Suppose Iran agreed to stop nukes...

[Future Shock]

It was said in another thread that Israel doesn't need nukes to kick the tails of every other country in the ME. So what happens if Iran offers to stop nuclear development, in exchange for a pan-ME agreement that removes all nukes from the ME - including Israel's and the US's?

I mean, we have stated that Israel can defend itself without nukes. The US certainly has no targets for nuclear weapons in that theater if no nuclear arms exist there. So...why not de-nuke the entire ME and Iran?

Future Shock

 

[lozina]

then where would the leverage come from when Israel and USA engages in diplomacy?

Really, we should encourage Iran to get nukes. Has there been a war between two nuclear powers? (play on the war between democracies sogan for promoting democracy accross the globe whether it be forced down their throats or not)

 

[maluckey]

Yes!

And we will all live in peace after that. We'll all have life, love and lollypops...at night we will sing songs around the fire of peace and harmony.

You would have as good of a chance at peace as you would being openly gay at an Aryan Nation picknick.

 

[Future Shock]

Originally posted by: maluckey
Yes!

And we will all live in peace after that. We'll all have life, love and lollypops...at night we will sing songs around the fire of peace and harmony.

You would have as good of a chance at peace as you would being openly gay at an Aryan Nation picknick.

I totally understand your cynicism - but the reason that I made the OP was to get a feeling for what would people think IF Iran came back with that position. From Iran's point of view, I think such an offer would be stunning - it allows them to position their nuke program as "defensive", and makes us explain why nukes in the ME are a good idea at all.

It does seem to put the US in a hard place politically...

Future Shock

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Future Shock

Originally posted by: maluckey
Yes!

And we will all live in peace after that. We'll all have life, love and lollypops...at night we will sing songs around the fire of peace and harmony.

You would have as good of a chance at peace as you would being openly gay at an Aryan Nation picknick.

I totally understand your cynicism - but the reason that I made the OP was to get a feeling for what would people think IF Iran came back with that position. From Iran's point of view, I think such an offer would be stunning - it allows them to position their nuke program as "defensive", and makes us explain why nukes in the ME are a good idea at all.

It does seem to put the US in a hard place politically...

Future Shock

Would be a tricky situation. OTOH, Israel still denies having Nukes(IIRC), so they'll respond with, "WTF are you talking about?"

 

[blackangst1]

The US would never give up it's nukes especially for Iran. Iran isnt a threat anyway (to our soil anyway). We had disarmament talks in the 80's with Russia, and it was made very clear we wouldnt give them up. Would we ever use them? Who knows. But that isnt the point of -having- them. The point is, you have the upper hand, even if never used.

 

[ajaxtala]

What the heck are you guys talking about? Iran agreed to stop nukes?
Jumping to conclusions here aren't we.

Nuclear power is the only stated goal of the regime.

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Originally posted by: ajaxtala
What the heck are you guys talking about? Iran agreed to stop nukes?
Jumping to conclusions here aren't we.

Nuclear power is the only stated goal of the regime.

Suppose you looked up suppose?

 

[eits]

what?! we gotta give up our nukes?!?! no way!!! no fair!!! why do we have to get rid of ours?!?!?!

we're so damn lame.

how fair is that? "do as i say, not as i do" is why the world hates us.

 

[ajaxtala]

Originally posted by: FrancesBeansRevenge

Originally posted by: ajaxtala
What the heck are you guys talking about? Iran agreed to stop nukes?
Jumping to conclusions here aren't we.

Nuclear power is the only stated goal of the regime.

Suppose you looked up suppose?

My brain hurts.

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: ajaxtala
What the heck are you guys talking about? Iran agreed to stop nukes?
Jumping to conclusions here aren't we.

Nuclear power is the only stated goal of the regime.

Not really... destruction of Israel is another.

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: Future Shock
It was said in another thread that Israel doesn't need nukes to kick the tails of every other country in the ME. So what happens if Iran offers to stop nuclear development, in exchange for a pan-ME agreement that removes all nukes from the ME - including Israel's and the US's?

I mean, we have stated that Israel can defend itself without nukes. The US certainly has no targets for nuclear weapons in that theater if no nuclear arms exist there. So...why not de-nuke the entire ME and Iran?
Future Shock

Iran would agree in a second. After all - they only have to say they are no longer developing the weapons.

