• 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?

There is no doubt that Iran has no right to have nuclear weapons. To believe it does is just lack of knowledge. Why should the fact of having developed other wmd mean they should be granted more wmd in the form of nukes? That sounds off the wall.

--------------

I'm sorry, I just don't see the logic behind allowing more aggressive States to have nuclear arsenals when Iran has attacked no one in modern history. I've been to Iran, met its people, stayed in their homes etc and they are not the stereotype Sword swinging, carpet riding fanatics they're made out to be in anti Islamic US Media.

Iran has the highest literacy rate in the Islamic world including its women. There's no better way to understand the truth about a country & its people other than going there

Many foreign governments support "Terrorist" groups & Proxy Armies throughout the Region, Israel, for example supports ISIS, al Nusra & al Quaeda in Syria. Hezbollah is currently fighting ISIS etc & only considered a "Terrorist" group by 3 countries in the world & considered by many to be a Humanitarian / Social Service Group especially by the S. Lebanese who have repeatedly suffered numerous Israeli massacres, invasions & bombardments.

Is it the overall spread of Nuclear weapons you oppose, the existence of all Nuclear weapons or only opposition to Iran's acquiring Nukes you support?


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

--------------

I'm sorry, I just don't see the logic behind allowing more aggressive States to have nuclear arsenals when Iran has attacked no one in modern history. I've been to Iran, met its people, stayed in their homes etc and they are not the stereotype Sword swinging, carpet riding fanatics they're made out to be in anti Islamic US Media.

Iran has the highest literacy rate in the Islamic world including its women. There's no better way to understand the truth about a country & its people other than going there

Many foreign governments support "Terrorist" groups & Proxy Armies throughout the Region, Israel, for example supports ISIS, al Nusra & al Quaeda in Syria. Hezbollah is currently fighting ISIS etc & only considered a "Terrorist" group by 3 countries in the world & considered by many to be a Humanitarian / Social Service Group especially by the S. Lebanese who have repeatedly suffered numerous Israeli massacres, invasions & bombardments.

Is it the overall spread of Nuclear weapons you oppose, the existence of all Nuclear weapons or only opposition to Iran's acquiring Nukes you support?


Thanks

You'll need a link to support your claim about Israel and the extremist Sunnis in Syria.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

--------------

I'm sorry, I just don't see the logic behind allowing more aggressive States to have nuclear arsenals when Iran has attacked no one in modern history. I've been to Iran, met its people, stayed in their homes etc and they are not the stereotype Sword swinging, carpet riding fanatics they're made out to be in anti Islamic US Media.

Iran has the highest literacy rate in the Islamic world including its women. There's no better way to understand the truth about a country & its people other than going there

Many foreign governments support "Terrorist" groups & Proxy Armies throughout the Region, Israel, for example supports ISIS, al Nusra & al Quaeda in Syria. Hezbollah is currently fighting ISIS etc & only considered a "Terrorist" group by 3 countries in the world & considered by many to be a Humanitarian / Social Service Group especially by the S. Lebanese who have repeatedly suffered numerous Israeli massacres, invasions & bombardments.

Is it the overall spread of Nuclear weapons you oppose, the existence of all Nuclear weapons or only opposition to Iran's acquiring Nukes you support?


Thanks

Israel Fuels The Syrian Crisis With Aid To Al-Qaida Rebels

http://www.mintpressnews.com/israel-fuels-the-syrian-crisis-with-aid-to-al-qaida-rebels/205262/

21WIRE reported back in December 2014 and again in January 2015, how the State of Israel has consistently provided both material, medical relief and IDF airstrike support to various terrorist and ‘rebel’ insurgents fighting in Syria.

http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/02/...oordinating-with-isis-militants-inside-syria/
 
Last edited:
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Israel Fuels The Syrian Crisis With Aid To Al-Qaida Rebels

Israel Fuels The Syrian Crisis With Aid To Al-Qaida Rebels

Hardly a credible link, and attacking Hezbollah is not the same as helping the Sunnis.

