Come on already, Iran!

[The Last Conformist]

Israel has already hinted they might need "neutralize" Bushehr and other installations. Unfortunately for you, I can't be bothered to find an article about it ATM.

 

[SeleucusNicator]

The cause of dissuading Iran from building nuclear weapons is not helped, and is in fact hindered by refusing to acknowledge Iran's right to develop nuclear power. The best and only realistic means of exerting pressure on Iran is through international law, regardless of your disdain for it. Iran's reluctance to engage with the IAEA is only boosted by US hostility to a legal non-military nuclear programme. There's no conflict in acknowledging the right to a peaceful nuclear programme while opposing via all necessary means a nuclear weapons programme, as laid out in the non-proliferation treaty.

Do you think the US approach actually aids the cause of dissuading Iran, or are you resigned to the innevitability of a future conflict that would plunge the region into further chaos?

The latter. Regimes such as the Iranian theocracy (isn't it amusing to see Curt take the side of religionists?) are not trustworthy when it comes to agreements on such things Again, look at the farce North Korea turned out to be.

 

[CurtSibling]

I have to agree with SN, the Iranians are too flaky to have that power at the moment.

Never trust fundie religionists with nukes.

Unrestricted development will lead to disaster -
If not from Iran proper, then from some dodgy client who buys some nuke material...

 

[CenturionV]

The Iranian despots will never agree to any foreign armed forces having that degree of authority in their nation. Even if forces or inspectors were allowed in, they could easily be led around and fooled; look at North Korea.

Past experienced has shown the folly of working with and trusting such regimes.

Yes, then our only choice is to either, destroy all nations with intentions of building WMD, or to formulate an effective defense against WMD.

Its not like we only need protection from our enemies, for all we know 50 years down the line we will need them against our allies, I small revolution in a nuclear equipped country supported by the military is all it takes to turn a freedom loving ally, in to a evil nuclear equipped dictatorship.

 

[SeleucusNicator]

And SeleucusNicator, actions by them will get Hizbollah to give them trouble, fire up the Palestinians, piss off Muslims in general, and perhaps cause Iran to launch something nasty at them.

Palestinian terrorism aided by Iran and Hezbullah is nothing new. Israel has been hit with it before and has survived.

The Iranian regime is not insane enough to get into a WMD contest with Israel.

 

[Perfection]

The Iranian despots will never agree to any foreign armed forces having that degree of authority in their nation. Even if forces or inspectors were allowed in, they could easily be led around and fooled; look at North Korea.

That's why we help build the plants, it ensures they are used for peaceful purposes, the international forces would be stationed near the plant as international security, if they protest, invite them to do the same in other nations! I wouldn't mind an international force around every nuclear plant in the world. Throw in some Iranians and that's fine with me.

 

[CenturionV]

I'm sure the americans would enjoy iranian military personal "guarding" there nuclear powerplants in highly populated areas.

 

[sabo]

I am getting very excited about Iran's developing nuclear programs!!!



"The Islamic Republic has never been guilty of blackmail or made concessions on minor issues and with more reason will not be compelled to give concessions on the more important issue of technology to produce nuclear energy."

The most efficient energy!!! Yeah!

ummm did you forget about the 50 americans taken hostage from the embassy in Iran? The recently captured american that the extremists plan to execute if the US doesn't release certain muslims in prison? Al-queda's attack on the world trade center because american had troups in Saudi Arabia? The first attack in 1991 on the WTC because of America's ties with Isreal? It all smells like blackmail to me. One thing I hope these extremists will understand one day is Americans do not cave in to blackmail, it just pisses us off more.

 

[BassDude726]

All I can say is, it's unfortunate that Iran most likely will develop nuclear power whether we want them to or not. I have nothing against the Iranian people and don't think it's fair to deprive them of the technology other nations enjoy, but the fact is, the Middle East is far FAR too unstable to allow that technology to proliferate there. The US used old plutonium from reactors to make weapons back in the day, and having a source of such material would be like sending an invitation to terrorists to get their hands on some. They wouldn't be able to make a high-quality or very powerful nuke with it, but a nuke is a nuke. It wouldn't matter how good the security would be at those plants, either. The information, technology, and possibly the materials would get out some way or another, and we could very well have a Sum of All Fears-type scenario occur.

