Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Yamato

Iran's President: We'll Never Build Nuke

102 posts in this topic

WASHINGTON (AP) — Iranian President Hasan Rouhani said Wednesday that his country has never sought and will never seek a nuclear bomb, telling NBC News in an interview that he has full authority to resolve a standoff with the West.

Rouhani spoke to the American television network in Tehran just days before he is to make his first appearance as president on the world stage when he attends the United Nations General Assembly in New York. U.S. officials will be watching next week's visit closely for signs that Rouhani will warm relations with the West and take a more moderate line in the next negotiations on Iran's disputed nuclear program.

http://news.yahoo.com/irans-president-never-seek-nuclear-bomb-235816635--politics.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iranian leaders have been saying that all along. The vast majority of Iranian people don't want nuclear weapons . They never have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were his fingers crossed?...

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were seeking a nucleur weapon the question is what would you hope to achieve with it? Annihilation? There is no guarantee deploying it will render all your enemies ineffective, infact the logical conclusion is that you will create many new enemies and make enemies of friends to boot.

I can't see the win for Iran in spending money on nucleur weapons which will simply increase their chances of one day being annihilated by someone because they have them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were seeking a nucleur weapon the question is what would you hope to achieve with it? Annihilation? There is no guarantee deploying it will render all your enemies ineffective, infact the logical conclusion is that you will create many new enemies and make enemies of friends to boot.

I can't see the win for Iran in spending money on nucleur weapons which will simply increase their chances of one day being annihilated by someone because they have them.

Every nation which possesses them does so to defend against being annihilated by others who possess them. And for the "prestige" for lack of a better term, that they bring. I think that few serious people today will deny that Iran has it's finger prints on global terrorism and that it sponsors some of the worst of the worst offenders. But all of that PALES when you look at the mindset of the Theocratic leaders of this nation. They regularly ignore what "most of the people" want. They believe that their messiah will come from his place of hiding in a well at the Jamkharan (sp) mosque and will settle all the world's troubles by destroying every soul that does not submit to Islam. They believe that this "savior" will only come to them when the world is in total chaos and filled with war. So I ask you seriously - do you believe the leaders are lying when they preach this or do you believe they are lying when they say they do not want nukes? Do you feel that these octogenarian Islamic scholars are just pragmatic politicians in the western mold? Even if they are hippocrites and used the power these weapons bring to bolster their own dominance like any western leader might, do you really want the stability (what little is left) of western economies to rest on their whims? I no longer care to try to convince anyone of the true intentions of these people. It doesn't really matter what anyone else believes anyway. But when they test or announce they have assembled (more likely) such weapons then the world is forever changed. The same people who argue for their peaceful intent now will probably be the same ones who argue to give them what they demand lest the mad b******* nuke someone.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Iran used the nuclear technology to build a nuclear weapon, they'd use it as a deterrent..

I'm opposed to nuclear weapons in principle. I believe their use is despicable.

While nuclear technology is advantageous in many respects, we can see it is possible to become disastrous.

Just look at Fukushima or Chernobyl.

I take any thing Iran says with a grain of salt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iranian leaders have been saying that all along. The vast majority of Iranian people don't want nuclear weapons . They never have.

The vast majority of American apparently did not (and do not) want the Affordable Heath Care Act, aka Obamacare, but we still got it. And if the Iranian mullahs want nuclear weapons I have a feeling it will be the people be damned.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ohh that's alright then!

nothing to worry about, after all it's not as if they lie or anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The vast majority of American apparently did not (and do not) want the Affordable Heath Care Act, aka Obamacare, but we still got it. And if the Iranian mullahs want nuclear weapons I have a feeling it will be the people be damned.

Excellent comparison.

You hit the nail on the head.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent comparison.

You hit the nail on the head.

I agree. And I also think that Obama thinks he has Netanyahu cowed but it only seems so. IF Israel really believes the "existential threat" rhetoric then it won't surprise me if the bombs start falling this Autumn. OBY has made it unmistakably clear that he will do nothing if Iran declares themselves a nuclear weapons state.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, ok Iran, and Sarah Palin can see Russia from her house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. And I also think that Obama thinks he has Netanyahu cowed but it only seems so. IF Israel really believes the "existential threat" rhetoric then it won't surprise me if the bombs start falling this Autumn. OBY has made it unmistakably clear that he will do nothing if Iran declares themselves a nuclear weapons state.

Iran and Israel's relationship is rocky, that's for sure.

I don't think it would get any easier if Iran continued their nuclear research, only to end up with a fully capable nuclear bomb.

Netanyahu, despite his strained relationship with Obama at times, probably wouldn't hesitate to ask for help.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was certainly a ray of sunshine..

Let's see what Hassan Rouhani has to say at his upcoming trip to the UN..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iran and Israel's relationship is rocky, that's for sure.

I don't think it would get any easier if Iran continued their nuclear research, only to end up with a fully capable nuclear bomb.

Netanyahu, despite his strained relationship with Obama at times, probably wouldn't hesitate to ask for help.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was certainly a ray of sunshine..

Let's see what Hassan Rouhani has to say at his upcoming trip to the UN..

I suspect Rowhani will be full of sunshine and willing to talk over everything. That's the point now - take as much time talking as is possible so that when the real pressure starts they can breakout and assemble several weapons in a couple or three months. Possibly even a few weeks. Assembling a weapon is no huge hurdle compared to enriching enough fissile fuel. I believe Iran will have their bomb (s). Israel will balk at the last moment and then we will be able to see just what the mullahs and ayatollahs really want. Imagine the North Koreans except with their fingers on the world's oil jugular. And WHO will stand against them then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect Rowhani will be full of sunshine and willing to talk over everything. That's the point now - take as much time talking as is possible so that when the real pressure starts they can breakout and assemble several weapons in a couple or three months. Possibly even a few weeks. Assembling a weapon is no huge hurdle compared to enriching enough fissile fuel. I believe Iran will have their bomb (s). Israel will balk at the last moment and then we will be able to see just what the mullahs and ayatollahs really want. Imagine the North Koreans except with their fingers on the world's oil jugular. And WHO will stand against them then?

The best stalling tactic is a wide grin, the twiddling of thumbs, all whilst whistling an innocent hum.

The only purpose of Iran having a bomb, in the way I see it, is to use it.

I mentioned they could use it as a deterrent, but do they really want to deter or engage in hostilities?

It's no shock to every one that Israel has a huge target on it. Every one in that region views them as the kid with lice.

Good point.. He who controls the oil controls the capital.

A lot of people have speculated a hypothetical World War III, at least in a conventional war sense, would take place in the Middle-East.

What would it be over? The last remaining drops of oil that our modern societies were built around.

Too bad we built ourselves into a brick wall..

I suspect the United States would issue some 'red line' statement to Iran..

Whether or not the leadership would have the gall to back it up is another topic entirely.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. And I also think that Obama thinks he has Netanyahu cowed but it only seems so. IF Israel really believes the "existential threat" rhetoric then it won't surprise me if the bombs start falling this Autumn. OBY has made it unmistakably clear that he will do nothing if Iran declares themselves a nuclear weapons state.

I have never seen a more uncomfortable meeting then the face-to-face Netanyahu had with Obama a year or so ago, the animosity in the room was so thick you could cut it with a knife. And if I were Netanyahu I wouldn't trust Obama regarding Iran. Imagine the United States was the size of say, New York state, and Canada was intent on destroying us, was building a nuclear arsenal and had said it was their intention wipe us off the map. Then imagine some country in the EU, far removed from the daily threat, was trying to dictate policy to the U.S. Now you have a rough idea of what Israel is dealing with. Iran's former president made it clear what he had in mind for Israel. I would not blame them for launching a preemptive strike on the Iranian nuclear facilities, however I don't know the likelihood of success with most of the facilities deep underground and scattered around the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best stalling tactic is a wide grin, the twiddling of thumbs, all whilst whistling an innocent hum.

The only purpose of Iran having a bomb, in the way I see it, is to use it.

I mentioned they could use it as a deterrent, but do they really want to deter or engage in hostilities?

It's no shock to every one that Israel has a huge target on it. Every one in that region views them as the kid with lice.

Good point.. He who controls the oil controls the capital.

A lot of people have speculated a hypothetical World War III, at least in a conventional war sense, would take place in the Middle-East.

What would it be over? The last remaining drops of oil that our modern societies were built around.

Too bad we built ourselves into a brick wall..

I suspect the United States would issue some 'red line' statement to Iran..

Whether or not the leadership would have the gall to back it up is another topic entirely.

Somehow I think Iran wound now consider our "red line" a hollow threat.

Not to worry, I'm sure Vlad can negotiate for us.....

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somehow I think Iran wound now consider our "red line" a hollow threat.

Not to worry, I'm sure Vlad can negotiate for us.....

I'm going to have to agree with you, unfortunately.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never seen a more uncomfortable meeting then the face-to-face Netanyahu had with Obama a year or so ago, the animosity in the room was so thick you could cut it with a knife. And if I were Netanyahu I wouldn't trust Obama regarding Iran. Imagine the United States was the size of say, New York state, and Canada was intent on destroying us, was building a nuclear arsenal and had said it was their intention wipe us off the map. Then imagine some country in the EU, far removed from the daily threat, was trying to dictate policy to the U.S. Now you have a rough idea of what Israel is dealing with. Iran's former president made it clear what he had in mind for Israel. I would not blame them for launching a preemptive strike on the Iranian nuclear facilities, however I don't know the likelihood of success with most of the facilities deep underground and scattered around the country.

I agree - and doubt that anything other than a delay could be gained. And for that we would see worldwide spike in terrorism against western targets and possibly open warfare in the region. So why do it? Because to NOT do it will mean much worse loss eventually. I really believe that if Britain and the US had both joined with Poland at the beginning of WWII and Hitler had realized he would be resisted then he would have satisfied himself with much less and the world would have been saved much of the trauma and loss of that war. But people did not want to face the truth until they were forced to. We are doing exactly the same thing now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree - and doubt that anything other than a delay could be gained. And for that we would see worldwide spike in terrorism against western targets and possibly open warfare in the region. So why do it? Because to NOT do it will mean much worse loss eventually. I really believe that if Britain and the US had both joined with Poland at the beginning of WWII and Hitler had realized he would be resisted then he would have satisfied himself with much less and the world would have been saved much of the trauma and loss of that war. But people did not want to face the truth until they were forced to. We are doing exactly the same thing now.

It was a gamble to let that madman get what he wanted.

We all know the unfortunate consequences.

Israel seems a bit miffed that Iran and the US are talking peacefully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to have to agree with you, unfortunately.

Yes, rather sad we have farmed out our foreign policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, rather sad we have farmed out our foreign policy.

To the military industrial complex, the oil industry, Christian militants, the Zionists, Wilsonian liberals and their compatriots the "neoconservatives". There's so many asinine political/religious groups in this country all stoking the fear-aid and promoting the next great war in the Middle East we wind up with looking The Fool in front of the world threatening missile attacks over red lines from a selective group of listeners. We've been bombing the Middle East unconstitutionally for over a decade and the first wisp of doing something differently and you say we're farming it out? As opposed to what? The special interest groups in Washington?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never seen a more uncomfortable meeting then the face-to-face Netanyahu had with Obama a year or so ago, the animosity in the room was so thick you could cut it with a knife. And if I were Netanyahu I wouldn't trust Obama regarding Iran. Imagine the United States was the size of say, New York state, and Canada was intent on destroying us, was building a nuclear arsenal and had said it was their intention wipe us off the map. Then imagine some country in the EU, far removed from the daily threat, was trying to dictate policy to the U.S. Now you have a rough idea of what Israel is dealing with. Iran's former president made it clear what he had in mind for Israel. I would not blame them for launching a preemptive strike on the Iranian nuclear facilities, however I don't know the likelihood of success with most of the facilities deep underground and scattered around the country.

The last military grade (which can be used for many other things as well) uranium that went to Iran it went to a civilian research facility and the bulk of it was consumed there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

poor old Obama's guns seem to be being (literally) spiked everywhere, don't they. Perhaps South America might provide a more fruitful ground for spreading Freedom, since the Middle East seems to be conspiring to deny him an excuse for military Intervention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somehow I think Iran wound now consider our "red line" a hollow threat.

Not to worry, I'm sure Vlad can negotiate for us.....

But the very fact that America had for so long used Military Intervention as the first tool of its foreign policy meant that it had had no credibility for, well, since long before Bush came to power. Its credibility was purely the credibility of the bully. Perhaps if it's no longer able to threaten everywhere with the Big Stick, and has to go back to old fashioned ideas like diplomacy (although that would mean actually having some diplomats), it might actually get some more credibility rather than just everywhere being afraid of it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were seeking a nucleur weapon the question is what would you hope to achieve with it? Annihilation? There is no guarantee deploying it will render all your enemies ineffective, infact the logical conclusion is that you will create many new enemies and make enemies of friends to boot.

I can't see the win for Iran in spending money on nucleur weapons which will simply increase their chances of one day being annihilated by someone because they have them.

So does that mean that the whole principle of the Deterrent which the Western Democracies still believe is essential for their safety is actually useless, then? :cry: Or is it that Western Democracies, being Democratic and Peace loving, should be allowed to have Nukes because they're Decent and Civilised, but other countries shouldn't because they're Mad and Evil?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.