Give Iran a Nuke Already!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by PAPA ROACH, Sep 25, 2009.

  1. Let’s Give Iran a Nuke or Two!

    With all the debate over whether Iran is building weapons or not and what to do about it, it would seem to me at least, that we have a great opportunity here to become a little bit safer from the Muslim extremists without having to pay for said security.

    By giving Iran a nuclear or shall we say nukular weapon, we also pass along the responsibility of ownership AND a United States guarantee. The guarantee would read something like this:

    Congratulations on your new purchase and welcome to the ownership club. Let it be known that if this weapon or any other nuclear device, whether originated from your country or not, is detonated on any western city, there will be a fully-automatic response. The response is a standing irrevocable order to launch no less than 20 nuclear warheads from multiple undisclosed locations at multiple targets in the Islamic world, including the whole of the Republic of Iran. It is therefore in your best interest to actively police all jihadist groups and extremists that have desires to attack western interests. The future continuity of Iran depends upon the successful security of the west.

    Maybe I am the crazy one here, but this seems like a win-win opportunity.
  2. Let's secretly code it, on launch, to hit Mecca.
    Let the Shiite / Sunni wars begin.
  3. No, it's a lose-lose opportunity. They'll drop the bomb on us (and by us I mean any part of the western world), we'll drop bombs on them (and it's a big if whether we'll have the stomach to retaliate) - there will be no winners. And they will drop that bomb, for them it'll be just like a really large and powerful suicide belt.

    If on the other hand we follow your suggestion but deliver those bomb by B52 bombers directly to Mecca and Medina (or perhaps Mecca and Tehran) that may adjust their attitudes quite a bit :)

  4. Heck it worked when we did it to Japan! Those guys are our best friends now!

  5. You gotta be kidding..........ICBMs and submarine-launched nukes would vaporize Iran.

    The reason we do not want to go there is nuclear warheads detonated near the border of the Russian bear. And those who think they are irrelevant are mistaken.
  6. Ok, ok how about Mecca and Damascus then? That will not upset the russian bear and will still get Iran's attention, don't you think? :D

    Well, of course I am kidding and I am not advocating a nuclear attack on Iran. I was just trying to point out that that Iran in possession of undetonated nukes is hardly a win-win situation for anyone involved. They might just decide to use them.
  7. Someone should tell us that America should not have nukes. The US is the only country to use nukes on a citizen population. Before we go out telling who can and cannot have weapons, we should get rid of our nukes considering we are the only country f-ed enough to use them. Are we hypocrites?

    What's so bad about Iran having nukes anyway? Their missiles cannot reach the U.S. nor are any leaders stupid enough to use nukes (it's like committing suicide)... they are defensive weapons nevertheless.

    So if US can have nukes after using them against Japan... and if Russia can have nukes and be very aggressive in foreign policy.. and if China can have nukes will threatening to nuke Taiwan... and if Pakistan can have nukes while they threaten to use them against India... and if Israel can have nukes also in that region... why can't Iran have nukes?
  8. You need to do more research....then you will find your answer.
  9. Are you referring to the media's propaganda against Iran? Specifically about the president's comment about Israel that is repeatedly used out of context.

    Tell me how many wars/skirmishes Iran has started in the last 100 years and then tell me how many wars the U.S. has been responsible for.

    Tell me what Iran has ever done to the U.S.? I know that the U.S. CIA helped overthrow a democratically elected government, to install a dictator, fundamentalist, Shah in Iran... probably a little worse than kidnapping Embassy workers in retaliation huh?

    Is Iran invading Canada and Mexico... or is the U.S. invading Iraq and Afghanistan? Who is really playing defense and protecting their territory?

    Considering that only we Americans have been the crazy ones to actually use nukes on a citizen population, why can we have weapons and tell others not to? Are we hypocrites?
  10. Your ignorance on this subject keeps us from having intelligent discourse.

    International protocols call for all countries to agree to certain principles. One is Nuclear proliferation. Treaties are in place to reward countries who decide not to escalate weapons development. These treaties provide for greater culture, trade, financial benefits in the world community for signers of these treaties.

    Iran has signed the NPT. They have denied any bomb development. Why? Because they wish to get all the benefits of the treaties they have signed while secretly breaking them.

    Any country has the right to make bombs. But the world has the right to stop all trade with that country. Iran should play fair and go public, withdraw from all the treaties and survive on their own.
    #10     Sep 27, 2009