• 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?

Montecresto said:
Ok, so this time wiki is acceptable, then I'll hear no complaints for trotting it out. Here's what the institute says about it, this is what they think, not what critics think that claim everybody who criticizes Israeli foreign policy is anti-Semitic.

"The Institute does not 'deny the Holocaust.' Every responsible scholar of twentieth century history acknowledges the great catastrophe that befell European Jewry during World War II. All the same, the IHR has over the years published detailed books and numerous probing essays that call into question aspects of the orthodox Holocaust extermination story, and highlight specific Holocaust exaggerations and falsehoods."[24] On the IHR website Barbara Kulaszka defends the distinction between denial and revisionism by arguing that considerable revisions have been made over the years by historians.................

Institute for Historical Review - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Just keep digging that hole for yourself. We're all very glad that where you get your crazy from is out in the open now. =)
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Montecresto said:
Ok, so this time wiki is acceptable, then I'll hear no complaints for trotting it out. Here's what the institute says about it, this is what they think, not what critics think that claim everybody who criticizes Israeli foreign policy is anti-Semitic.

"The Institute does not 'deny the Holocaust.' Every responsible scholar of twentieth century history acknowledges the great catastrophe that befell European Jewry during World War II. All the same, the IHR has over the years published detailed books and numerous probing essays that call into question aspects of the orthodox Holocaust extermination story, and highlight specific Holocaust exaggerations and falsehoods."[24] On the IHR website Barbara Kulaszka defends the distinction between denial and revisionism by arguing that considerable revisions have been made over the years by historians.................

Institute for Historical Review - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

"Look man we don't like, deny the holocaust or anything, but like come on you don't REALLY think there were gas chambers do you?" - IHR and Monty.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Sherman123 said:
"Look man we don't like, deny the holocaust or anything, but like come on you don't REALLY think there were gas chambers do you?" - IHR and Monty.
Click to expand...

It's dishonest to attribute something to somebody in quotations, that they in fact have not said. I let the institute speak for themselves, you may spoon words into their mouth all you wish. Btw, a majority of Americans stood with Bush on his war in Iraq, I stood with small company. Today, a majority of Americans stand with me. There is a growing consensus in America that the US's projection of power as it has been, has been counter to our true interests. Between that evolution, and the actions of both Russia and China, this is changing.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

For historians Giangreco's work stands as definitive. Could that change in the future? Of course, but unless new evidence comes to light that seems unlikely.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Apocalypse said:
You're arguing with the forum's representative of the Dark Side regarding the subject of morality.

Just to let you know how meaningless what you're doing right now really is.
Click to expand...

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

Graffias said:
Let's just remember this is all about Israel. Iran is not a threat to the U.S, and quite frankly I really don't care if they get nukes. The only reason that stopping Iran from going nuclear is such a priority for the U.S government is the influence pro-Israel lobby groups like AIPAC have on Capitol Hill.
Click to expand...

The problem is that a nuclear exchange between Iran and Israel would draw others in.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

It's hardly conclusive where moral equivocation is no less tedious in this matter than in any other. If they have no right, then who does and why? Good guys and bad guys? Please.

Yes, they have the right.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Jack Hays said:
The problem is that a nuclear exchange between Iran and Israel would draw others in.
Click to expand...

What concern is that to us? As long as we don't get involved, it shouldn't make any difference.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

NoC_T said:
It's hardly conclusive where moral equivocation is no less tedious in this matter than in any other. If they have no right, then who does and why? Good guys and bad guys? Please.

Yes, they have the right.
Click to expand...

Simple and succinct.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Montecresto said:
Well perhaps we've a difference in opinion on the character of those that kill innocent women and children, and those that justify it, hmm?
Click to expand...

Name a war where "innocent women and children" have not had to die.

Seriously this ongoing anti-American everything is getting very tiresome. There is a substantive difference between collateral damage and deliberately targeting civilians.

WW2 was the last "just war", but it was not fought justly, if you want to point at a horror, the real 'crime' of the Allies, look a Dresden.

Before anyone can criticize the US, they need to actually STUDY history, the unabridged version not what you are fed in school. Most idiots who go on about Hiroshima and Nagasaki have never even seen the detailed notes on the lead up, how the US command struggled with it, how they chose the targets and save Tokyo harmless. Yes, their intelligence was wrong, but the Japanese high command was deliberately inflating their fighting capability.

Meanwhile, suicidally crazed Japanese soldiers and pilots were tearing apart the US and British advances killing thousands of Americans. You ignore estimates that at that rate the war in the Pacific would drag on for three to five more years.

All the critics look at is the result, the destruction, read the stats, and ignore what the high command faced.

Anyone who sees history in black and white, good vs bad, like you is seriously under-informed, usually by deliberation.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Robert in Ohio said:
And if they were to withdraw their ratification of the NPT, they would no longer be subject to its restrictions and the current regime could argue that ratification of that treaty was by a prior rogue regime not in the best interests of the country. Changing things that prior administrations have done is how progress is made in politics after all (at least in the eyes of those in power at the time)
Click to expand...

Withdrawal would change the legal situation. As far as I know that would be legal.

And what do you want to say by that?
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Graffias said:
What concern is that to us? As long as we don't get involved, it shouldn't make any difference.
Click to expand...

The US not get involved in a war in the Middle East, I chuckle.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Fearandloathing said:
Name a war where "innocent women and children" have not had to die.

