Iran Shoots Down US Drone

My name is URL · 04-12-2011 05:12PM

SamHarris wrote: »

The far left is really getting ridiculous - "I dont mind Iran gets the bomb/ little or nothing should be done to stop them despite the breach of perhaps the most important international treaty because the US has them" The be all and end all of every one of their arguments is "sure look, I dont like the US / Israel!" :rolleyes:

That's some amount of bull**** right there. Automatically equating the 'left' to supporting the likes of Iran and hating the US is asinine and simplistic. You do know that Israel has not even disclosed details of its nuclear arsenal? Your muddled views on what is right and wrong run into a roadblock when you consider that Iran is most likely developing a nuclear weapon for its own defense, because nations opposed to the state have them and are a threat to them. Much the same as how the US et al have weapons for their own defense and to insure security of their own interests.

The left and right aren't differentiated by some geopolitical divide.. cop on!

eire.man · 04-12-2011 05:14PM

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

My name is URL wrote: »

Same can be said for any of the other nations which have atmoic weapons. It's incredibably rich for the likes of the US and especially Isreal (who are non-compliant with the nuclear non proliferation agreement) to be whinging about Iran's studies into nuclear energy.

The US has a longer list of international conflicts under its belt than Iran does. Maybe it's them that need to get rid of the bomb before they demand others to stop developing them.

Don't you find it slightly worrying that a country would lie and undermine every international treaty just to acquire nuclear weapons? Furthermore, it's a given that nuclear weapons should be refrained from use...this requires cuts in the said nukes, not multiplications of them with countries who lie even to the IAEA. If you're comfortable with that, then that's quite worrying methinks.

I find it more worrying that a country with nukes (THE USA!!) can be exposed manipulating almost every country in the world and nobody cares.

fcuk off America!!!!

Biggins · 04-12-2011 05:15PM

eire.man wrote: »

I find it more worrying that a country with nukes (THE USA!!) can be exposed manipulating almost every country in the world and nobody cares.

O' right, there is no protests occasionally!

Thrill · 04-12-2011 05:16PM

All that lovely stealth tech and electronics for the Iranians to study and copy and maybe share with Russia and China.

The U.S. will not be pleased.

RichieC · 04-12-2011 05:20PM

SamHarris wrote: »

Thats not how the NPT works, thank god. Hypocrisy and thinking YOU are special is ar for course in international policy - pointinh it out ast h ough that makes their sides argument invalid is just childishness and worse, completly false. Why the hell does it matter?

The far left is really getting ridiculous - "I dont mind Iran gets the bomb/ little or nothing should be done to stop them despite the breach of perhaps the most important international treaty because the US has them" The be all and end all of every one of their arguments is "sure look, I dont like the US / Israel!" :rolleyes:

The amount of conflicts a country gets involved in always has and always did have much more to do with the countries capabilities than with any underlying "morality". If you dont know this you do not know much history. At all.

It's quite clear it's you that does not know his history. you just manipulate it to suit your ideology. just like all the Yank/Israel apologists have to do.

Jaafa · 04-12-2011 05:20PM

Thrill wrote: »

All that lovely stealth tech and electronics for the Iranians to study and copy and maybe share with Russia and China.

The U.S. will not be pleased.

Indeed thats the biggest thing about this. One thing the Iranians do well is reverse engineering.

RichieC · 04-12-2011 05:22PM

MOSSAD wrote: »

Wonderful stuff! Sooner a nuclear device is detonated over Teheran the better.

yea great idea, there isn't enough Muslims that hate us, just drop a nuke over one of the most liberal Muslim cities in the world.. sure we can nuke all the ones that hate us after that too!

genius...

Zebra3 · 04-12-2011 05:24PM

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

Don't you find it slightly worrying that a country would lie and undermine every international treaty just to acquire nuclear weapons?

Israel?

WoollyRedHat · 04-12-2011 05:25PM

MOSSAD wrote: »

Wonderful stuff! Sooner a nuclear device is detonated over Teheran the better.

Howya lads...my passport's about to run out of date..can yous set me up?

nacho libre · 04-12-2011 05:26PM

Thrill wrote: »

All that lovely stealth tech and electronics for the Iranians to study and copy and maybe share with Russia and China.

The U.S. will not be pleased.

They won't be pleased either that their spies inside Hezbollah are continually being rumbled(http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57329186/major-cia-network-unraveled-by-hezbollah-iran/)
However with the recent series of mysterious "accidents" inside Iran, it looks like they have assets high up in the Iranian military and security structure.

Freddie59 · 04-12-2011 05:33PM

AnamGlas wrote: »

What right do they have to have it there?

Spot on Iran.

Sweet Jesus. Mods, can we have a facepalm smiley?

SamHarris · 04-12-2011 05:35PM

My name is URL wrote: »

That's some amount of bull**** right there. Automatically equating the 'left' to supporting the likes of Iran and hating the US is asinine and simplistic. You do know that Israel has not even disclosed details of its nuclear arsenal? Your muddled views on what is right and wrong run into a roadblock when you consider that Iran is most likely developing a nuclear weapon for its own defense, because nations opposed to the state have them and are a threat to them. Much the same as how the US et al have weapons for their own defense and to insure security of their own interests.