 

[Future Shock]

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: Future Shock
It was said in another thread that Israel doesn't need nukes to kick the tails of every other country in the ME. So what happens if Iran offers to stop nuclear development, in exchange for a pan-ME agreement that removes all nukes from the ME - including Israel's and the US's?

I mean, we have stated that Israel can defend itself without nukes. The US certainly has no targets for nuclear weapons in that theater if no nuclear arms exist there. So...why not de-nuke the entire ME and Iran?
Future Shock

Iran would agree in a second. After all - they only have to say they are no longer developing the weapons.

If we could patrol and monitor SOVIET RUSSIA for START and SALT, then I don't believe that Iran's compliance would be that difficult to monitor...

FS

 

[Aimster]

I don't believe Israel can take on the entire M.E without nuclear weapons.
In fact they simply cannot. They don't have the manpower.
Israel's force is great for defending the nation of Israel.
Their nuclear weapons will be used at a time when their nation is on the verge of defeat. Meaning the Arabs have to invade Israel.
Thank the powers above us that the Arab nations are not united and have never been united.

If Israel didn't have nuclear weapons.. there is no chance in hell they could defend themselves against a unified Arab attack. Saudi Arabia is increasing its military spending (they are going to buy the latest Russian military equipment). UAE is purchasing advanced weapons (UAE has cut off all ties to Israel). Iraq is going to grow again and they will have a military the size of Saddam's regime. Egypt's economy is growing and soon their military will grow too.

The Arab nations are growing. Israel is not growing as fast. Israel is small. Arab nations are massive.

Verdict: Israel keeps its nuclear weapons. There will be no future wars between Israel and Arabs.

[Iran can have nuclear weapons when Iran's regime is gone. When Iran is a democracy. When Iran and Israel are friends. When Iran and the U.S are friends. No Islamic Govt. should have nuclear weapons. Iran will never be free from Islam .. so... ]

 

[ajaxtala]

If Israel didn't have nuclear weapons.. there is no chance in hell they could defend themselves against a unified Arab attack.

That give's them a legitimate reason to want a nuclear arsenal but it doesn't give them the right to have it.

In fact no government in power will tell you that they want nuclear weapons for offensive purposes. The global backlash to such an action would be more severe than anything they could stand to gain.

There is no way you can tell me that if the Iranian government had nukes right now, they would use them against Israel.
Suicidal terrorists are perhaps the only ones that would actually consider such actions seriously.

No doubt if the Iranian government had nuclear weapons, it would increase tensions to a new level, and that's why I think they have nothing to gain from making them and I'm not convinced that they plan on it.

 

[Future Shock]

Originally posted by: Aimster
No Islamic Govt. should have nuclear weapons.

Have you considered nuclear-armed Pakistan? You know, the country that is most likely harbouring Osama on it's western border's mountain villages? Which not only has nuclear arms, but also has been outed as supplying that technology to other countries such as North Korea?

You are trying to close the gate after the horse has left the barn...one bullet into Sharif and it will be an Islamic state, probably within the next 5 years - WITH nuclear arms, WITH missles to carry them.

Future Shock

 

[Future Shock]

Originally posted by: Aimster
I don't believe Israel can take on the entire M.E without nuclear weapons.
In fact they simply cannot. They don't have the manpower.
Israel's force is great for defending the nation of Israel.
Their nuclear weapons will be used at a time when their nation is on the verge of defeat. Meaning the Arabs have to invade Israel.
Thank the powers above us that the Arab nations are not united and have never been united.

If Israel didn't have nuclear weapons.. there is no chance in hell they could defend themselves against a unified Arab attack. Saudi Arabia is increasing its military spending (they are going to buy the latest Russian military equipment). UAE is purchasing advanced weapons (UAE has cut off all ties to Israel). Iraq is going to grow again and they will have a military the size of Saddam's regime. Egypt's economy is growing and soon their military will grow too.

The Arab nations are growing. Israel is not growing as fast. Israel is small. Arab nations are massive.

Verdict: Israel keeps its nuclear weapons. There will be no future wars between Israel and Arabs.

[Iran can have nuclear weapons when Iran's regime is gone. When Iran is a democracy. When Iran and Israel are friends. When Iran and the U.S are friends. No Islamic Govt. should have nuclear weapons. Iran will never be free from Islam .. so... ]

Just a few other points:
1) So you say all this, but you haven't offered an alternative response to prevent Iran from building nuclear technology. Or simply buying a bomb from North Korea in a few years when they have a few to spare. Please offer a credible alternative - what WOULD you suggest if Iran made such a disarmament proposal for the ME? What other plan looks to have a better success chance?