[h=3]Mint Press News - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/h]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mint_Press_News


Wikipedia


MintPress News (MPN) is an independent American news website founded in 2012, covering opinion and investigative reporting on American political, ...
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

--------------

I'm sorry, I just don't see the logic behind allowing more aggressive States to have nuclear arsenals when Iran has attacked no one in modern history. I've been to Iran, met its people, stayed in their homes etc and they are not the stereotype Sword swinging, carpet riding fanatics they're made out to be in anti Islamic US Media.

Iran has the highest literacy rate in the Islamic world including its women. There's no better way to understand the truth about a country & its people other than going there

Many foreign governments support "Terrorist" groups & Proxy Armies throughout the Region, Israel, for example supports ISIS, al Nusra & al Quaeda in Syria. Hezbollah is currently fighting ISIS etc & only considered a "Terrorist" group by 3 countries in the world & considered by many to be a Humanitarian / Social Service Group especially by the S. Lebanese who have repeatedly suffered numerous Israeli massacres, invasions & bombardments.

Is it the overall spread of Nuclear weapons you oppose, the existence of all Nuclear weapons or only opposition to Iran's acquiring Nukes you support?


Thanks

There's also this,

UN Report Reveals How Israel is Coordinating with ISIS Militants Inside Syria
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

There you go with those troublesome facts, again..

Prepare to be scolded for not using a C.A.M.E.R.A. approved source

Well of course the Islamic State has an airforce, it's the IDF. And Israel is helping them out because they don't want Hezbollah to establish a front on the border of the Golan Heights which they think Iran would use to carry out attacks on Israel. Look, all of this **** would be moot were Hussein, Mubarak, Gaddafi and Assad still in power. We'd not even be talking about it.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

--------------

I'm sorry, I just don't see the logic behind allowing more aggressive States to have nuclear arsenals when Iran has attacked no one in modern history. I've been to Iran, met its people, stayed in their homes etc and they are not the stereotype Sword swinging, carpet riding fanatics they're made out to be in anti Islamic US Media.

Iran has the highest literacy rate in the Islamic world including its women. There's no better way to understand the truth about a country & its people other than going there

Many foreign governments support "Terrorist" groups & Proxy Armies throughout the Region, Israel, for example supports ISIS, al Nusra & al Quaeda in Syria. Hezbollah is currently fighting ISIS etc & only considered a "Terrorist" group by 3 countries in the world & considered by many to be a Humanitarian / Social Service Group especially by the S. Lebanese who have repeatedly suffered numerous Israeli massacres, invasions & bombardments.

Is it the overall spread of Nuclear weapons you oppose, the existence of all Nuclear weapons or only opposition to Iran's acquiring Nukes you support?


Thanks

They signed up on iaea. They agreed not to develop nuclear weapons and guaranteed not to. If they do, it would be pure and aggravated negligence to trust anything they said.
I think it pretty much indisputable that proliferation increases the probability of nuclear war at some point. And I am quite afraid that the type of country's attitude is of much less important than one would a priori believe.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

They signed up on iaea. They agreed not to develop nuclear weapons and guaranteed not to. If they do, it would be pure and aggravated negligence to trust anything they said.
I think it pretty much indisputable that proliferation increases the probability of nuclear war at some point. And I am quite afraid that the type of country's attitude is of much less important than one would a priori believe.
------------------
I think that it's hard to justify to Iran how allowing Israel to have a nuclear arsenal with its record of aggression & illegal Expansion, UN Resolution violations routine massacres in Gaza, S Lebanon etc is justified when Iran is forced to go by rules Israel is allowed to flaunt

What's the point of having any Nuclear regulation unless they're uniformly enforced........that's all.


Thanks

(We can drop this if you'd like since it seems to be a simple difference of opinion)
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Another wacko link, and again, attacking Hezbollah is not the same as supporting the Sunnis.

21st Century Wire | Bio

----------------
RE: "....attacking Hezbollah is not the same as supporting the Sunnis."

.....but supporting Iran is supporting terrorism......Which is it?