The left and right aren't differentiated by some geopolitical divide.. cop on!

I never said anyone supported Iran, I pointed out the complete childishness of believing it has a right to it because others already have it.

Or that countries should not react to Iran getting the bomb because they do not throw themselves around the same way when allied states act the same way is childish in the extreme. It is also

Last statement is very false, if you do not believe me read a left leaning newspaper, say the Guardian then a right leaning publication and I can guarantee you the spin they put on every story concerning the region will nearly always have the same "bad guys".

So your belief is that everyone that whants one badly enough should be allowed to it? that an oppressive theocratic regime should have one because YOU believeit is purely for their own defence (again of the regime, not of the peopel an important distinction). You should run that by the CFR, your analysis is scathing.

The idea that the US cannot try and stop a nationquiring a nuclear weapon (as all reasonable evidence now points to) that routinely refers to it as "the great satan" and calls for its death because Israel flouts international law from and the US does not push for sanctions against it is

Why do I have a feeling if it were Israel seeking nuclear weapons (leaving aside the fact they probably alreadyt have them) and the Arab nations surrounding them were raising alarm bells it would be very different people protecting their "rights"?

Ellis Dee · 04-12-2011 05:36PM

MOSSAD wrote: »

Wonderful stuff! Sooner a nuclear device is detonated over Teheran the better.

Just the kind of sentiment I'd expect from someone who chooses the name of the zionazi terror entity's murderous spy organisation as his alias!:rolleyes:

A nuke detonated over Tehran, a city of 15 or so million people, could kill millions, many of whom are certainly no supporters of the present regime.:eek:

Mind you, the zionazi terror entity that calls itself Israel and has occupied the land of Palestine has emulated the German National Socialists in so many other ways that killing a few million of what it probably considers Untermenschen would really only be par for its course.:)

SamHarris · 04-12-2011 05:37PM

RichieC wrote: »

It's quite clear it's you that does not know his history. you just manipulate it to suit your ideology. just like all the Yank/Israel apologists have to do.

Really? Name one country or entity in the past with complete dominance that did not get into conflict more than a nation which would almost certainly be completly destroyed should it do the same?

I await with baited breath.

woodoo · 04-12-2011 05:37PM

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

Does anyone here sincerely believe the nuclear programme is peaceful.

I would have no problem with a Nuclear Iran. They wouldn't use it but it would be there as a means of standing up to the US/Israel bully-boy tactics.

MisterEpicurus · 04-12-2011 05:42PM

Zebra3 wrote: »

Israel?

I love how people assume that if you are against the Iranian Nuclear Programme, somehow that infers you support Israel. It doesn't logically follow. My views on Israel are equally as harsh, however this question concerns Iran and I sincerely don't see any benefit of allowing them to acquire nuclear weapons. And by questioning 'Israel' as you did above, you seem to infer that lying is permissible by Iran because Israel lies. Again, quite an untenable and worrying position to hold.

SamHarris · 04-12-2011 05:44PM

woodoo wrote: »

I would have no problem with a Nuclear Iran. They wouldn't use it but it would be there as a means of standing up to the US/Israel bully-boy tactics.

And this is what everyone who supports the idea's motivations boild down to.

No regard for the idea of a theocratic regime having nuclear weapons.

No regard for the strong possibility of sparking a nuclear arms race in the most instable, religiously zelous and strategically important region of the world.

No regard for the legitimate fears of anyone (of which there are many) who have been routinely threatened by Irans higher leadership.

Its all about "haha! look at de yanks/ zionazis now!". That peoples poltical chips on their shoulders have gotten so gaping is very sad.

MisterEpicurus · 04-12-2011 05:46PM

woodoo wrote: »

I would have no problem with a Nuclear Iran. They wouldn't use it but it would be there as a means of standing up to the US/Israel bully-boy tactics.

What sort of a precedent does that set though? Wouldn't it contain the risk of a domino effect whereby other countries will want to attain them for the same defensive reasons. The situation could escalate. It's best to nip these situations in the bud. I don't see long term benefits outside of the Iranian question if they possess nuclear weapons based on defensive grounds.

SamHarris · 04-12-2011 05:47PM

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

I love how people assume that if you are against the Iranian Nuclear Programme, somehow that infers you support Israel. It doesn't logically follow. My views on Israel are equally as harsh, however this question concerns Iran and I sincerely don't see any benefit of allowing them to acquire nuclear weapons. And by questioning 'Israel' as you did above, you seem to infer that lying is permissible by Iran because Israel lies. Again, quite an untenable and worrying position to hold.

