Iraq wants to become nuclear

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

Goldorak,

"Iran is one of the few middle eastern countries to not actually attack Israel."

Well your right, but to use that fact to claim that they wouldn't with a nuke is the height of disingenuous. The only reason that Israel and Iran have never had a conventional war is quite simple....

They lack a common border.

And yet they could have formed an alliance with Egypt, Jordan and Syria to attack Israel and didn't. You don't have to border a country to declare war on it. Iran could have just as well send troops with the Egyptians/Jordanians/Syrians. Offered logistical support, intelligence and who knows what else.
But they didn't.

With a delivery device, this obstacle is removed. No Arab nation is going to allow another nation to run its conventional forces right through its middle so it can attack Israel. They distrust each other too much for that. But a nuke delivery vehicle, while presenting its own issues, is like allowing the use of airspace to them.

Of course, the first thing the Iranians will do is launch a nuclear strike on Israel oblivious to the fact that Israel would counterstrike back and most assuredley destroy Iran. Lets be realistic here. Iran wants to be a regional power as much as Israel is. And India and Pakistan.

Instead of recognizing this simple fact, and the reality that the regimes in the region don't want a nuclear Iran, you want to put the survival of the world in the hands of everyone, meaning a nuclear launch will be decided by whatever leader is the LEAST stable.

Its incredibile, you all think that Iran = Ahmadinejad. Its like me saying that the american president could do whatever he wants oblivous to the different check and balances that permeat the US government.
You may not like Iran because its an islamic republic, that there are checks and balances over there as well. Just because you think they are all some kind of brain washed potentially suicide bombers doesn't make it so. And the events after the last Iranian election shows this quite well.

The survival of the world, you are talking about the survival of the world.
Then lets start by dismantling the thousands of nuclear warheads that Russia and the US still have. Then the hundreds of warheads the French, British and Cinese have. Israel to follow and of course India and Pakistan. And then we can start to be preocupied by NK that has 2 little atomic bombs and Iran that has nothing at all.

But of course this will never happen since most countries that have gained entrance into the nuclear club realise just how much power and prestige it is to have them. And another reason much more important, countries that have nuclear weapons are not invaded. The US launched a massive war on Iraq on the basis of nuclear weapons that were inexistant, and yet they can't do squat to North Korea that has 2 puny little bombs. It goes a long way in showing that to keep the US off your country you better have working weapons of mass destruction.

Thankfully, you don't make decisions on a world stage is all I can say.

You're right, we have to believe that our leaders are in some way graced by a higher intuition in the affairs of the world. Unfortunately I don't have this optimism as history has shown time and time again just how screwed up our democratic leaders can be.