Iran and Absurdity

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • PeterSibley
    Senior Member
    • Dec 2001
    • 70993

    Iran and Absurdity

    I've just been listening to President Bush berating Iran for trying to develop nuclear weapons .My guess is that Iran feels that such weapons might prove useful as a deterrent to an attack or invasion ...they may well be right .

    So is a country entitled to develop such weaponry as it needs to defend itself or do the current owners of such weapons have the right to stop others doing what they did themselves ?

    Does such a right depend on whether we like them or not ?
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead
  • seanz
    Resilient?
    • Nov 2006
    • 23662

    #2
    Re: Iran and Absurdity

    Just a bit of light reading......



    Since very few of the nuclear weapons states and states using nuclear reactors for energy generation are willing to completely abandon possession of nuclear fuel, the third pillar of the NPT under Article IV provides other states with the possibility to do the same, but under conditions intended to make it difficult to develop nuclear weapons.
    The treaty recognizes the inalienable right of sovereign states to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, but restricts this right for NPT parties to be exercised "in conformity with Articles I and II" (the basic nonproliferation obligations that constitute the "first pillar" of the Treaty). As the commercially popular light water reactor nuclear power station uses enriched uranium fuel, it follows that states must be able either to enrich uranium or purchase it on an international market. Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, has called the spread of enrichment and reprocessing capabilities the "Achilles' heel" of the nuclear nonproliferation regime. As of 2007 13 states have an enrichment capability.
    Countries that have signed the treaty as Non-Nuclear Weapons States and maintained that status have an unbroken record of not building nuclear weapons. However, Iraq was cited by the IAEA and sanctioned by the UN Security Council for violating its NPT safeguards obligations; North Korea never came into compliance with its NPT safeguards agreement and was cited repeatedly for these violations, and later withdrew from the NPT and tested a nuclear device; Iran violated its NPT safeguards obligations by pursuing a clandestine enrichment program for nearly two decades; and Libya pursued a clandestine nuclear weapons program before abandoning it in December 2003. In 1991 Romania reported previously undeclared nuclear activities by the former regime and the IAEA reported this non-compliance to the Security Council for information only. In some regions, the fact that all neighbors are verifiably free of nuclear weapons reduces any pressure individual states might feel to build those weapons themselves, even if neighbors are known to have peaceful nuclear energy programs that might otherwise be suspicious. In this, the treaty works as designed.
    Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has said that by some estimates thirty-five to forty states could have the knowledge to acquire nuclear weapons.
    It might be worth noting Iran's position in the geographical sense, most of their neighbors are nuclear armed. Pakistan did not sign the NPT, the Russians aren't far away and Iraq is occupied by an foreign power that just loves nuclear weapons.........do the Iranians want Nukes? Who could blame them?
    We don't know how lucky we are....

    Comment

    • PeterSibley
      Senior Member
      • Dec 2001
      • 70993

      #3
      Re: Iran and Absurdity

      [quote=The Bigfella;1866389

      Quite frankly, I'd like to see a lot more "world's policeman" activity on this one. Its got a lot more potential to seriously stuff up the future for your grandkids than does climate change.[/quote]

      That ,I seriously doubt , but it's another conversation .

      So is a country entitled to develop such weaponry as it needs to defend itself or do the current owners of such weapons have the right to stop others doing what they did themselves ?

      Is the question I posed .I agree that there are too many weapons but the right to self defence seems another matter ,MAD was what kept the peace through the Cold War , perhaps MAD is a way to a peace in the ME .The US and Australia seem quite happy to sell uranium to India ...who has no intention of signing the NNPT.It seems like double standards to me .
      '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
      Grateful Dead

      Comment

      • WX
        Uki NSW Australia
        • Feb 2002
        • 35918

        #4
        Re: Iran and Absurdity

        I see the US and Iraq are having problems over just how much power the US should have in Iraq, not to mention how long the US is planning to stay in Iraq. I'm sure the US would like to use Iraq as a springboard for it"s...possible invasion of Iran. Something the Iraqi's are totally opposed to....what's the bet they don't get much say in it.
        Without freedom of speech, we wouldn't know who the idiots are.

        Comment

        • C. Ross
          Senior Member
          • May 2007
          • 14155

          #5
          Re: Iran and Absurdity

          When NPT was ratified, only five countries were known to have nuclear weapons: US, USSR, China, France, UK. Since then many more have joined the club despite NPT.

          Is it totally hypocritical for those in the club to oppose new members? Yes.

          Is it a good idea to have more states with nuclear weapons? No. With the sole exception of the uneasy standoffs between US and USSR and USSR and China, I don't think there's any "proof" that MAD creates stability or diplomacy.

          Specifically, would Iran having the bomb promote peace and stability in the Middle East? Absolutely not. Iran has tacitly and overtly declared destruction of Israel as state policy over 30 years. Any nation with such a policy has no place owning WMDs, and it makes sense for the world policemen, per Ian's comments, to deter them.

