If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Iran
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
What do you all think of the Iran stuff?
Do you think those countries with Nuclear technology should be able to band together to stop other countries from having the same technology? Especially if it's for electrical power generation?
I think if one country wants to develop nuclear powerplants then that's up to them and if anything the other countries should do all they can do to help (without giving away secrets) to make sure they use best practise and have the safest power plant possible.
I don't agree with going into another war with Iran just in case they might be developing Nuclear weapons, heard the same argument for Iraq and Weapons of Mass Destruction and so far don't think they found any .. did they?
Do you think those countries with Nuclear technology should be able to band together to stop other countries from having the same technology? Especially if it's for electrical power generation?
I think if one country wants to develop nuclear powerplants then that's up to them and if anything the other countries should do all they can do to help (without giving away secrets) to make sure they use best practise and have the safest power plant possible.
I don't agree with going into another war with Iran just in case they might be developing Nuclear weapons, heard the same argument for Iraq and Weapons of Mass Destruction and so far don't think they found any .. did they?
0
Comments
Iran may well be a hostile country but we do ourselves no favours by attempting to resist their inevitable nuclear advancement with threats of war. We'd be better off trying to build up proper diplomatic relations such that they wouldn't feel the need to use those weapons against other countries.
Excellent interview here detailing some of the grave concerns about Iran. If you believe Iran just wants peaceful nuclear power for electricity (when it has a ton of oil and natural gas) you’ll believe anything. We made mistakes on Iraq which are detracting from the genuine danger that Iran poses, I think that will perhaps prove the greatest legacy of the Iraq war.
I do think the world needs to sort itself out with regards to the production of electricity - current methods like coal burning are producing too many greenhouse gases, whilst Nuclear power in a country that doesn't suffer from earthquakes, etc can be very safe and clean, espacially if they have loads unused land..
Quite true, .. although all countries have to plan for the day when the oil and gas runs dry.
And I'm sure ALL countries sign various pacts and agreements but they all develop stuff in secret, The USA spends more money on it's miltary then the next 17 nations combined - I'm sure they're working on all sorts of stuff we don't know about.
It seems to me that Osama is a man that is using propaganda and public opinion to his benefit better than anyone else in history.
It’s not difficult to understand the worry. The Middle East isn’t the most stable and calm place in the world. If Iran acquires nuclear weapons a couple of Arab states will follow suit, the Saudis will almost certainly purchase nuclear weapons from Pakistan. A decade or so and the entire Middle East could conceivably be armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons. Hardly a desirable scenario.
Further, Iran’s president isn’t rational – your logic works upon secular, reasonable leaders but when you’re dealing with a Muslim fundamentalist that denies the Holocaust but says enacting one wouldn’t be a bad idea, wants to ‘wipe Israel off the map’ and buys into the 72 virgins thing it’s different. Allowing Iran to get nuclear weapons is like letting al queda loose at Heathrow with a ton of dynamite.
he has an armaggedon mind.
he seems to believe that his god cannot come until the jews are wiped from the face of the earth ...which he keeps ranting about,
elecfucking tricity doesn't come into this.
while we have the strength to stop such people obtaining these things ...we should.
the truth is ...there are many thousands of moderates who want these religous idiots out ...thousands of them but ...they have to keep a fairly low profile.
these are the people america are funding in the hope of an uprising ...doesn't look good though.
I think we also have to put ourselves in their shoes.
Their Neighbour was attacked by the USA, so far many nations make threats about excercising their miltary power but only a few like the USA actually go ahead and attack other countries wether they can prove a reason or not.
America spends so much money on it's military that every now and again they need to justify spending so much money ... I'm just thinking if it wasn't for the middle east where would they go looking for a fight?
If they fight in the middle east they can use oil as an excuse, whilst millions in the past have been slaughtered in various African countries and the USA hardly bothers to intervine.
How many people on how many continents should be murdered to suffice?
But if we did play that game it would be thousands dead would it not?
Assasinaions are short term measure for short term aims.
Elections are biased and impossible to get an accurate representation with.
Who knows what is actually best...is a dictator who does good things better then an elected president who does evil things? Yes, i think, but would that be acceptable? Maybe...Maybe not.
The only reason Iran might want a bomb is to make itself a more influencial party in the region, and more to the point because the threat of thermonuclear war is nowadays the only form of the defence against the single most dangerous and aggressive regime in the history of mankind: the US government.
