|
Iran joins nuclear technology club (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| EvilTree |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
The unfortunate reality with a country such as Iran, driven by ideology, is that they may believe their destruction to be fair trade for the advancement of their ideological beliefs. See, the cold war was about territory and people aren't willing to destroy the territory they already have in order to aquire more territory therefore the MAD theory works. Iran doesn't care about territory, they are driven by theology. People are willing to die for theology, and a theocratic country such as Iran could, conceivably, be willing to destroy itself for theology. |
I think you're wrong on this.
As much as they want to chant 'Insh'allah' and throw themselves at the infidels with a bomb strapped on them (no offence to moderate muslims), these people are not stupid.
I don't think these people are willing to sacrifice themselves to merely hurt US. Not to mention that the average Iranian have no desire to get themselves blown up because their politicians and generals did somethiing stupid to piss off US. |
|
|
| evil_cookie |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
The unfortunate reality with a country such as Iran, driven by ideology, is that they may believe their destruction to be fair trade for the advancement of their ideological beliefs.
Iran doesn't care about territory, they are driven by theology. People are willing to die for theology, and a theocratic country such as Iran could, conceivably, be willing to destroy itself for theology. |
rofl... |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by EvilTree
I think you're wrong on this.
As much as they want to chant 'Insh'allah' and throw themselves at the infidels with a bomb strapped on them (no offence to moderate muslims), these people are not stupid.
I don't think these people are willing to sacrifice themselves to merely hurt US. Not to mention that the average Iranian have no desire to get themselves blown up because their politicians and generals did somethiing stupid to piss off US. |
The average citizen does not have to have the desire... those in control of the weapon do. As this is a theocracy we're talking about its the clerics we need to be concerned with.
Your statement regarding the US is misguided as it is not the US they would be willing to sacrafice themselves for.... it's Isreal. Now, Isreal is a pretty small country with only a few densly populated areas.... it wouldn't take too many warheads to effectively take them out and allowing the Palistinians to recapture Palistine and with it the holy cites. Given the hatred between some sects of Islam and the Jews one would be completely misguided to ever think this is not a possibility.
BTW, suicide bombing is not an act of stupidity it is one of sacrafice, those strong in their faith can be very willing to sacrifice. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by evil_cookie
rofl... |
because it's repetative? |
|
|
| evil_cookie |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
because it's repetative? |
nope, because your perception on the topic is very shortsighted |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by evil_cookie
nope, because your perception on the topic is very shortsighted |
Granted, Iran has other concerns particularly a desire to establishing themselves as the regional power, however, these are secondary concerns. Their primary drive is ideological and their secondary motivations are more means to an ideological end then anything else. |
|
|
| evil_cookie |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Granted, Iran has other concerns particularly a desire to establishing themselves as the regional power, however, these are secondary concerns. Their primary drive is ideological and their secondary motivations are more means to an ideological end then anything else. |
I'm curious to know where this is coming from.Academic background? or...? |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by evil_cookie
I'm curious to know where this is coming from.Academic background? or...? |
BA in Political Science, minor in Military History. I focused on international relations quite a bit. |
|
|
| psychosomatica |
| quote: | Originally posted by EvilTree
Well, the threat of your country being turned into a parking lot if you ever use a nuke against another country is pretty good safe measure.
And having a nuke will certainly give 'inferior' powers same clout as the 'superior' powers? Unless a nation can develop strong enough conventional military to project its power globally (and only nation that can effectively do that is US atm) it's pointless having a nuke, other than for propaganda and deterring other nation from invading yours. Even then, using nuke for self defence will probably turn the entire world against you.
Unless a nation has economic power to back up its military power, it's pointless having a weapon that you'll mostly likely not use. (And bloody expensive too) Having a nuke doesn't give automatic economic advantages. (You can ask North Korea how that worked out for them) |
I'm sorry if I wasn't clear enough earlier. I don't think it is actually an equalizer in terms of economics or even military power. However, it IS seen as a sign of "power" and it would probably fulfil their own perception of having gained status. Probably the same for North Korea. I agree with your response to Moral Hazard's post. I don't think they're all dumb enough to die for this 'ideology' they preach. It's only a myth perpetuated by a few suicide bombers and what propagandists would tell you on "our" side in order to continue "The Long War" as it has been dubbed recently. Preventing them from such technology will only make them resent "us" more.
Moral Hazard: MAD was exactly what I was referring to. I just didn't express it explicitly. |
|
|
| Abercrombie |
| Any country who pledges the destruction or another country should not have to physical abililty to destroy it on a catastrophic level. |
|
|
| Shade |
| quote: | Originally posted by Abercrombie
Any country who pledges the destruction or another country should not have to physical abililty to destroy it on a catastrophic level. |
Couldn't have said that better. While they were on great terms before the revolution, the modern Iranian government has said that they are intent on taking Israel out; that being said, it's quite obvious they should not be in posession of anything that might make that easier.
As for the suicide bombing comment.. I don't really want to run on that tangent, but I find it strange that you say that the people who are highly religious are the ones who go out and commit suicide bombings. Not long ago I remember there was an article about someone whose family was at risk because there was a threat to harm the family if one of them didn't go and bomb Israel. There was also a situation where a kid was really scared and was supposed to execute the bomb, but was found extremely scared and had no want to bomb anything at all. The fanaticism of it all is ridiculous, and I'm not saying this is directly connected to Iran (though it's a fact that they do help fund such things), but Iran definitely would become a major danger to Israel as well as other countries if they were to take the opportunity to develop nuclear weapons. |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | Originally posted by drgoodvibe
You know what I can't understand? Maybe someone can clarify..
North Korea confirms, that it has Nuclear Weapons, nuclear technology and so on. Yet Iran that still has a long way to go in order to produce nuclear weapons causes the international community to stir.
Am I wrong, or hasn't North Korea been just as great a threat as Iran has to the international community?
Am I wrong, or hasn't North Korea effectively extorted, money, oil, food and etc.. by leveraging it's nuclear power from the U.S and other countries?
Am I wrong, or doesn't the international community seem a bit hypocritical by using diplomacy with North Korea and force with Iran? |
Here's why:
 |
|
|
|
|
