Iran

[DavidMn]

Well, things are heating up in another wanna-be nuclear country. I'm no political wonk, but this would appear to me to be more serious thatn the North Korea situation in that Iran has more connections with the outside world than NK. Therefore it sould seem to me that gaining support for whatever action the US would want to take would be harder for the security council at the U.N to ratify since both Russia and China have fuel deals with Iran. The last thing this world needs is one more country with unstable leadership to have a nuke.

[seeker007nmss]

Originally Posted by DavidMn

Well, things are heating up in another wanna-be nuclear country. I'm no political wonk, but this would appear to me to be more serious thatn the North Korea situation in that Iran has more connections with the outside world than NK. Therefore it sould seem to me that gaining support for whatever action the US would want to take would be harder for the security council at the U.N to ratify since both Russia and China have fuel deals with Iran. The last thing this world needs is one more country with unstable leadership to have a nuke.

It will never come to be. The Israeli's just announced they will not have Iran with nukes. They bombed their reactors before...sounds like they will do it again. Here we go again......around and around... the cycles continue

[DavidMn]

Of course, as far as I'm concerned, and I think most people would agree, it would be better if there werent any nuclear weapons anywhere.

[tynan88]

You see to be honest I just can't stand the hypocrisy here, the US has the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons and have actually used them and yet the government has the hide to take some sort of whacked up moral high ground.

Honestly I think it is time for a pre-emptive strike against the US before THEY go around blowing up the world with nukes, the United States I think has proved that its leader is willing to kill others for an unjust cause and not to mention he is probably the most dangerous religious fundamentalist in the world.

*By some token here my opinions are just against the government however I think that the fact that members of the public and media have generally been so spineless in their criticisms of the Bush administration it does say something about at least some of the general population.

[DavidMn]

Originally Posted by tynan88

You see to be honest I just can't stand the hypocrisy here, the US has the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons and have actually used them and yet the government has the hide to take some sort of whacked up moral high ground.

Honestly I think it is time for a pre-emptive strike against the US before THEY go around blowing up the world with nukes, the United States I think has proved that its leader is willing to kill others for an unjust cause and not to mention he is probably the most dangerous religious fundamentalist in the world.

*By some token here my opinions are just against the government however I think that the fact that members of the public and media have generally been so spineless in their criticisms of the Bush administration it does say something about at least some of the general population.

Hey!! If you dont like it here, get the hell out!!! ...... Oh that's right, you arent here anyway...

[DavidMn]

Tynan btw, that was a joke. hope it came across that way.

[tynan88]

EDIT: Yes I understand the joke but I try to articulate my views because I like contributing, hopefully I can do it without offending, I can respect all opinions even if I don't agree

Yer sorry I really hate inflaming discussions too much but I am actually hoping for a future political career and although I am a Liberal, in my political party (The Labor Party) I actually have some both more moderate and far left views.

In regards to international policy I am quite radical in the sense I would support sanctions against the United States government (amongst others) for:
1. Having a nuclear arsenal.
2. Refusing to sign the International Declaration on the Rights of the Child so some states can execute children.
3. Some of the most extreme war crimes extending to torture in regards to the occupation of Iraq (and most likely Afghanistan) at both Abu Ghraib (sp?) and Guantanamo Bay where prisoners have been held now for close to four or five years without having charges laid.

I would also consider the legitimacy of the United States leadership based on the fact I don't believe that your electoral bodies allow independent observers to view your elections, however I could be wrong on that.

[DavidMn]

Originally Posted by tynan88

EDIT: Yes I understand the joke but I try to articulate my views because I like contributing, hopefully I can do it without offending, I can respect all opinions even if I don't agree

Yer sorry I really hate inflaming discussions too much but I am actually hoping for a future political career and although I am a Liberal, in my political party (The Labor Party) I actually have some both more moderate and far left views.

In regards to international policy I am quite radical in the sense I would support sanctions against the United States government (amongst others) for:
1. Having a nuclear arsenal.
2. Refusing to sign the International Declaration on the Rights of the Child so some states can execute children.
3. Some of the most extreme war crimes extending to torture in regards to the occupation of Iraq (and most likely Afghanistan) at both Abu Ghraib (sp?) and Guantanamo Bay where prisoners have been held now for close to four or five years without having charges laid.

I would also consider the legitimacy of the United States leadership based on the fact I don't believe that your electoral bodies allow independent observers to view your elections, however I could be wrong on that.

I'm impressed. You obviously for being 17 have an interest in what goes on in the world around you. That's a good thing..

[DavidMn]

Originally Posted by tynan88

EDIT: Yes I understand the joke but I try to articulate my views because I like contributing, hopefully I can do it without offending, I can respect all opinions even if I don't agree

Yer sorry I really hate inflaming discussions too much but I am actually hoping for a future political career and although I am a Liberal, in my political party (The Labor Party) I actually have some both more moderate and far left views.

In regards to international policy I am quite radical in the sense I would support sanctions against the United States government (amongst others) for:
1. Having a nuclear arsenal.
2. Refusing to sign the International Declaration on the Rights of the Child so some states can execute children.
3. Some of the most extreme war crimes extending to torture in regards to the occupation of Iraq (and most likely Afghanistan) at both Abu Ghraib (sp?) and Guantanamo Bay where prisoners have been held now for close to four or five years without having charges laid.

I would also consider the legitimacy of the United States leadership based on the fact I don't believe that your electoral bodies allow independent observers to view your elections, however I could be wrong on that.

Well, I'm not one of those people that's going to attack you if I disagree with what you have to say. That's what creates so many problems is when people shout each other down all the time and are never willing to listen to what someone else has to say.

[tynan88]

Originally Posted by DavidMn

Well, I'm not one of those people that's going to attack you if I disagree with what you have to say. That's what creates so many problems is when people shout each other down all the time and are never willing to listen to what someone else has to say.

I think you just pretty much summed up the major problem not just on this board but in this world. We are often so blinded by our positions we can't accept that another has a valid point or could enrich our own position.

[DavidMn]

Originally Posted by tynan88

I think you just pretty much summed up the major problem not just on this board but in this world. We are often so blinded by our positions we can't accept that another has a valid point or could enrich our own position.

Amen to that.

[tynan88]

Originally Posted by DavidMn

Amen to that.

Oh how I love this place sometimes It's one of the few places I know where despite some crap you can have intelligent discussion.

[ShangriLaTroubl]

I think, unlike Iraq...Iran could be an ACTUAL potential threat to the security of the world. And while yes it is hypocritical for the USA to be condemning a country obtaining nuclear weapons, considering how many we have---it's just one of those things...I would say that Iran having nuclear weapons is much more of an international security concern than the US, although with our credibility in recent years that could likely be debated.

Regardless--if the US wants to set a standard for nuclear proliferation, we should get rid of our own. We do not need them to maintain "Safety" or security. It's a tough subject--I do know however that that will never happen, and powerful/rich/and supposedly "peaceful" nations will always keep these types of weapons to maintain their aura of "power" around the world.

Chris

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by DavidMn

Well, things are heating up in another wanna-be nuclear country. I'm no political wonk, but this would appear to me to be more serious thatn the North Korea situation in that Iran has more connections with the outside world than NK. Therefore it sould seem to me that gaining support for whatever action the US would want to take would be harder for the security council at the U.N to ratify since both Russia and China have fuel deals with Iran. The last thing this world needs is one more country with unstable leadership to have a nuke.

The only country to ever have detonated a nuclear weapon is the United States.

[seeker007nmss]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

The only country to ever have detonated a nuclear weapon is the United States.

Outside of testing. Many have detonated them in testing.