Thats because everyone who "supports" their nuclear program, either directly or through their wish that nothing, not even sanctions, be done about it universally abhore Israels program. They make the assumption that everyones views on issues such as Nuclear Proliferation is as based on whos "side" they are as much as their own.

nacho libre · 04-12-2011 05:48PM

woodoo wrote: »

I would have no problem with a Nuclear Iran. They wouldn't use it but it would be there as a means of standing up to the US/Israel bully-boy tactics.

Yes. The real issue for America and Israel is that if Iran did acquire a nuke it has leverage; with a nuke they upset the power balance in the middle east.

However i don't believe they are building a nuke.

Principal Skinner · 04-12-2011 05:50PM

woodoo wrote: »

I would have no problem with a Nuclear Iran. They wouldn't use it but it would be there as a means of standing up to the US/Israel bully-boy tactics.

Youll have a problem with it when Iran fires at the UK and we get the fallout, no good can possibly come of Iran having nuclear weapons.

Personally I don't want any country to have nuclear weapons but I'd trust the American's a hell of a lot more than I would trust the Iranians

MisterEpicurus · 04-12-2011 05:54PM

nacho libre wrote: »

i don't believe they are building a nuke.

I'd recommend you read this document;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2011/nov/09/iran-nuclear-programme-iaea-report

SamHarris · 04-12-2011 05:56PM

nacho libre wrote: »

Yes. The real issue for America and Israel is that if Iran did acquire a nuke it has leverage; with a nuke they upset the power balance in the middle east.

However i don't believe they are building a nuke.

Irrelevant if you do or not, every international body does, and says as much, bar the Iranians themselves.

Yes one of the worries is if they have a nuke they will use it as a tool to threatensurrounding countries, even silently. This fact is, again, brushed under the carpet by some people because well... you know... Israel are jerks.

Jaafa · 04-12-2011 05:57PM

I don't think Iran will get a nuke. For the exact reason SamHarris is giving. They too understand the danger of sparking a nuclear arms race in the region. If everyone has the bomb then any advantage of them having one is nullified and your just left a very very dangerous situation.

No, I think what Iran will/has been doing is developing the know how of making a bomb, without taking that final step. It makes sense.

All the reports from the IAEA (assuming they're completely true), say Iran has tested this component or researched this aspect or enriched up to this level.
The one thing it does not say (and it can say this with reasonable certainty due to the cameras and monitors it has at the facilities), is that not one gram of nuclear material has ever been diverted from any of the facilities. In other words all the enriched materials have been used in the facilities themselves and not sent to a secret weapons program.

So while one side say's Iran will never build a nuke and the other says Iran definitely is, I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. It is developing the capability without taking the final step and the consequences that brings.

Jaafa · 04-12-2011 05:58PM

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

I'd recommend you read this document;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2011/nov/09/iran-nuclear-programme-iaea-report

I suggest you look up the dozens of people that have completely and systematically debunked that report.

nacho libre · 04-12-2011 05:59PM

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

I'd recommend you read this document;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2011/nov/09/iran-nuclear-programme-iaea-report

I've read it. I wouldn't rely on outdated reports.

nacho libre · 04-12-2011 06:02PM

SamHarris wrote: »

Irrelevant if you do or not, every international body does, and says as much, bar the Iranians themselves.

Yes one of the worries is if they have a nuke they will use it as a tool to threatensurrounding countries, even silently. This fact is, again, brushed under the carpet by some people because well... you know... Israel are jerks.

They speculate, they do not provide sufficient proof. We've been over this on the politics forum. I would agree though, it's irrelevant what you or I believe.

SamHarris · 04-12-2011 06:04PM

Jaafa wrote: »

So while one side say's Iran will never build a nuke and the other says Iran definitely is, I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. It is developing the capability without taking the final step and the consequences that brings.

Second.

I also believe there are elements within the regime which believe baiting Israel into a strike will rally international support for their right to a weapon. One of the reasons a "surguical strike" is a bad idea, it practically guarantees the eventual aquisition of a weapon.

Principal Skinner · 04-12-2011 06:07PM

Jaafa wrote: »

I suggest you look up the dozens of people that have completely and systematically debunked that report.

Well Iran claim theyre just developing nuclear power. If that is the case why have they repeatadly rejected offers from the UN to swap depleted uranium (which augments the destructivness of the nuclear weapon and cannot be used to produce power) for "clean" uranium which can be used for power? Surely it would be stupid to not accept this deal as it would save Iran money from buying "clean" uranium?

SamHarris · 04-12-2011 06:07PM

nacho libre wrote: »

They speculate, they do not provide sufficient proof. We've been over this on the politics forum. I would agree though, it's irrelevant what you or I believe.

I agree, it is massivley ambiguous and is far from a straight "they are building The Bomb." It is, however, much more skewed in favour of those that look on Iranians nuclear ambitions as being military in nature and harder to find vindication for the belief that they are not at least in some ways moving towards a weaponised program.

On another note if they built an ICBM tTHEN you would see some serious problesm, as they stand they are not near a threat, nuke or not, to the US homeland. If their missile program keeps progressing that may change and so will US public opinion in a big way.

Iran Shoots Down US Drone

Comments