Pressure mounts on defiant Iran

[stray bullet]

How is it that the U.S, Britain, France, Russia, China, India, Pakistan and Israel can have nukes but Iran can't? What exactly gives these nations the right to not only possess nukes but the right to deny that same right to Iran?

I hope Iran gets nukes, it'll ensure they won't be next on America's 'liberation' list.

Iran has every legal right to nuke, but these countries have every reason to want to keep Iran from nukes given their track record.

 

[stray bullet]

didn't we just wipe the nation of iraq off the face of the map?

We removed a regime from power after it violaed international law, failing to meet their agreements after invading two inations and attacking two others.

 

[stray bullet]

ALSO, WE MUST REMEMBER, THAT U.S. IS THE ONLY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD THAT HAS USED NUKES TO KILL 100,000 - 200,000 INNOCENT CIVILIANS.

What makes us so sure that Pakistan, India, U.S. won't use their nukes???

I wouldn't characterize them as 'innocent civilians', they were civilians in a state that attacked us. The cities were legitimate military targets and not using the nukes would have been far more devastating than using them.

 

[stray bullet]

The US has a history of using Nukes and other WMDs specifically and purposefully on civillian populations. History does repeat itself. I just don't understand how in the WORLD Christians can justify the use of those horrible, anti-Christ weapons?

Because not using them would be far more horrific?

 

[stray bullet]

As far as Iranian Parliament and the jews, remember that none of their votes really matter because the country is controlled by religious clergy that can shoot down any decision by parliament.

 

[k]

Because not using them would be far more horrific?

How so?

 

[k]

I wouldn't characterize them as 'innocent civilians', they were civilians in a state that attacked us. The cities were legitimate military targets and not using the nukes would have been far more devastating than using them.

According to the logic of this argument, then everybody who died on 9/11 were also legitimate military targets.

 

[Scholar in training]

According to the logic of this argument, then everybody who died on 9/11 were also legitimate military targets.

Nobody is suggesting that every single person in every single enemy state is.... well, an enemy. However, American civilians have not sworn allegiance to an emperor whom they believe to be a god, they do not believe that suicide is an honorable tactic of war, they have not stolen land in the Pacific through imperialistic ventures and they did not have the Soviet Union breathing down their necks.

 

[applepowerpc]

As far as Iranian Parliament and the jews, remember that none of their votes really matter because the country is controlled by religious clergy that can shoot down any decision by parliament.

Might I point out there regarding Israeli parliament and the Palestinians, none of their votes really matter, either. How many Palestinians are on the Knesset now--3? It's time to quit the double standards here. Disarm Israel's nukes or quit complaining about Iran.

 

[Scholar in training]

Might I point out there regarding Israeli parliament and the Palestinians, none of their votes really matter, either. How many Palestinians are on the Knesset now--3? It's time to quit the double standards here. Disarm Israel's nukes or quit complaining about Iran.

If you can produce a statement by an Israeli prime minister saying that this person wants to wipe another state off the map, then we can talk about disarming Israel.

 

[Ginny]

Iran has every legal right to nuke, but these countries have every reason to want to keep Iran from nukes given their track record.

Here, here.

Bottom line. Enough said.

 

[k]

Nobody is suggesting that every single person in every single enemy state is.... well, an enemy. However, American civilians have not sworn allegiance to an emperor whom they believe to be a god, they do not believe that suicide is an honorable tactic of war, they have not stolen land in the Pacific through imperialistic ventures and they did not have the Soviet Union breathing down their necks.

emphasis mine

I really do not know how to respond, but it is enough to show we have very different understandings of US history.

 

[stray bullet]

According to the logic of this argument, then everybody who died on 9/11 were also legitimate military targets.

The WTC was not a legitimate military target. It was a civilian target.

 

[k]

Aww geez...just realized this is the N&CE forum...so I'm done on this thread.

 

[k]

The WTC was not a legitimate military target. It was a civilian target.

So when the US purposefully targets Civillians they are considered "military" targets but when other countries do the same thing they are targeting civillians? Okay.

 

[stray bullet]

How so?

Having not used nukes would have resulted in massive starvation among the Japanese people. Land invasion by the US would have resulted in mass suicide (like when the civilians started killing themselves as the US was landing on the outlying Japanese islands), as well as a release of biological weapons by the Japanese military.

The civilians that remained alive would have been given meager weapons, to either use in a suicidal way, or charge in suicide attacks.

The Japanese were tying to develop nuclear weapons too, working on a dirty bomb towards the end of a war to use on the west coast.

 

[stray bullet]

So when the US purposefully targets Civillians they are considered "military" targets but when other countries do the same thing they are targeting civillians? Okay.

The US did not purposely target civilians. Just like if you bomb a military base and kill civilians- it doesn't mean you were trying to blow up civilians.

 

[k]

Having not used nukes would have resulted in massive starvation among the Japanese people. Land invasion by the US would have resulted in mass suicide (like when the civilians started killing themselves as the US was landing on the outlying Japanese islands), as well as a release of biological weapons by the Japanese military.

The civilians that remained alive would have been given meager weapons, to either use in a suicidal way, or charge in suicide attacks.

The Japanese were tying to develop nuclear weapons too, working on a dirty bomb towards the end of a war to use on the west coast.

While I could refute everything stated here, respect for the thread will be shown by simply saying, this is a discussion for another time.

So, do people approve of America's Imperialism in the ME? Let's see, we're working on Iran next...just check out a map to see how Afghanistan, Iran, and Iraq lineup culturally, geopolitically, and geographically.

 

[k]

The US did not purposely target civilians. Just like if you bomb a military base and kill civilians- it doesn't mean you were trying to blow up civilians.

DARN IT...Keep forgetting this is the N&CE...Iam deleting this thread from my list.

 

[stray bullet]

While I could refute everything stated here, respect for the thread will be shown by simply saying, this is a discussion for another time.

That's fine although I highly recommend you investigate what happened when the US invaded the home islands of the Japanese during the war until that time. It should give you some perspective on what would have happened. Also, the amount of food that was being distributed by the US to the Japanese after the war and the reports of starvation all over Japan should prove interesting.

So, do people approve of America's Imperialism in the ME? Let's see, we're working on Iran next...just check out a map to see how Afghanistan, Iran, and Iraq lineup culturally, geopolitically, and geographically.

I wouldn't consider it 'imperialism', certainly not in the classical sense...