Quote:
Originally Posted by August
Maybe you feel differently but I don't think the assassination of a scientist, especially by persons unknown, is a justification for a nuclear war, which is what a nuclear deterrent is all about.
|
Hi August, personally I can't think of a rational justification for an attack using nuclear weapons and I invite you to explain how you came to think that I might. While I would hope you agree that Iran has neither threatened to do so nor would it consider it an option unless in appropriate defense or retaliation, as obviously it would be MAD suicide, you miss my point. Israel has nuclear weapons developed in secret and against global opposition. Iran is simply doing the same if they are doing it at all, which incidentally there is no empirical evidence for. I certainly would be if I were them, for exactly the same 'deterrent' arguments that all the nuclear armed nations use and I am not prepared to really believe them when they deny it, neither am I prepared to believe that either Mossad or CIA (or SAS, whomever you like) were not responsible for the attacks inside Iran when they likewise, deny it. Also, regardless of yours or mine opinions on the subject, assassinations of scientists who are civilians are acts of terrorism in and of themselves, and can only reinforce the attitudes of the governments the authorising bodies verbally aspire to curtail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by August
The same countries that invaded Israel in the first place? Those are the ones you support?
|
No, August. I support the concept of the United Nations, it is regretful that in regard to Israel they have a saboteur on the SC and are largely impotent because of it. Most Americans (and pretty much all non Americans) I converse with are against the idea of America becoming a global military police force, which is what the UN were setup to do. If the US government actually took their position there seriously 'in the spirit' so to say, rather than for purely selfish reasons, well, who knows. They cannot own the UN, but they can and do prevent it from achieving its aims. I do not assert they are exclusively guilty of this type of behaviour, but they do so with far more impunity and regularity than the others. I support people trying to do what is right, because it is right, and that is all. I should make it clear now that in no way do I think modern governments or their figureheads are truly representative of the human beings they supposedly govern, when I use a nations name in the singular I am only referring to its leaders. This is however irrelevant, what both you and Skybird (HI SKY! I didn't think your ignore list would work for too long.) have failed to address in my previous post is, with slight extrapolation :
What it actually achieves is promoting anti-Israeli and anti-US sentiment globally but especially in Iran, as well as likely reinforcing any ideas the Iranians may have that they surely need the nuclear deterrent tool for themselves, as well as global support for this probable intent, again especially in Iran.
Oh, and Sky if you are still not ignoring, if my logic is circular as you suggest, where is the evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons project? Where are the threats of nuclear action by Iran against Israel? Where are Saddams WMDs? It is just smoke and mirrors, for political and ideological reasons, and you should take your own advice to wake up to the fact. I have argued with you regarding Palestine before, and my position is set. What Israel does in occupied Palestine is criminal, if they want the righteous position they claim to have then they should either, cease occupation, or, simply claim the land as their own, and in doing so grant the same civilian rights to the inhabitants as are granted to the inhabitants already within their borders. Keeping people in a perpetual no mans land is not only criminal and inhumane, it is tantamount to genocide.
Now I am way off topic, apologies. The US is certainly more dangerous in capability, I'd say they were about even in intent.
Regards, Sam.