          Comment

          • JBreeze
            Senior Member
            • Apr 2007
            • 1874

            #6
            Re: Iran and Absurdity

            Israel has 150-200 nukes. Has it signed the NPT? Does having the nukes promote stability in the mid-east?

            I can almost see Iran's point of view.....within striking distance of US, Russia, India, Pakistan and Israel...when was the last time Iran invaded another country?

            Comment

            • S/V Laura Ellen
              Neither Fair nor Balanced
              • Oct 2003
              • 9384

              #7
              Re: Iran and Absurdity

              Originally posted by C. Ross
              Any nation with such a policy has no place owning WMDs, ...
              Any nation that has used a WMD against another nation in an act of aggression has no place owning WMDs.
              Allan of the Grove
              "never send a ferret to do a weasel's job.."

              Comment

              • C. Ross
                Senior Member
                • May 2007
                • 14155

                #8
                Re: Iran and Absurdity

                Israel did not sign NPT. Neither did India, Pakistan, or North Korea. I don't think Israel having nuclear weapons is a good thing. Clearly their conventional military strength was one of the reasons that led to Camp David accords, though.

                Allan, I assume you're referring to US use of bombs against Japan, perhaps among other examples of WMD use. The post-war debate on nuclear weapons was pretty interesting, with the US toying with renouncing them altogether. That ended when the USSR built their first.

                C'mon guys, is anyone serious that the world would be a better place if Ahmadinejad has nuclear weapons?

                Comment

                • S/V Laura Ellen
                  Neither Fair nor Balanced
                  • Oct 2003
                  • 9384

                  #9
                  Re: Iran and Absurdity

                  Originally posted by C. Ross
                  Allan, I assume you're referring to US use of bombs against Japan, perhaps among other examples of WMD use.
                  Not specifically just the US, but yes they would be on the list.
                  Allan of the Grove
                  "never send a ferret to do a weasel's job.."

                  Comment

                  • JBreeze
                    Senior Member
                    • Apr 2007
                    • 1874

                    #10
                    Re: Iran and Absurdity

                    May was the 100th anniversary of the discovery of oil in Iran...you might think Iran would be an extremely wealthy, propsperous country by now, especially considering their geographic location on the Straits.

                    Maybe they are tired of 100 years of the West's meddling in their affairs. Having nukes would probably not be a good thing from the POV of the West, but inflaming the situation last week was Olmert's flunkies stating the nuclear ambitions of Iran must be destroyed, as well as US plans for permanent bases in neighboring Iraq. What would you do?

                    Can't we just pay for the stuff and leave them alone?

                    Comment

                    • Rigadog
                      Senior Member
                      • Apr 2007
                      • 4514

                      #11
                      Re: Iran and Absurdity

                      I have actually heard that Iran needs Nuclear power. They sell so much oil and natural gas to get currency (they don't produce much else except Pistacios , and rugs), that they don't have a lot left over for power.
                      If he ever drinks the brew of 10 tanna leaves, he will become a monster the likes of which the world has never seen


                      Comment

                      • LeeG
                        Senior Member
                        • May 2002
                        • 72781

                        #12
                        Re: Iran and Absurdity

                        ditto, using nuclear power for generation of electricity and making money from selling oil makes sense. I think more of Irans natural gas will go for exports to china.

                        Comment

                        • Frank Wentzel
                          Senior Member #935
                          • Dec 1999
                          • 787

                          #13
                          Re: Iran and Absurdity

                          I don't like the idea of Iran having the bomb any more than I like North Korea having it. But to look at it from their point of view:
                          1) The chimperor stated that he has the right to invade anybody he wants to.
                          2) We have already deposed a legal government in Iran and installed a dictatator (the Shah).

                          What should Iran expect from the US? How can they have any security from the US without the bomb? I don't like Iran's stated policy about Israel, but with Israel having over 100 nukes I don't see Iran trying to implement that policy with or without their own nukes.

                          I don't have a solution to this conundrum but I think we need to look at it in more detail. We have just had a great learning experience of the ineffectiveness of "military might" as a problem solving method.

                          A side note: It is considered that a major cause of the meltdown of the USSR was caused by the attempted military buildup during the Reagan years and the resultant economic collapse. How close is the US to the same situation?

                          /// Frank ///

                          Comment

                          • Syed
                            Member
                            • Oct 2006
                            • 5607

                            #14
                            Re: Iran and Absurdity

                            Originally posted by C. Ross
                            C'mon guys, is anyone serious that the world would be a better place if Ahmadinejad has nuclear weapons?
                            The world would be a better place if no country has nuclear weapons.

                            Comment

                            • carioca1232001
                              Senior Member
                              • Nov 2003
                              • 5142

                              #15
                              Re: Iran and Absurdity

                              Originally posted by Syed
                              The world would be a better place if no country has nuclear weapons.
                              Why just nuclear weapons ?

                              How about no weapons at all ?.......

                              We´d then be left with......... what our wives weild when they are fraught with despair .............. piping-hot kitchen utensils .....!

                              Comment

                              Working...