How Are Those Iranians Coming Along With Their Nuke?
By robspeakman
@robspeakman (1700)
December 15, 2012 3:00pm CST
Over recent days, those pesky North Koreans have been nominated by mass media as this weeks "EVIL NATION" because they had the nerve to launch a rocket.
The North Koreans say it is to launch a satellite and the rest of the World say they are developing weapons.
The Iranians must be annoyed as they have been EVIL NATION on and off for 30 years.
Seriously though - Why can the Iranians not have a Nuke?
We have Nuclear weapons in the UK.
Obviously The Americans have them.
The French have them.
Russins and Chinese also have them
This band of Moral giants have signed the NON PROLIFERATION TREATY - which basically they signed an agreement to limit the spread of Nuclear weaponary.
Now there are some others who have nuclear weapons...
Pakistan
India
Isreal
North Korea
These lot never signed the agreement or did sign it and then came out of the agreement.
This four don't have to limit the spread of nuclear weapons.
So back to your friends and mine - IRAN.
Now why can't they have nuclear weapons? - They have not signed the treaty.
Other nations have them.
Are these other nations better than Iran?
Iran is very very close to Israel - Israel have them.
Now surely that is enough reason for the Iranians to have some big nasty nukes?
If you had a neighbour like Israel, the best course of action would be to get a BIG ANGRY DOG THAT BITES
Nothing bites like a ballistic nuclear weapon.
For the western world to impose sanction on Iran is inhumane and unjust - Once more the west is trying to manipulate the world
3 people like this
8 responses
@sid556 (30953)
• United States
16 Dec 12
i have alwaays wondered that. what rightdo we have to interfere with these other countries? why do we even involve ourselves in thir battles? I get it whn we ofer help to any of them after some natural disaster but other than that...its none of our dam business. maybe my thinking is too shallow but i compare it to my own small personal life. i dont tell my friends what they can and cant do. i dont get in the middle of my friends arguments nor do i take sides and iim willing to help when an where it is needed. maybe if all these countries treated each other in the same manner they did their friends and loved ones, we'd find a semblance of world peace. that wont happen because its not us running the show. it is the governments and big corps.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
16 Dec 12
Oh this is true. All the MORE REASON for those who are sane to stay ARMED and READY. 
Not 'controliing' them does not negate the fact that THEY may be intent on destroying us for many other reasons not connected to 'rebellion' against our strength.
Can you seriously tell me that you think that human beings are NOT inherantly selfish? And that if WE laid down our weapons, lessened our military strength, that there'd be instant peace on earth?
As Mike stated, a nation that does not care if their people starve to the point of turning cannibal, or does not accept another nation's right to exist, will not turn suddenly loving, compassionate and accepting when they see us weaken.
Not 'controliing' them does not negate the fact that THEY may be intent on destroying us for many other reasons not connected to 'rebellion' against our strength.
Can you seriously tell me that you think that human beings are NOT inherantly selfish? And that if WE laid down our weapons, lessened our military strength, that there'd be instant peace on earth?
As Mike stated, a nation that does not care if their people starve to the point of turning cannibal, or does not accept another nation's right to exist, will not turn suddenly loving, compassionate and accepting when they see us weaken.@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
16 Dec 12
The progressive liberal will tell you, we are a global village, every village has a chief. It fell to America, because we USED to be strong economically and militarily and have somewhat responsible leadership. The world USED to be somewhat grateful for that via WWII and its outcome. But the tide has turned. Maybe because some of our elected leaders made mistakes, maybe because we didn't play quite fair due to those same elected officials, maybe because we allowed a third party, big bankers to start running the country.
Regardless, SOMEONE must be in charge when you're talking about enough fire power to destroy ALL civilization.
@habibti320 (925)
• United States
16 Dec 12
Honestly, I'd rather everyone got rid of their nuclear weapons.
"Developed" nations can't be trusted with them: after WWII, how is America even allowed to keep so many weapons?
Less developed nations can't be trusted with them either. Remember the nuclear disaster in Japan? The Japanese are the epitome of order and efficiency, and even they had problems with the reactor. Can you imagine a country with lots of bureaucracy, underpaid employees who don't take ownership of their job, and power outages being responsible for such a dangerous object?
It's not that I don't think they should have the right to have nuclear weapons: I agree that it's not fair. It's just that I would rather that no one had them.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
16 Dec 12
I do accept that the leaders of my country are not making the right decisions. 
And I'm not suggesting we are blameless, but not for defending against totalitarian governments that kill their own citizens or are trying to take over the world. Did you take a look at the link I posted? It does a pretty good job of explaining the necessity of making a quick end to WWII and the reasons Truman decided to use the bomb. I too, wish it had never happened. But even though it did, we have not then just willy nilly used it again, we do realize the terrible price paid and have sought to not take it likely.