2) Last I looked at a map, Iran, the UAE, and Iraq have no direct land borders with Israel, and if you think that the intervening nations are going to let them march right through, I would have to say you are dreaming. Even if they DID march through, this would not be undetactable without a lot of advance notice, and would be quite vulnerable to interdiction and airstrikes. I highly doubt it would be successful or add much to the war effort, especially if a couple of US carriers assisted in the interdiction.

3) And if you believe that Saudi Arabia is going to militarily invade Isreal, over the direct protests of it's largest business partner the U.S., I would also have to say you are dreaming.

I hear lots of chest thumping, but I don't hear a lot of considered thought or scenario analysis...

Future Shock

 

[firewall]

Originally posted by: Future Shock
It was said in another thread that Israel doesn't need nukes to kick the tails of every other country in the ME. So what happens if Iran offers to stop nuclear development, in exchange for a pan-ME agreement that removes all nukes from the ME - including Israel's and the US's?

I mean, we have stated that Israel can defend itself without nukes. The US certainly has no targets for nuclear weapons in that theater if no nuclear arms exist there. So...why not de-nuke the entire ME and Iran?

Future Shock

It would be a good proposal though a faulty one in the sense that Israel and the US will never agree with it. And one sided proposals are just that......

 

[firewall]

Originally posted by: Aimster
[Iran can have nuclear weapons when Iran's regime is gone. When Iran is a democracy.

You mean a puppet government following US orders? Isn't that the same as Saddam or the Shah of Iran? First supported by the US, then left when the US interests are no longer associated with such people.

When Iran and Israel are friends.

Forced friendships hardly last.......

No Islamic Govt. should have nuclear weapons. Iran will never be free from Islam .. so...

Likewise, no Zionist regime should have nuclear weapons. US is a mere dictator and the world is it's concentration camp. What more could the world expect from a country lead by a person who says, "Either you are with us or against us!"

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Once the knowledge is there, you can not remove it.. Sure, you can dissuade a country with one to get rid of it, but a country with thousands? Not possible. Period. It is meaningless to say that it could happen, because it can't.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: Future Shock
It was said in another thread that Israel doesn't need nukes to kick the tails of every other country in the ME. So what happens if Iran offers to stop nuclear development, in exchange for a pan-ME agreement that removes all nukes from the ME - including Israel's and the US's?

I mean, we have stated that Israel can defend itself without nukes. The US certainly has no targets for nuclear weapons in that theater if no nuclear arms exist there. So...why not de-nuke the entire ME and Iran?

Future Shock

Then like sheep we would probably disarm ours why they went ahead secretly with thiers.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: asadasif

Originally posted by: Aimster
[Iran can have nuclear weapons when Iran's regime is gone. When Iran is a democracy.

You mean a puppet government following US orders? Isn't that the same as Saddam or the Shah of Iran? First supported by the US, then left when the US interests are no longer associated with such people.

When Iran and Israel are friends.

Forced friendships hardly last.......

No Islamic Govt. should have nuclear weapons. Iran will never be free from Islam .. so...

Likewise, no Zionist regime should have nuclear weapons. US is a mere dictator and the world is it's concentration camp. What more could the world expect from a country lead by a person who says, "Either you are with us or against us!"

*************************************************************************
Every once in a while I see a post that makes me want to say what kinda drugs is this guy on.
But I looked at your profile and see your Pakistani. So that would explain why your spouting standard mullah rhetoric.

 

[B00ne]

That wouldnt work.
You know nukes are a funny thing - the bad guys are always the guys without them. Once you have them you will try to prevent anybody else from getting them - labeling the have nots as the bad guys trying to nuke everyone.

 

[firewall]

Originally posted by: daniel49
Every once in a while I see a post that makes me want to say what kinda drugs is this guy on.
But I looked at your profile and see your Pakistani. So that would explain why your spouting standard mullah rhetoric.

:roll: That's all you can say......

Ofcourse, you will call anything against your views as being 'mullah rhetoric'.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: asadasif
What more could the world expect from a country lead by a person who says, "Either you are with us or against us!"

You also need to look at that statement in the context that it was made. Do not grab a sound bite and replay it verbatim.