Seriously this ongoing anti-American everything is getting very tiresome. There is a substantive difference between collateral damage and deliberately targeting civilians.

WW2 was the last "just war", but it was not fought justly, if you want to point at a horror, the real 'crime' of the Allies, look a Dresden.

Before anyone can criticize the US, they need to actually STUDY history, the unabridged version not what you are fed in school. Most idiots who go on about Hiroshima and Nagasaki have never even seen the detailed notes on the lead up, how the US command struggled with it, how they chose the targets and save Tokyo harmless. Yes, their intelligence was wrong, but the Japanese high command was deliberately inflating their fighting capability.

Meanwhile, suicidally crazed Japanese soldiers and pilots were tearing apart the US and British advances killing thousands of Americans. You ignore estimates that at that rate the war in the Pacific would drag on for three to five more years.

All the critics look at is the result, the destruction, read the stats, and ignore what the high command faced.

Anyone who sees history in black and white, good vs bad, like you is seriously under-informed, usually by deliberation.
Click to expand...

Yes fear, I've heard all you have before. Apparently you too think that targeting women and children is only criminal when our enemies do it.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Montecresto said:
Yes fear, I've heard all you have before. Apparently you too think that targeting women and children is only criminal when our enemies do it.
Click to expand...


When has the US ever TARGETED women and children?

Seriously, lose the hate OK?

And get a ****ing education
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Robert in Ohio said:
Not all and if you read my comments on the thread you would understand that my position is simply that it is not the U.S.'s responsibility or right to dictate to the rest of the world about how things should be done in sovereign countries. That is colonialism and we fought a revolution to get out from under the domination of an established world power.
Click to expand...

It depends on how you see it. Actually it is the responsibility of the international community to guarantee security ie protect populations. It is also the responsibility of each and every country to do so.
Proliferation reduces this security and increases the probability of nuclear war. That is not in doubt. And considering the threats Iran has been want to issue? Or the attacks on American allies and assets,? I think clear and present danger could and probably should be argued.
Colonialism? Read the definition.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Montecresto said:
joG said:
and you think it is therefore a good reason to condone proliferation?[

No, it's not, although the CFR has presented an argument for Iranian nuclear weapons. The point is picking and choosing who does and who doesn't. Pakistan is no stable country, but they are a nuclear power.
Click to expand...

There is no problem with prioritizing until the global community is willing to believably guarantee and robustly ensure international security. Demanding anything else is silly, uninformed emnity.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Fearandloathing said:
When has the US ever TARGETED women and children?

Seriously, lose the hate OK?

And get a ****ing education
Click to expand...

Like I said we need a fire hose in here this morning to save the right from combustion. I suppose you think the two cities struck in Japan were unintended bomb drift. You need an education.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

From an international law perspective, no, since they are a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Attempting to gain nuclear missiles would be a violation of the agreement Iran itself holds itself to. This is the key difference between Iran and Israel that many miss or intentionally omit - Israel is not a signatory to the NPT and therefore is not bound to be nonnuclear.

Whether or not they have the right is irrelevant to whether or not they will attempt to pursue such capabilities. They want to become a regional hegemon in the Middle East. From both a moral and a practical perspective, Iran's ambitions (if they really exist) should be opposed.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Montecresto said:
Like I said we need a fire hose in here this morning to save the right from combustion. I suppose you think the two cities struck in Japan were unintended bomb drift. You need an education.
Click to expand...

How about we lose the rhetoric for once...

And focus on your lies?

Please address the post on where you are wrong, and the fact you are terribly ignorant of the facts.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Moderator's Warning:
The topic is: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Not each other and not the Holocaust. Let's please drop the flaming and baiting as well and get back to discussing the topic.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Fearandloathing said:
How about we lose the rhetoric for once...

And focus on your lies?

Please address the post on where you are wrong, and the fact you are terribly ignorant of the facts.
Click to expand...

Well Moderator intervention rescued you. Let's just conclude that Iran will likely have a nuclear weapon, and that will please some and concern others. Rights have no factor in this at all.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

chromium said:
i feel this is getting off track, but i can't let slide revisionism that pretends americans in 1940s gave a rat's ass about this, not while they were forcing americans of japanese descent into camps, and the bombs very nearly did not lead to a surrender anyway
Click to expand...

It's been rehashed several times in teh history forum (where it belongs) but, it's worth noting that your logic is poor. We put Japanese into internment camps =/= "F it, nuke them". We weren't perfect, sure, but we weren't the Nazis.




[later edit] Didn't see the Warning before I replied. My apologies to all.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

joG said:
It depends on how you see it. Actually it is the responsibility of the international community to guarantee security ie protect populations. It is also the responsibility of each and every country to do so.
Proliferation reduces this security and increases the probability of nuclear war. That is not in doubt. And considering the threats Iran has been want to issue? Or the attacks on American allies and assets,? I think clear and present danger could and probably should be argued.
Colonialism? Read the definition.
Click to expand...

So if it is the will of the international community that the U.S. get rid of its nuclear weapons immediately then we should do it. That sounds like what you are saying.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Robert in Ohio said:
So if it is the will of the international community that the U.S. get rid of its nuclear weapons immediately then we should do it. That sounds like what you are saying.
Click to expand...

I suspect we would do that if we could be assured others got rid of theirs as well. Elimination of nuclear weapons has been a US goal as far back as Ronald Reagan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom