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 1
and then

The Problem of an Iranian Nuke

   23 members have voted

  1. 1. Is Iran preparing themselves to build nuclear weapons at a time TBD?

    • yes
      10
    • no
      7
    • possibly
      6
  2. 2. Will an Iranian nuke cause more or less stability in the M.E.?

    • more
      14
    • less
      9
  3. 3. Would an Iranian nuke threaten more than just Israel?

    • yes
      12
    • no
      11

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

67 posts in this topic

This thread is not about Israel per se. It is about the real possibility of an Iranian nuclear weapon program and the effect it would have on the M.E. and the wider world. If you fully believe there is no program nor ever will be then please ignore this thread. Arguments are not welcome - discourse on hypotheticals is welcomed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"How would you handle an imminent threat to those YOU love?"

Nice approach to fear-mongering. So everyone must first accept this hypothetical "imminent threat" and then carry their discourse from there? Why not just write a fictional apocalyptical story about the end of the world at the hands of Iranians and post it in the Writer's and Artist's Section? You will get zero arguments and 100% freedom for hypotheticals.

Lithium/Minerals from Afghanistan, Oil from Iraq,libya are not enough for Americans and now they have their eyes on Iran. One more country to invade on WMD pretext. Nice.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iran will not be allowed to overtly produce even one nuclear warhead • If they manage to do so in secret , what could be done? If they announced that accomplishment they would surely know that there would be severe consequences? but, to use one? fogetaboudit! I doubt they are that anxious to get a substantial part of the population to paradise?

Any country producing a nuclear weapon is a problem. May i ask, (because i don't know , but don't think so) are there any countries currently,openly, beginning a nuclear program?

IMO it's far past time to get rid of all nukes. We have efficient enough alternatives to kill each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"How would you handle an imminent threat to those YOU love?"

Iran will not be allowed to overtly produce even one nuclear warhead • If they manage to do so in secret , what could be done? If they announced that accomplishment they would surely know that there would be severe consequences? but, to use one? fogetaboudit! I doubt they are that anxious to get a substantial part of the population to paradise?

Any country producing a nuclear weapon is a problem. May i ask, (because i don't know , but don't think so) are there any countries currently,openly, beginning a nuclear program?

IMO it's far past time to get rid of all nukes. We have efficient enough alternatives to kill each other.

To my knowledge there are no overt nuclear weapons programs ongoing. I agree they should be dismantled but I also wish for a cure for cancer and expect about the same timeline for each each event. Not to be argumentative - just that no weapon that gives such advantage between nations has ever been unilaterally discarded. The couple of countries that have set them aside have done so because they really had no real advantage to begin with AND they were rational enough to see the benefit of doing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"How would you handle an imminent threat to those YOU love?"

Nice approach to fear-mongering. So everyone must first accept this hypothetical "imminent threat" and then carry their discourse from there? Why not just write a fictional apocalyptical story about the end of the world at the hands of Iranians and post it in the Writer's and Artist's Section? You will get zero arguments and 100% freedom for hypotheticals.

Lithium/Minerals from Afghanistan, Oil from Iraq,libya are not enough for Americans and now they have their eyes on Iran. One more country to invade on WMD pretext. Nice.

This thread presupposes an Iranian nuclear weapons program and I repeat - if anyone believes such a program to be an impossibility then this thread should hold no interest for them. Please do not derail it. There are legitimate considerations about this issue that threaten world peace and it is valuable to consider them - not dismiss them so casually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is not about Israel per se. It is about the real possibility of an Iranian nuclear weapon program and the effect it would have on the M.E. and the wider world. If you fully believe there is no program nor ever will be then please ignore this thread. Arguments are not welcome - discourse on hypotheticals is welcomed.

Hypothetically it's extremely difficult to hide the evidence. Evidence of a weapons program is evidence. We can accept it at face value.

Meanwhile Iran is complying with the law.

