Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It does pose a small to moderate threat to U.S. and a moderate to great threat to our allies.
Not really. Iran has nothing to gain by attacking anyone. They know that if they started a war with Israel that we would jump in and rain bombs on them.
Iran is a fairly modern country (by middle East) standards. They have no desire to be blasted.
I mean, afterall, he made this bold statement that the whole world knows is a complete LIE.
So, WHEN, not IF, Iran develops a nuclear weapon, will you the loyal Obama supporter look back and ask yourself how you could allow yourself to be bamboozled yet again by this wolf in sheep's clothing?
No, what a ludicrous question. You are implying that if Iran were at some point to build a nuclear weapon it would be as a direct result of this deal.
That fact is that this deal is the best option we have to cut off Iran's pathways to build a nuclear weapon. It is not 100% guaranteed (and will require work from Obama's successor), but any other option like unilateral sanctions, or not doing the deal, or war would lead to Iran's bomb faster, and ensure that it would be more likely to use it.
You're absolutely right. The frightening aspect of an Iranian nuke is the lack of rationality of an extremist regime with beliefs based on radical Islam:
There is a critical flaw in making analogies between the radical Islamic regime in control of Iran with the other states that have nuclear weapons, including N. Korea. And rationality is the basic difference:
Bernard Lewis, professor emeritus of Princeton U., as well as many other experts, firmly believes a nuclear Islamic Republic would be a unique threat due the nature of the Shiite regime:
"There is a radical difference between the Islamic Republic of Iran and other governments with nuclear weapons. This difference is expressed in what can only be described as the apocalyptic worldview of Iran's present rulers. This worldview and expectation, vividly expressed in speeches, articles and even schoolbooks, clearly shape the perception and therefore the policies of Khomeini, Ahmadinejad and his disciples." That of course includes the current Supreme Leader.
Lewis goes on to explain that they fervently believe in the return of the 12th Imam, who will be ushered in as a result of an apocalypse:
"The most dangerous leaders in history are those like Hitler and the radicals in control of Iran, fueled by totalitarian ideologies and mystical belief systems. The regime leaders believe in the imminent return of 12th Imam, which they further believes they can hasten. They also sense that they have a personal responsibility to expedite the return of the Mahdi and is therefore preparing Iran for the apocalypse."
"Allah’s designated Mahdi is the only one who demands a violent path to conquer the world. The regime's leaders say they have a ‘signed contract’ with al Mahdi in which they pledge themselves to his work. What does this work involve? In light of concerns over Iran’s nuclear capabilities, they have stated numerous times, in one form or another, that Israel should be wiped off the map. Former president Achmadinajad spoke to the United Nations in September ’05. During that speech he claims to have been in an aura of light and felt a change in the atmosphere during which time no one present could blink their eyes. Iran’s PM also spoke in apocalyptic terms and seems to relish conflict with the West whom he calls the Great Satan. This is while he proclaims he must prepare the world for the coming Mahdi by way of a world totally under Muslim control. He is working hard to bring about the world-wide horrors that must be in place for their al Mahdi to bring peace." And he fervently believes in the return of the 12th Imam, who will be ushered in as a result of an apocalypse: 12th Imam
And this also explains why the concept of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction), the situation which existed between the US and the Soviet Union, has NO significance when it comes to radical Islam.
Yes it does in a way. We tell them and they know that if they Nuke Israel then we nuke them. Israel is gone and so is Iran but we are still here.
The OP said the deal in and of itself wont work, and then argued that the reasoning for that is that Iran cant be trusted.
While it may be true that they can not be trusted, that has nothing to do with the deal itself. if the deal is followed, Iran wont be able to build a nuke, it is that simple.
IOW in fairyland where Iran was an honorable government the deal would be fine. OK I agree.
But in reality, where we actually live, it isn't a good deal, because we KNOW (EVEN YOU KNOW) Iran can't be trusted to follow the deal. They are ALREADY up to shenanigans before its even official...
Are you even aware of the differences between the two agreements? You have found some brain dead meme from the internet, and because it fits nicely with your complete lack of understanding of this situation you post it like its supposed to mean something
Not really. Iran has nothing to gain by attacking anyone. They know that if they started a war with Israel that we would jump in and rain bombs on them.
Iran is a fairly modern country (by middle East) standards. They have no desire to be blasted.
The leaders are crazy, it is not a cost benefit analysis to them.
That is the scary part.
Let's just speculate that Iran gets a nuclear bomb, nothing as big as we have and they don't have icbms. Then they use said nuclear bomb as part of some religious fanaticism against some Western European country, something like putting it on a boat and sailing to a large port city and detonating it. It could be this current leadership, a rouge military leader, etc.
Do you think the western world would then use nuclear weapons in response? I don't.
No, what a ludicrous question. You are implying that if Iran were at some point to build a nuclear weapon it would be as a direct result of this deal.
That fact is that this deal is the best option we have to cut off Iran's pathways to build a nuclear weapon. It is not 100% guaranteed (and will require work from Obama's successor), but any other option like unilateral sanctions, or not doing the deal, or war would lead to Iran's bomb faster, and ensure that it would be more likely to use it.
You are severely confused. I in no way, shape, or form implied that this deal would be the reason Iran developed a nuclear bomb.
Are you even aware of the differences between the two agreements? You have found some brain dead meme from the internet, and because it fits nicely with your complete lack of understanding of this situation you post it like its supposed to mean something
The leaders are crazy, it is not a cost benefit analysis to them.
That is the scary part.
They didn't attack a country based upon false premises.
Quote:
Let's just speculate that Iran gets a nuclear bomb, nothing as big as we have and they don't have icbms. Then they use said nuclear bomb as part of some religious fanaticism against some Western European country, something like putting it on a boat and sailing to a large port city and detonating it. It could be this current leadership, a rouge military leader, etc.
Do you think the western world would then use nuclear weapons in response? I don't.
Being that the odds are slim to none on that happening, I see little to gain in the speculating what would happen.
They didn't attack a country based upon false premises.
Iran has been sponsoring terrorism for decades. They have also indicated they are willing to destroy other countries as well.
The scenario is very plausible and would be very easy to implement once a nuclear weapon is attained.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
