Iran's Peaceful Nuclear Program

[Wipeout]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070219/...russia_nuclear

I haven't really developed my own opinion on this situation as of yet, but after reading this it's made me think about a few things in a different light. Isn't it true that all nuclear fuel, weapons, and technology is monitored by a international organization? So.. There enlies my an interesting fact.. See if you can find it.

SIDE NOTES: If this turns into political "bullshit" I want this thread destroyed, shredded burned and blown up with the nuclear fuel that it was created with. This thread is about whether or not Iran should be allowed a nuclear program and if it is; can we trust the russians to take care of the matter and keep the Iranians from a nuclear weapons program. I know it's hard to stay away from politics in this manner but just keep the bashing a two face shit to a minimum.

[ArmedDrunk&Angry]

Well if you think an oil rich country with some serious social problems and several terrorist proxy armies wants a nuclear plant just for electricity, then by all means support this.
I do have some land in florida for sale as well, just needs some mild drainage and there is a bridge in NYC I would like to sell you as well.

[JS.Fortnight.A]

Note: my opinion is not that of Project Reality or the team as a whole and is solely my response to a user started topic.

French President Chirac made an interesting point which I would to an extent agree with.

"If Iran really does want to pursue nuclear weapons, and they end up using them on Israel...Tehran (Iran's capital) would be razed to the ground"

It is the same context as Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) from the Cold War, I really don't believe that Iran would go to such lengths, because it would mean that they WOULD be wiped out if they did and in the spirit of self-preservation they will just have to grin and bare the fact that Israel does and will continue to exist.

The Bush approach of course would be proactive-ness, hit them before they get the bomb to attack Israel, but then the thought is, do they really have it (as in the case of pre-2003 Iraq) and what type of a crap storm would it start if they did or did not, if 'WE' went in?

[[R-MOD]dunehunter]

There is a rather huge difference between the uranium that is used in nuclear power-plants, and weapons grade uranium (3-4% enriched vs 97%? enriched), so as long as it's monitored well, it's ok. Which is the main problem. It would be a good idea, I think, to just have all the different countries of the world enrich their uranium in shared facilities, though that's probably just wishful thinking.

[{9thInf}Dr!fter *E*]

Originally Posted by [R-DEV] JS.Fortnight.A

"If Iran really does want to pursue nuclear weapons, and they end up using them on Israel...Tehran (Iran's capital) would be razed to the ground"

I agree with you on that, if it’s in the context of Iran launching a couple dozen Shahab missiles at Israel. However, I don’t think that would be the reason they would want them. Israel is holy to Muslims too and I think it would be unforgivable if Iran used atomic weapons on Israel.
I think the only rational reasons would be as a nuclear deterrent to attacks by the United States. One of the main reasons North Korea has ICBM’s is to deter American attacks and I think Tehran wants that protection too.
Also, Iran wants to project itself as a major world power. The leadership has made numerous references to itself as the Persian Empire. Most developing nations consider nuclear weapons to be a ticket to the top of International power.
Also, they could possibly want nuclear weapons to possibly funnel a warhead to a terrorist group for use against the west. I think it wouldn’t take much to connect Iran since it’s possible to trace plutonium and uranium back to where they were mined and processed but that’s still a possibility. I just don’t think Iran would attack Israel directly with nuclear weapons. Among the reasons being the religious and international ramifications and also Israel’s arrow missiles are a far better ICBM shield than the patriot. Of course, this is all just the thoughts and opinion of a worthless drunk….

[ArmedDrunk&Angry]

I think Iran's neighbors are more worried about the Persian Empire than Isreal is.
An isolationist west combined with a nuclear powered Iran would spell a lot more trouble for the 'hood than I think those pampered sheik types would really enjoy.
When they get close to fielding a useful weapon the local countries will support a UN intervention like in 91, but not until the danger is immenant.

[{9thInf}Dr!fter *E*]

Originally Posted by ArmedDrunk&Angry

When they get close to fielding a useful weapon the local countries will support a UN intervention like in 91, but not until the danger is immenant.

Well that could only happen if the other regional powers have good intelligence people in country. Otherwise the world will find out after the first bomb goes off like we did with India and Pakistan. “BOOM! Surprise! We tricked you!”

[Ghostrider]

Iran has already been linked to be sending weapon caches to terrorists in Iraq...and yet people believe Iran only wants to generate electricity. Right...

All that aside, why would people choose to believe the claims of a nation that is commited to your own death (as a person) and destruction (as a nation), which is translated as being your ENEMY, and then go against those who's work is to protect their sorry asses (aka: their own goverment)?

It's nonesense, of course...but it happens. As for Russia...I think that they should be held accountable as well if something bad ever came to happen.

I agree with {9thInf}Dr!fter *E* in that I don't think Iran would use the nukes against Israel. They want the land. I do think that they would provide them to terrorist groups for them to use against the West, just out of common interest. It would also be the easy way to get "something done" without being "directly" involved..

If something bad ever came to happen to the US, Israel's most powerfull (and determined, I must add) ally would have a very limited capability to provide help, if Israel was attacked afterwards...


-Ghost

[Happy-n00b]

Well, would you allow a governemt lead by a dictaor who oppreses women, denies the holocaust, kills gays, and calls for the destruction of Isreal to have nuclear weapons? Here is a quote by Mahmoud Ahmedinejad: "I will sacrifice half or Iran to destroy Isreal." Knowing him, he probably would. And secondly, he is helping terrorists in Iraq get new weapons! All the RPG-29s and 27s that are popping up from dead insurgents in Iraq are obviously coming from Iran. The new mortar shells in the possesion of insurgents use Iranian tailfin designs! If Russia decides to ally itself with Iran (and it probably will) Iran won't heseitate for full war with the US and Isreal! And, with nuclear weapons in Iran's possesion, who knows what devestation they could wreak?
Liberals warn of "The imperialistic US" but would you rather have the US as the dominant power, or the nuclear playdate from hell with Vladmir Putin, Mahmoud Ahmidinejad, and Kim Jong-Il?

You have been warned.

[The_motivator]

The thing is, if/when they do make nukes, what incentive do they have to give them to terrorists? Think about it guys... even if they don't give them to terrorists, and a nuke goes off somewhere in the US... Iran would be glassed. Period, The end. No more ahmednijad or whatever his name is. Terrorists flew three planes into 3 buildings(minus the one that got taken down), and we invaded and conquered 2 COUNTRIES. if a nuke went off, and we had any reason to think it came from Iran... such as "well, Iran does have nukes...", Iran would be gone.

The suicide bombers are not always the sharpest, but those who send them out sure do enjoy survival. How do you enjoy life when you're covered in radiation burns and 70% of your country is dead, the other 20% will die in hours, and 10% will die in years and have severe birth defects in their children?

For some reason, I doubt Iran would be stupid enough. Sure, they can supply insurgents with a weapon or ten here and there... But to supply insurgents/terrorists with nuclear weapons would be sealing their fate, simply because we have more. One nuke goes off in Iraq against our forces, or in the Continental US (a task in its own), and maybe 10 will be in the skies on the way to Iran.