Don't like the treaties that bind us? Then let us re-write or amend the ones we've got.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypothetically it's extremely difficult to hide the evidence. Evidence of a weapons program is evidence. We can accept it at face value.

Meanwhile Iran is complying with the law.

Don't like the treaties that bind us? Then let us re-write or amend the ones we've got.

I guess it comes down to what is accepted as "evidence". There is no real dispute that they are installing large numbers of new centrifuges and they have built secure deep underground facilities to house them. For a truly peaceful civilian program such steps are very expensive and unnecessary. The total numbers of centrifuges are the key. Weapons breakout depends almost entirely on the capability to produce the fissile fuel. I have heard that an agreement is soon to be announced that will basically allow Iran to keep their centrifuges and their capacity to enrich to 5% while removing all their stocks of 20% and closing Fordow. All in exchange for lifting of sanctions. Sounds very fair. If I and others of the same mind are correct however, the thousands of centrifuges that we KNOW of will remain in place and spinning and a conversion back to 20% or even 95% purity is only a decision away - days - while re establishing the sanctions could take months or even years. I actually believe an Iranian bomb is a fait accompli. My curiosity is whether Israel will truly stand alone in the final analysis or if they will simply accept the bomb and begin to plan for a destabilizing of the mullocracy.

An Iranian bomb would make them untouchable. If their proxies decide to attack Israel or terrorize the Kingdom - trying to install a Shia leadership there - the world would be paralyzed to defend against it. If the "fat sissies" as Don Imus calls them, decided to build their own bombs, then what? Or perhaps the rumors are true and they already have purchased a small arsenal from Pakistan. The region becomes a powder keg sitting next to a bonfire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly wouldn't be a warmonger against a country that's no real threat to me. Remember Pakistan has nukes, and Islamic fundamentalists, and an incredibly unstable government, and a feud that's been bordering on a nuclear exchange for forty years. Where are all your threads about them, AT?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly wouldn't be a warmonger against a country that's no real threat to me. Remember Pakistan has nukes, and Islamic fundamentalists, and an incredibly unstable government, and a feud that's been bordering on a nuclear exchange for forty years. Where are all your threads about them, AT?

What I understand about Pakistan is that although they tested a few, they aren't building them and aren't issuing threats to use them.

Regardless, the more countries have nuclear weapons the greater danger to all of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread presupposes an Iranian nuclear weapons program and I repeat - if anyone believes such a program to be an impossibility then this thread should hold no interest for them. Please do not derail it. There are legitimate considerations about this issue that threaten world peace and it is valuable to consider them - not dismiss them so casually.

Your polls are extremely biased and impossible to vote at by everyone. I wonder how people even managed to vote. You are either completely unaware of legitimate statistical research procedures or are deliberatey messing aound with people. Your thread cannot be derailed because it is fundamentally skewed from the start. You want participants to presuppose an Iranian nuclear weapons program and not to argue against it yet you are free to argue about what evidence suggests they are making WMDs?!

What you are doing here by asking people to vote at the polls and to participate in this discussion involves a lot of logical flaws - biased and erroneous. Read these:

http://en.wikipedia....i/Biased_sample

http://en.wikipedia..../Self-selection

And this too:

http://en.wikipedia..../Appeal_to_fear

Lets see how you pick answers from the below questions that are in the same pattern as in the OP (The objective is to demonstrate the bias and errors in the OP and not to insult anyone):

1. Is Mr. and then involved in violent crimes like all other Christian Zionists?

A. yes

B. no

C. possibly

2. Will Mr. and then's nonsensical extremist ideology and mindless parroting of western war-mongering propaganda cause more or less harm to his credibility in these forums?