And who cares if the holy land is not inhabitable for decades or even centuries so long as in the future it is the Iranian/Islamic people who can claim it. That is the mentality of the fanatical elements at work. I am sure the military elements or Iran will be against such actions and prefer to play to the political game of power and influence of having Nukes. But the religious leaders who stand by the "Infidels must die" attitude that are not practicle in any religion or political regime are the ones to have there way.
I do not think the Iranian people or military would allow a Nuclear war to take place, but that does not mean the fanatical elements aren't already thinking about it.
MR is talking complete sense I should point out. Iran’s leader is even more extreme than the most fundamentalist and crazy Texan evangelical nutter.
Riiight, you are talking crap. The US government (unfortunately) is not in any position to invade Iran. With no nuclear weapons it’s an impossibility that the US would invade Iran. And even with nukes the US hardly has the means to invade Iran.
Iran’s leader would happily nuke Israel, he’d be getting his 72 virgins – so what if Iran too gets destroyed? Allow this guy nukes and you’re allowing a greatly increased chance of nuclear war. No rational human being could possibly tolerate an Iran with nukes – anybody that will is as thick as somebody who would give the KKK a ton of dynamite in a black neighbourhood.
we all know how dangerous and murderous america can be ...it would be insane to allow an even more dangerous nutjob ...in a far more unstable situation ...to have nukes.
why?
there is welsh people there ye know?
And even if the propaganda talk (for that's all there is) about removing Israel from the face of the earth etc etc were really serious, do you really think the leader of Iran would be happy to do anything about it knowing that it would mean his death sentence and that of his entire country (not to mention much of the Arab and Muslim world) too?
Nah. It's got nothing to do with pre-emptive attacks. It's got everything to do with protecting oneself from the most aggresive and dangerous government since Adolph Hitler himself.
Perhaps a bit of M.A.D. is what it's needed to restore a bit of balance and fairness in the region. I'd rather nobody had any nukes but since one party has already a couple hundred I don't see why we should restort to force and create even more conflict and tensions to stop another party from getting its own.
Yup, they were great!
Yeah, M.A.D does work well. It is a proven concept. Either way... 10 years the experts reackon until Iran gets nukes!
Its a POWER PLANT so far... if they cock about and prove themselves too immature to have nukes in 10 years, I am sure we can resolve hte situation there and then, when it arises.
Both sides are equally as capable of using them. It isnt a case of all evil America and all riteous Iran.
Finally, if the leader of a country is a nutter, who thinks he will go to heaven and it is for the greater good, that leader WOULD use nuclear weapons no matter what the cost to life or his country. Regardless whether that leader is a yankee cowboy or a fanatical Religious leader.
But the fact remains that "bunker-busting" or not the US has advanced, detailed plans of deploying thermonuclear weapons in a first-strke use within a non-nuclear war.
Of course such action was inconcievable only 6 years ago when Dubya first cheated into office. Back then there were non-proliferation treaties that prohibited the development and use of such nuclear weapons. But then the chimp went and tore up all those accords.
Tell me again who poses the biggest threat to peace and stability...
I said you cant say the Iranians would never use nuclear weapons but America would when BOTH sides are equally as capable of using them, should they have them to hand to use!
Bunker-Busters are the new line of Daisy-Cutters designed to burst under ground facilities. They were used in Iraq...are you saying the Yanks are now calling Nukes a completely different weapon? That is retarded if they are!
Yes, the Americans are trying to circumnavigate whichever few nuclear treaties they haven't walked out of yet, and to avoid criticism from other nations by classifying a new generation of nuclear weapons as bunker-busters or even "battlefield nukes"- where a low yield nuke is actually dropped on the enemy.
Needless to say Russia has since re-started its own nuclear and missile programmes.
Scary stuff.
I mean...its in the name...thermo-nuclear device!
when your enemy doesn't just mind wether he dies or not but ...actualy wants to die ...that makes for a very dangerous enemy.
i've noticed that a lot of you think that suicide bombers are nothing more than brain washed peasants ...if you actualy looked at the profile of these bombers you would see some very educated people who want to die.
yet you don't see that this mentality can be in the leadership/
these guys don't give a toss about death and destruction.
too many of you are so caught up in bush bashing it has clouded your view of reality.
for those of you who believe it is just for electricity production ...where the hell do you think iran can build a nuclear power plant?
answer please cos i keep asking ...