Anyway, the evasive tactic of dismissing ANY and EVERY Independent source as "whacko" or "conspiracy" is a tiresome, & dishonest old ploy straight out of the "Hasbara Handbook"

What is most important is if a source is telling the truth

“...Israel’s crumbling media war”
2014 - Salon.com

EXCERPT "The U.S. political elite, the elite in Israel and the owners of the corporate media share a set of common economic and political interests that ensures that pro-Israeli propaganda dominates in the establishment media.
Should journalists and media organizations break from the script, various pro-Israeli groups, such as CAMERA, generate flack and bring enough pressure to bear on editors and reporters that they are brought back in line.

The dynamic at work is as follows: First, independent media have played a crucial role in countering Israeli propaganda and offering alternative accounts.

Second, social media have provided a forum from which independent journalism, as well as first-hand reports from Palestinian people in Gaza, are circulated.

Third, in these spaces Israel is losing the propaganda war, despite its vast resources of misinformation experts.

Fourth, grassroots activists using social media have been able to bring pressure to bear on the establishment media.

Fifth, this climate has enabled establishment journalists on the ground to be more forthcoming about the horrors of what is happening in Gaza.

Despite the serious intimidation faced by journalists,... such pressure seems to be working less and less. While ... a vigilant social media sphere combined with mass protests around the world has created a climate where if media institutions are to retain their credibility they have to at least appear to be balanced.”CONTINUED



The truth is that Israel is supporting the same "Terrorists" that are beheading individuals & Balkanizing the Mid East
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I don't see how the US has justifiable say in the matter and will just be ignored anyway

If, under another president, the United States were to decide to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons facilities, what anyone chose to ignore would not matter. Several technical studies of the force required show that a fraction of this country's air and naval power could destroy every one of them, as well as Iran's air defenses, and its ballistic missile sites and production facilities, in one fell swoop. A single aircraft with a few 2,000-lb. bombs could destroy the heavy water/plutonium facility at Arak, for example.

Your remark makes about as much sense as claiming that the U.S. had no justifiable say in whether atom bombs were dropped Japanese cities, and that Japan would just ignore it anyway.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

If, under another president, the United States were to decide to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons facilities, what anyone chose to ignore would not matter. Several technical studies of the force required show that a fraction of this country's air and naval power could destroy every one of them, as well as Iran's air defenses, and its ballistic missile sites and production facilities, in one fell swoop. A single aircraft with a few 2,000-lb. bombs could destroy the heavy water/plutonium facility at Arak, for example.

Your remark makes about as much sense as claiming that the U.S. had no justifiable say in whether atom bombs were dropped Japanese cities, and that Japan would just ignore it anyway.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Would you mind posting the publications/sources that claimed:

"Several technical studies of the force required show that a fraction of this country's air and naval power could destroy every one of them, as well as Iran's air defenses, and its ballistic missile sites and production facilities, in one fell swoop."


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

----------------
RE: "....attacking Hezbollah is not the same as supporting the Sunnis."

.....but supporting Iran is supporting terrorism......Which is it?


Anyway, the evasive tactic of dismissing ANY and EVERY Independent source as "whacko" or "conspiracy" is a tiresome, & dishonest old ploy straight out of the "Hasbara Handbook"

What is most important is if a source is telling the truth

“...Israel’s crumbling media war”
2014 - Salon.com

EXCERPT "The U.S. political elite, the elite in Israel and the owners of the corporate media share a set of common economic and political interests that ensures that pro-Israeli propaganda dominates in the establishment media.
Should journalists and media organizations break from the script, various pro-Israeli groups, such as CAMERA, generate flack and bring enough pressure to bear on editors and reporters that they are brought back in line.

The dynamic at work is as follows: First, independent media have played a crucial role in countering Israeli propaganda and offering alternative accounts.

Second, social media have provided a forum from which independent journalism, as well as first-hand reports from Palestinian people in Gaza, are circulated.

Third, in these spaces Israel is losing the propaganda war, despite its vast resources of misinformation experts.

Fourth, grassroots activists using social media have been able to bring pressure to bear on the establishment media.

Fifth, this climate has enabled establishment journalists on the ground to be more forthcoming about the horrors of what is happening in Gaza.