I also very much agree that America is not immune from totalitarianism. I take a lot of flack for that view from the Obama supporters on here.
And I'm not suggesting we are blameless, but not for defending against totalitarian governments that kill their own citizens or are trying to take over the world. Did you take a look at the link I posted? It does a pretty good job of explaining the necessity of making a quick end to WWII and the reasons Truman decided to use the bomb. I too, wish it had never happened. But even though it did, we have not then just willy nilly used it again, we do realize the terrible price paid and have sought to not take it likely.
I also very much agree that America is not immune from totalitarianism. I take a lot of flack for that view from the Obama supporters on here.@habibti320 (925)
• United States
16 Dec 12
I'm not saying that Japan or Russia in those times were blameless, but America was not blameless either. Our use of these weapons had horrible effects on civilians and future generations. It also set a precedent for using these weapons.
America is not immune from becoming totalitarian. Also, wouldn't the world be a safer place if there were more stable countries and governments? America has helped oust some pretty awful leaders, but we haven't been blameless in the process. Also, these countries are now left with civil wars and even more instability. Why not allow them to have their own revolution and offer support as they rebuild a more democratic country for themselves?
Why can't we accept that America has made mistakes just as any other nation is capable of making, and that we should have to follow the same set of rules that we demand of other nations?
@robspeakman (1700)
•
17 Dec 12
We don't need them
If some countries have them, then all countries should have them
It is either all or nothing
@inertia4 (27978)
• United States
29 Dec 12
Honestly. Do you really think that Iran does not have any nukes? I doubt that. But they are off the hook as a nation. Not that that has anything to do with the fact of having a nuke or not. Now if there was a treaty that every country signed to disarm and disband all nukes, then no one would have them. What I don't believe is that if a treaty like that was ever signed, I doubt very much the countries that have nukes would get rid of them. They will say they did and not do it. They do have the right to posses nukes just as Israel does. And as far as I can tell, Israel is not very stable either. Now, if every country in this world had nukes, we would be back to square one. We would all be as powerful as the next. Its a game, its all bull. No matter who has nukes or not, if there is going to be the next big world war, that will happen anyway. People are just crazy and getting crazier everyday. I also think that is Israel no longer existed, most of this tension in the middle east will cease to exist.
@inertia4 (27978)
• United States
29 Dec 12
I understand that the conversation was not to be serious. But there are some serious statements there. I do agree that it seems unfair that the powers to be can have nukes but not Iran. Either way, like I said before, I doubt that will create another world war. If it is going to happen it will happen anyway. I am sure the U.S. is also upgrading their nukes. So I will leave you with these words, Hey Now!!!!
@robspeakman (1700)
•
29 Dec 12
I originally posted this discussion to be a little cheeky and get a reaction.
However I also believe that it is arrogant of the UK, France and the USA to tell Iran that they can't have them, when they have them.
There are discussions in the UK about upgrading our Nuclear weapons - We currently have nukes called TRIDENT and we are in the process of replacing them at a cost of £90 Billion...
We can do that, yet Iran can't have them?
Doesn't seem fair
1 person likes this
@knoodleknight18 (917)
• United States
16 Dec 12
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the world already has enough nuclear weapons that it's not in anyone's best interest if they start flying. We don't need enough to wipe out mankind or even come close to drastically change the way we live. Many governments are failing and being overthrown as is, the last thing we need is more nukes in the hands of falling leaders.
@mariaperalta (19073)
• Mexico
15 Dec 12
Id be worried with those countries leader. Along with Cuba and venenzuela. Those leaders arent all there. And do things like no others. And if all those countries are playing with bombs and things.. bad things are yet to come. Lets hope not.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
16 Dec 12
sid, I saw, right after we invaded, Iraqis holding signs saying thank you. Of course, no one wants children to be killed in war. But I bet you American soldiers did a whole lot more to keep that from happening than Saddam Hussein did.
@cupkitties (7421)
• United States
15 Dec 12
Well I see what you mean. Who business do we have to tell them what they can and can not have anyway? Though its really scary that anybody has nuclear weapons at all.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
16 Dec 12
Couldn't decide whether to post the lyrics to Kumbaya or We Are the World. Then decided on reality and am now posting Sympathy for the Devil and Symphony of Destrution. 
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/r/rolling+stones/sympathy+for+the+devil_20117881.html
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/m/megadeth/symphony+of+destruction_20091364.html
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/r/rolling+stones/sympathy+for+the+devil_20117881.html
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/m/megadeth/symphony+of+destruction_20091364.html