A. more

B. less

3. Will Mr. and then's lust for Muslim blood end with the destruction of Muslim countries alone?

A. yes

B. no

Edited by XingWi
6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it comes down to what is accepted as "evidence". There is no real dispute that they are installing large numbers of new centrifuges and they have built secure deep underground facilities to house them. For a truly peaceful civilian program such steps are very expensive and unnecessary. The total numbers of centrifuges are the key. Weapons breakout depends almost entirely on the capability to produce the fissile fuel. I have heard that an agreement is soon to be announced that will basically allow Iran to keep their centrifuges and their capacity to enrich to 5% while removing all their stocks of 20% and closing Fordow. All in exchange for lifting of sanctions. Sounds very fair. If I and others of the same mind are correct however, the thousands of centrifuges that we KNOW of will remain in place and spinning and a conversion back to 20% or even 95% purity is only a decision away - days - while re establishing the sanctions could take months or even years. I actually believe an Iranian bomb is a fait accompli. My curiosity is whether Israel will truly stand alone in the final analysis or if they will simply accept the bomb and begin to plan for a destabilizing of the mullocracy.

An Iranian bomb would make them untouchable. If their proxies decide to attack Israel or terrorize the Kingdom - trying to install a Shia leadership there - the world would be paralyzed to defend against it. If the "fat sissies" as Don Imus calls them, decided to build their own bombs, then what? Or perhaps the rumors are true and they already have purchased a small arsenal from Pakistan. The region becomes a powder keg sitting next to a bonfire.

Well, they had the "evidence" of WMD before the invasion Iraq too. Where is that "evidence" now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Iranians actually try to use atomic weapons to blackmail the Sunni world, or the Israelis, they will face utter destruction. I would hope in their blindness they can see this but it doesn't seem so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I understand about Pakistan is that although they tested a few, they aren't building them and aren't issuing threats to use them.

Regardless, the more countries have nuclear weapons the greater danger to all of us.

They've got their own MAD situation going on with India at the moment, and while they may not be building any or threatening to use them, there's still an estimated hundred or so warheads in the country. I think the question still stands; why is the imaginary nuke of Iran so much more threatening than the one hundred real nukes of Pakistan?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say it isn't more threatening, just an additional threat the world doesn't need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Iranians actually try to use atomic weapons to blackmail the Sunni world, or the Israelis, they will face utter destruction. I would hope in their blindness they can see this but it doesn't seem so.

It does seem so. The US should be friends with Iran. This interventionist policy we've administered since 1953 is getting old.

"If they actually try to use atomic weapons." There is NO EVIDENCE that they "would try" this bogus Zionist conjecture. Let's suppose we get invaded by space aliens or hit by a large meteor. Let's suppose there will be another natural disaster somewhere and run balanced budgets so that we'll actually be able to afford to help whoever the victim of the disaster is.

off topic Does Vietnam balance its budget?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is not about Israel per se. It is about the real possibility of an Iranian nuclear weapon program and the effect it would have on the M.E. and the wider world. If you fully believe there is no program nor ever will be then please ignore this thread. Arguments are not welcome - discourse on hypotheticals is welcomed.

If Iran has a nuclear weapon program, and actually develop a nuclear weapon I can see greater instability in the ME as a result - largely because of Israel's reaction to losing it's 'trump card' in the region, not necessarily because Iran would use the threat of nuclear weapons.

Most nations in the region already have WMD's, albeit not nuclear, yet we have yet to see any serious attempt made against Israel using WMD's. Why, then, should the development of another form of WMD alter this balance?

This will not be Israel's thinking (or 'posturing' might be a better verb) on the matter, however. If there is any further instability in the ME due to a nuclear weapons program by Iran, I can see it being instigated by Israel as a more likely candidate.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One can have gas masks and shelters against chemical weapons; there is no such defense against nuclear weapons. Were I in Israel's shoes I would strike hard before a nuclear attack became possible. In fact I don't really see that they have any choice in the matter, although they will of course do all delaying and putting off such an act that they possibly can.

There are others in the Middle East who may end up striking first, though. I don't think the Saudis like what is happening either, and they are not without considerable resources. They would of course prefer that the Israelis do it for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One can have gas masks and shelters against chemical weapons; there is no such defense against nuclear weapons.