Despite the serious intimidation faced by journalists,... such pressure seems to be working less and less. While ... a vigilant social media sphere combined with mass protests around the world has created a climate where if media institutions are to retain their credibility they have to at least appear to be balanced.”CONTINUED



The truth is that Israel is supporting the same "Terrorists" that are beheading individuals & Balkanizing the Mid East

Iran supports terrorism. They don't need our help.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Would you mind posting the publications/sources that claimed:

"Several technical studies of the force required show that a fraction of this country's air and naval power could destroy every one of them, as well as Iran's air defenses, and its ballistic missile sites and production facilities, in one fell swoop."


Thanks

http://csis.org/files/publication/120906_Iran_US_Preventive_Strikes.pdf

Here is one of them from 2012, from a well-regarded military analyst. I don't think the analysis has changed significantly since then. Cordesman had done similar studies before this, and both those and others I have seen over the years assumed somewhat different tactics. In particular, I question whether two B-2's would need to be assigned to each of the five main nuclear weapons facilities. That would be well over half the total number of B-2's the U.S. has available at a given time, and at least three times as many as the U.S. has ever used at once.

I also question whether strike planners would rely so heavily on manned aircraft to do what would probably be the very first task in any strike--incapacitating Iran's air defense network. Cruise missiles have been proven to be effective against aircraft in the open, runways, control towers, barracks, fuel tanks, and electric generating stations, as well as anti-aircraft missiles and the radars, control centers, communication cables, etc. they rely on. They do not put air crews in harm's way, can be launched from ships or subs 1,000 miles away, and are very hard to detect or defend against. There are probably some air defense targets it's better to attack with fighter-bombers--either because a cruise missile's 1,000 lb. warhead is not strong enough to destroy them, or for some other reason--but I would think the missiles could play a big part in the very first stages of an attack.

The most striking things about this analysis, to me, is that it considers that a strike by Israel might need to use nuclear weapons. The reason is that while the U.S. has a 30,000 lb. bomb capable of destroying the deeply buried centrifuge galleries at Fordow and the B-2's to deliver it, the heaviest ones Israel has are 5,000 lb. That is the largest single bomb its most capable aircraft, its 25 F-15-I's, can carry--but it probably would not be powerful enough to do the job on Fordow. But I am sure Israel will use whatever force is necessary to keep Tehran from getting the bomb, if the U.S. does not act. If there were absolutely no other way to destroy those centrifuges but to use a nuclear-armed missile, I think it would. It would put its survival first, and let other nations condemn as long and loud as they liked. Because the weapon would need to detonate at ground level, it would throw up huge amounts of irradiated soil. That would then drift back down as "fallout" that would be very harmful to anyone living downwind.
 
Last edited:
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Very true. A rotten apple is still very different from a rotten orange.

Anyone that holds an opposing view is a wacko link. Think Faux News. ;)
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Do America and Israel have a right to nuclear weapons?
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Do America and Israel have a right to nuclear weapons?

The NPT attempts to answer that question. For me, there's no such thing as a "right" to nukes. States either have them or they don't.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Do America and Israel have a right to nuclear weapons?

Conveniently ignored, while no nation has a right to such things, the poll could have been phrased better, it's whether or not a nation can do it, or if a stronger nation can prevent them. Who was going to prevent America from acquiring them, or who is going to take them away from us. Might makes right. As to Iran, people are keen to point out that they sponsor terrorism, well, that's too bad, but so does Saudi Arabia, Israel, the UK and many other ally's of ours, not to mention our own history of its use to advance our "interests". Americans tend to be very patronising.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

People spend way too much time concerned with "rights", which really don't exist. :shock:

Well, in that case, then neither does this.:

EarthTransitionsEquation.gif

It, too, is just a figment of someone's overactive imagination.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Do America and Israel have a right to nuclear weapons?

This isn't about equity or fairness, take that back to where it belongs--kindergarten.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

The NPT attempts to answer that question. For me, there's no such thing as a "right" to nukes. States either have them or they don't.
Agreed.
 
Back
Top Bottom