Iran, world powers reach landmark nuclear agreement

[nate]

I missed the part where this deal is about giving Iran nukes.

[Crampknees]

If we went to war in Iran because they have WMD's....which they don't, FOX News would be saying why did Obama not negotiate a deal.  Just how we roll these days. 

[Jay]

If we went to war in Iran because they have WMD's....which they don't, FOX News would be saying why did Obama not negotiate a deal.  Just how we roll these days. 

 

We'll be relying on your updates to tell us what they're saying on Fox News.

[Crampknees]

We'll be relying on your updates to tell us what they're saying on Fox News.

I enjoy providing them for you.  Hope I am not repeating anything you have already heard, that would bug me.  

[juansavage1]

Why would N Korea want nukes? Why would Isis want Nukes? Why did the Soviet Union want Nukes? Why did Cuba want Nukes?

They want Nukes to either project power or to actually use them in a war. Also,unlike the Soviets, Iran is ruled by people who feel they can affect the apocalypse.

But,who cares?

[nate]

Or as a threat of retaliation if they are attacked by nukes?

[Jay]

I guess this will be good news for my Schlumberger stock

 

I needed some good news on my Schlumberger stock

[Thomas]

Or as a threat of retaliation if they are attacked by nukes?

 

I would think Russia and China would be a reasonable assurance that a foriegn country wouldn't nuke them or even likely invade. I mean I guess it is always better to be safe about such things but I wonder how much of it is as use as a deterrent against their own citizens against regime change?

[UndertheHalo]

Or as a threat of retaliation if they are attacked by nukes?

 

This, Iran and all countries that have nukes want them primarily as a deterrent. Imo, if the soviets didn't get a bomb it is extremely likely that we would have used one on them. We didn't because by the time the Cold War escalated to that point the soviets had as many nukes or more then we did. Thus our battles played out in proxy. It's not dissimilar to the battle in the Middle East between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Iran wants nukes in order to weaken Saudi Arabia's position. They also want nukes because the Israelis have nukes, just as Israel perceives Iran to be its enemy, Iran very much sees Israel as its enemy. Moreover the Israelis and the Saudis quietly cooperate on many regional issues. So from the Iranian perspective they will do what is necessary to blunt that alliance. Nukes. 

[mtangelsfan]

Why would the U.S. nuke the Soviet Union?  That is quite an assumption.

[Thomas]

Why would the U.S. nuke the Soviet Union?  That is quite an assumption.

 

Rational reasons? There are none. But there was certainly a vocal minority in this country that wanted to nuke them before they got a chance to return the favor.

[UndertheHalo]

we were pretty much about to nuke korea and there was no threat to the homeland.  MacArthur fully intended to use them at his own discretion (fortunately Truman really hated Douglas MacArthur and thwarted him)  In those days using nukes was very much an option on the table. IMO its pretty easy to see a scenario where we would have used the atom bomb to destroy the Soviet Union if we didn't have to fear the consequences of a nuke strike on us.  It came off the table when the threat of our enemies using nukes against us became real / possible.  As scary as they are, nukes are great peace makers. 

Edited July 16, 2015 by UndertheHalo

[Thomas]

It got General MacArthur canned.

Edited July 16, 2015 by Thomas

[UndertheHalo]

It got General MacArthur canned.

yep.  At least we got that cool quote. "Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" thats one for the ages.

[mtangelsfan]

there are plenty of countries that don't have nukes that were our enemies.  Never nuked one of them.

[Thomas]

there are plenty of countries that don't have nukes that were our enemies.  Never nuked one of them.

 

Japan?

[mtangelsfan]

I am pretty sure you know what I was saying Thomas, neither of us are stupid.

[Thomas]

But that is kind of my point. Any country that actually nukes a country doesn't really get much benefit of the doubt in the following years.

 

The rationale was the whole point to The Hunt for Red October.  A military device capable of actually winning a nuclear war (at least on the drawing board). They have a whole conversation about it near the end of the film. Abhorrent to most rational people but there are always the better safe than sorry people of whom fear is their main motivator. What would a poll of Americans during the Cuban Missile Crisis said about the approval of wiping the Soviet threat out in 1947?

[Thomas]

If you read the Pentagon Papers you can see that nukes were even considered against North Vietnam by some.  

[juansavage1]

This, Iran and all countries that have nukes want them primarily as a deterrent. Imo, if the soviets didn't get a bomb it is extremely likely that we would have used one on them. We didn't because by the time the Cold War escalated to that point the soviets had as many nukes or more then we did. Thus our battles played out in proxy. It's not dissimilar to the battle in the Middle East between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Iran wants nukes in order to weaken Saudi Arabia's position. They also want nukes because the Israelis have nukes, just as Israel perceives Iran to be its enemy, Iran very much sees Israel as its enemy. Moreover the Israelis and the Saudis quietly cooperate on many regional issues. So from the Iranian perspective they will do what is necessary to blunt that alliance. Nukes.

I don't want to be insulting, but this is absurd. First, we had the bomb six years before the Soviets (they used American communists to steal it). During the time the Soviets were taking over eastern europe and korea and closing off berlin,we were the only ones with the bomb. Second,Iran is pursuing war all over the world, not cowering in fear and trying to live peacefully.

[UndertheHalo]

and was discussed, it was an option that was very much on the table (the use of nukes).  My point was, sans the soviets getting their own bomb it was possible.  The wording I used was "extremely likely".  I admit, thats a bit dramatic and I probably should have just said possible.  The cold war was not at its most dangerous during the years the Soviets didnt have a bomb.  I dont think its absurd at all to speculate the possibility of our using a bomb during those hotter years IF the Soviets didn't have one.  Also, I disagree that Iran is pursuing war "all over the world" Iran has proxy's in lebanon, syria, iraq and yemen that pursue results that are favorable to Iran.  All of those countries have conflicts that predate Irans involvement, and they are all basically in Irans neighborhood.  Yes, Iran acts to be the big player in its neighborhood. You can disagree with whether thats right or wrong (i think its not cool) but most countries on earth seek to manipulate their neighbors into being more favorable.  Sometimes its just diplomacy.  Sometimes its armed interventions, and sometimes its supporting proxies.  Again, im not justifying it im just saying it doesnt make Iran into some crazy rogue that cant be dealt with.  Finally, your just stating your opinion as I am, I am not insulted by your arguments/disputes.  

Edited July 17, 2015 by UndertheHalo

[Jay]

I love how the libs are defending Iran, priceless.

 

A couple of months ago even Obama was calling Iran a "state sponsor of terrorism".

[juansavage1]

Some facts came out that are kind of worrisome. 

 

1. Americans can't be part of the inspection process. 

2. Iran will have about three weeks to clean things up between inspections. 

 

Why? If they're not doing anything wrong, why ask for that? 

 

[nate]

Something people don't seem to understand.  This deal doesn't help Iran make a bomb, just like the NK deal didn't.  They would have had it no matter what if that is what they wanted.

[juansavage1]

Well, then what's the point of the deal? To give them more money?