While that is true, it is also the case that chemical/biological attacks are considerably easier to action than nuclear attacks, and would involve far less warning in many scenarios. Their effects (biological possibly excepted) are probably not a long-felt, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biological attacks are out of the question if you are even marginally sane. Israel is quite prepared for a chemical attack, and they too can backfire badly. I dare say a chemical attack on Israel would end in the obliteration of whoever did it, with marginal harm to Israel.

I think the real fear in Israeli planning is nuclear attack. Here deterrence does little good after the fact if your opponent is that crazy. Pre-emptive attack could be expected sooner or later, and the more nuclear Iran may be, the worse the attack would be. Having nuclear weapons is a good reason, in other words, to expect the elimination of the Persian nation forever. They are far better off forgetting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they had the "evidence" of WMD before the invasion Iraq too. Where is that "evidence" now?

In your zeal to make me look like an idiot I think you overlooked the fact that I never said they currently had a bomb. The question is about "IF" they acquired one. A hypothetical. And I also invited anyone with an interest in that HYPOTHETICAL situation to become part of the discussion - I am fully aware of your attitude toward myself and my beliefs and do not care about either. My post, my rules. Be a part of it civilly or just leave it be please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly wouldn't be a warmonger against a country that's no real threat to me. Remember Pakistan has nukes, and Islamic fundamentalists, and an incredibly unstable government, and a feud that's been bordering on a nuclear exchange for forty years. Where are all your threads about them, AT?

Good choice. Pakistan IS a threat to the world but I did not particularly want this thread to go in an anti Islamic direction. This is about the consequences of what is demonstrably a terror producing government acquiring nukes. And to go a step farther since Pakistan meets THAT criterion as well Iran is a government that has openly called for the destruction of another UN member state and which controls the land at a chokepoint for a very large portion of the world's oil supply. The consequences to the world economy if that leadership acquires a nuclear umbrella are many things - none of them good.

And is it your belief that having yet another nuclear armed state of extremists would be somehow a bonus for the planet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Iran has a nuclear weapon program, and actually develop a nuclear weapon I can see greater instability in the ME as a result - largely because of Israel's reaction to losing it's 'trump card' in the region, not necessarily because Iran would use the threat of nuclear weapons.

Most nations in the region already have WMD's, albeit not nuclear, yet we have yet to see any serious attempt made against Israel using WMD's. Why, then, should the development of another form of WMD alter this balance?

This will not be Israel's thinking (or 'posturing' might be a better verb) on the matter, however. If there is any further instability in the ME due to a nuclear weapons program by Iran, I can see it being instigated by Israel as a more likely candidate.

On this we agree. Israel most likely will react in unforeseen ways in what they consider to be self defense to this situation. Having been warned by MANY Iranian leaders that the end game is their destruction, they would be fools to do otherwise.

Leonardo I have to ask, do you believe that the Shia eschatological beliefs that have been espoused about the 12th Imam were just rhetoric? And if so, to what purpose? A country that is being sanctioned by most countries in the world for their statements and actions should rather be attempting to soothe those tensions, yes? Of course NOW they are trying to do so but what of their zeal prior to this point? My point is that those other WMD possessing countries have not gone about rallying support to ACT against another nation of the UN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Problem of an Iranian Nuke

The problem with a flying pig is more expensive sausage.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with a flying pig is more expensive sausage.

Lovely. Anything worthwhile to say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leonardo I have to ask, do you believe that the Shia eschatological beliefs that have been espoused about the 12th Imam were just rhetoric?

No more so than I believe the millienial beliefs held by many concerning the destiny of Israel to usher in a world-ending war is simply rhetoric. There are those who believe these things implicitly and there are those who don't.

What I do not see are people in postions of responsible authority having the mentality to turn this belief into action on their watch.

Sure, we have extremists on all sides, but they are few and not in positions to start such a conflict as you suggest. I hope that remains the case, but I am actually more concerned that situation will deteriorate on the Israel/Millenialists 'side' of the equation.

Edited by Leonardo

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 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.