If Iran feels they need nukes, who could blame them?

[Charles]

Originally Posted by merrylander

So you are worried about your neighbors and for self protection you plan on installing a 1000 tons of TNT about your house. Just pray you don't accidentally set it off cause you are going up with all the neighborhood.

Using an A or H bomb in that area means that there will be so much radioactive fallout downwind that y'all will be able to use the average citizen as a nightlight.

Yup, what's good for the goose is good for the gander has nothing to do with it.

The world will be better off if the Middle East doesn't furnish any more members to the nuclear club.

And it doesn't really matter how intelligent the Iranians are. The Japs and the Krauts weren't a bunch of dummies, and look where they took us.

Chas

[neophyte]

Originally Posted by Charles

Yup, what's good for the goose is good for the gander has nothing to do with it.

The world will be better off if the Middle East doesn't furnish any more members to the nuclear club.

And it doesn't really matter how intelligent the Iranians are. The Japs and the Krauts weren't a bunch of dummies, and look where they took us.

Chas

Just a wild guess, but, I'm thinking that you aren't Iranian, and probably don't give two shits about them, or their rights as a sovereign nation. It is unreasonable to expect them to feel this way about themselves and their nation of origin. Contrary to what most Americans seem to believe, we haven't the right, let alone some contrived moral imperative to dictate terms to other countries, even though we've done it since the end of WW2.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by neophyte

Just a wild guess, but, I'm thinking that you aren't Iranian, and probably don't give two shits about them, or their rights as a sovereign nation. It is unreasonable to expect them to feel this way about themselves and their nation of origin. Contrary to what most Americans seem to believe, we haven't the right, let alone some contrived moral imperative to dictate terms to other countries, even though we've done it since the end of WW2.

Yes on the first two queries, no on the third.

As to the rest, I agree in theory but not in practice.

I don't see how a nuclear armed Iran will be beneficial to anyone. Take a good look at the Mullahs running things over there, they make our theocratic "cheeses" look as though they possess the wisdom of Saul by comparison.

Ain't right or wrong. Ain't good or bad. It's like the Kraut called it..."realpolitik".

If the USA can use it's influence to prevent the Mullahs from possessing nukes, or better yet, let the Iranians proper rule their county...what's wrong with that?

Other than getting in a shooting war during the process.

Chas

[neophyte]

If the USA can use it's influence to prevent the Mullahs from possessing nukes, or better yet, let the Iranians proper rule their county...what's wrong with that?

so, in the spirit of the whole good for the goose, good for the gander thing, I take it you'd have no problem with Iranian nationals/zealots coming over here and doing same? Dictating terms to us regarding our national defense and military postures?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Charles

I don't see how a nuclear armed Iran will be beneficial to anyone....

... other than the Iranians themselves (in their view). Exactly what is it that keeps us pussyfooting around Pakistan other than their nukes?

Do I like it that they have them (or are trying to develop them)? No. Do I blame them for doing so? No.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by neophyte

so, in the spirit of the whole good for the goose, good for the gander thing, I take it you'd have no problem with Iranian nationals/zealots coming over here and doing same? Dictating terms to us regarding our national defense and military postures?

Ah, but this is where the dominant dog factor comes onto play. They are not over here, dictating to us----Because we are the dominant dog.

Now, on many occasions, I have expressed a desire to have my country stop trying to run the world, myself. Personally, I'd love to see us protect no one but ourselves and nothing but our own shores. And, the closer we can get to this goal, the happier I'd be.

But, that's a hard goal to acheive when sworn enemies are building bombs with your name on them.

Dave

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

Ah, but this is where the dominant dog factor comes onto play. They are not over here, dictating to us----Because we are the dominant dog.

Now, on many occasions, I have expressed a desire to have my country stop trying to run the world, myself. Personally, I'd love to see us protect no one but ourselves and nothing but our own shores. And, the closer we can get to this goal, the happier I'd be.

But, that's a hard goal to acheive when sworn enemies are building bombs with your name on them.

Dave

It all makes New Zealand seem more and more desirable.

[neophyte]

they have nearly a century of meddling, manipulation and exploitation on which to build a solid foundation of hate for America and Great Britain, and they have done. Anyone remotely familiar with these circumstances, coupled with a remarkable grasp for the obvious gets why we are there sworn enemies. We made this bed, and now we lay in it.

Ah, but this is where the dominant dog factor comes onto play. They are not over here, dictating to us----Because we are the dominant dog.

Iran has deduced,very correctly, the fact that they become a dog much less likely to be fucked with if they have nukes. They might not become the alpha male right away, but, they will immediately become a dog to be very, very wary of.

[finnbow]

What many Americans fail to realize is that the animus of the Iranians against the US is based upon our (with Britain's assistance) orchestrating a coup against their first democratically elected leader in 1953. They don't "hate us because of our freedoms," as the GOP would have you believe. It has much more to do with us deposing their democratically elected leader so that we could maintain control over their oil, while installing the Shah and his very nasty secret police, SAVAK. It could be very easily argued that we're responsible for the Ayatollahs ultimately taking control.

[Bigerik]

Originally Posted by finnbow

What many Americans fail to realize is that the animus of the Iranians against the US is based upon our (with Britain's assistance) orchestrating a coup against their first democratically elected leader in 1953. They don't "hate us because of our freedoms," as the GOP would have you believe. It has much more to do with us deposing their democratically elected leader so that we could maintain control over their oil, while installing the Shah and his very nasty secret police, SAVAK. It could be very easily argued that we're responsible for the Ayatollahs ultimately taking control.

I thought I posted at length about that recently. Didn't seem to sink in that time. Hopefully it will this time.