permanent Security Council members. In other words, that's the way the system is supposed to work.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

To be colonialism it would have to have some connection to, you know, colonies. It does not. I think the word you may be looking for is hegemonism. That may be fair. Please keep in mind that the UN was established in such a way as to deliberately enshrine hegemonism via the five permanent Security Council members. In other words, that's the way the system is supposed to work.

Colonialism is the extension of a nation's interests, control and power into sovereign countries

Colonialism - the policy or practice of acquiring full or partial political control over another country, occupying it with settlers, and exploiting it economically.

A lot of systems need changes, perhaps this is one of them
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Interesting, thanks for sharing that insight (about how things are) and also for the perspective on the WWII aspect of this issue

You may want to try something more recent, and drawing on documents that were not available to Bernstein.

D.M. Giangreco
HELL TO PAY | U.S. Naval Institute
United States Naval Institute
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Colonialism is the extension of a nation's interests, control and power into sovereign countries

Colonialism - the policy or practice of acquiring full or partial political control over another country, occupying it with settlers, and exploiting it economically.

A lot of systems need changes, perhaps this is one of them

If you think change is called for then by all means advocate for it. As I have already posted, I do not believe the current system is viable over the long term anyway.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Actually, it comes from thoroughly documented historical research.

The senior fellows at the CFR, disagree with you.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

If you think change is called for then by all means advocate for it. As I have already posted, I do not believe the current system is viable over the long term anyway.

Perhaps you are right, but the current system or any other system and the steps taken to sustain that system are for them to determine not the U.S.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I'm sorry to see that your hatred for the U.S. continues to blind you.

That's your fall back, and weak rebuttal. Not only did Eisenhower know that the use of the nuclear bombs was unnecessary, he saw it as immoral. And Curtis LeMay acknowledged his action in Japan as war crimes, hoping that the US should win so that he might not be prosecuted such. We've had this discussion often enough, and I'm well aware that your hawkish stance disregards that.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I quite agree. No country's leadership has ever been without end. We did indeed use nuclear weapons when they were essential for victory against a tyrannical aggressor. They will be used again by someone else, likely with much less justification.

What a joke. If one can justify dropping nuclear bombs on civilian targets, entire cities, then anybody will justify anything, and that's what we'll have, bravo.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I suspect the coming century will see much broader possession of nuclear weapons. That's not a moral judgment, just an assessment.

Yes, that is obvious, despite the fact that such indiscriminate weapons have no legitimacy.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

That's your fall back, and weak rebuttal. Not only did Eisenhower know that the use of the nuclear bombs was unnecessary, he saw it as immoral. And Curtis LeMay acknowledged his action in Japan as war crimes, hoping that the US should win so that he might not be prosecuted such. We've had this discussion often enough, and I'm well aware that your hawkish stance disregards that.

The weapons were essential to win the war, and both Eisenhower and LeMay had their own reasons for their statements. Giangreco's account is definitive.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

What a joke. If one can justify dropping nuclear bombs on civilian targets, entire cities, then anybody will justify anything, and that's what we'll have, bravo.

The use of nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was essential to Allied victory.
 
Back
Top Bottom