 

[SeleucusNicator]

Yes, then our only choice is to either, destroy all nations with intentions of building WMD, or to formulate an effective defense against WMD.

Its not like we only need protection from our enemies, for all we know 50 years down the line we will need them against our allies, I small revolution in a nuclear equipped country supported by the military is all it takes to turn a freedom loving ally, in to a evil nuclear equipped dictatorship.

Well, we don't have to worry about Western Europe and Russia because MAD applies there. Nor do I think leaders there are insane enough to get into any nuclear war. Heck, the way European culture is going, it may soon be more acceptable for them to molest small children than it is to even say the word "nuke".

Pakistan and India do not have the range to hit the United States and, with their conflict being regional (Pakistan having nukes as a deterrant against India, India having them as a deterrant against China and Pakistan) probably won't be investing in long-range missiles anytime soon. China has a relatively small nuclear arsenal compared to the US and Russia (about 300 or so, maybe closer to 600 now) and I think our best bet with China is to keep very good intelligence on where those nukes are being kept and develop systems (spaced-based weapons and the such) to locate and destroy those nukes asap in case of a conflict.

A shield is only useful against rogue states that have only a handful of nukes. Russia or China could simply launch their entire arsenal at us and have our shield be overwhelmed.

 

[Perfection]

I'm sure the americans would enjoy iranian military personal "guarding" there nuclear powerplants in highly populated areas.

2 Iranians out of a force of say 60 or 70 will not be a problem. Besides, it's not like security goes into the reactor or gets to fiddle with the controls or anything!

 

[The Last Conformist]

Doesn't India have a space programme?

 

[SeleucusNicator]

Doesn't India have a space programme?

Fledgling at best.

 

[Enkidu Warrior]

Nukes != nuclear power

Nuclear power plants can be built which perform excellently as power stations but are useless in weapons development.

It's important to learn from NK, but remember that NK already had their own weapon making reactors which were merely frozen in exchange for the building of harmless nuclear reactors. If these reactors had been put beyond use in exchange for the harmless reactors then it would have given us a great deal of notice when NK withdrew from the NPT.

I'm not 100% optimistic that Iran can be dissuaded, but if they can then the way forward is to engage with the Iranians and welcome a properly monitered nuclear programme that cannot be put into weapons production at a moments notice. If Iran doesn't play ball at least it will expose them to the international community, including those that would otherwise remain sceptical.

 

[El Sop]

The Iranian regime is not insane enough to get into a WMD contest with Israel.

Well, we don't have to worry about Western Europe and Russia because MAD applies there. Nor do I think leaders there are insane enough to get into any nuclear war.

Makes me wonder which leaders of what country ARE insane enough then?

 

[The Last Conformist]

Fledgling at best.

That would nonetheles mean they've got the intention of building ICBMs.

 

[SeleucusNicator]

If Iran doesn't play ball at least it will expose them to the international community, including those that would otherwise remain sceptical.

Anyone trusting Iran right now is not doing so because they are naieve and are open to changing their minds. They are doing it because they view aiding Iran is in their best interest (mostly because it harms the United States) and will continue to be Iranian apologists regardless of the facts.

 

[Enkidu Warrior]

Heck, the way European culture is going, it may soon be more acceptable for them to molest small children than it is to even say the word "nuke".

Even given you're usual hostility towards Europe, that was below you.

 

[Perfection]

Anyone trusting Iran right now is not doing so because they are naieve and are open to changing their minds. They are doing it because they view aiding Iran is in their best interest (mostly because it harms the United States) and will continue to be Iranian apologists regardless of the facts.

That's why you get the international community to help fund and build it. If we make nuclear energy a worldwide cooperative program the results will be beneficial!

 

[The Last Conformist]

And that would be different from IAEA and associated treaties how?