[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
The products of intelligence analysis are not certainties, but rather varying degrees of probability. If the United States followed your ridiculously stringent standards of evidence before undertaking its foreign policy, the smoking gun would indeed be a mushroom cloud (or more literally, seismic activity as a result of an underground nuclear test.) Iran is pursuing a nuclear program. That is indisputable fact that the Iranian regime itself had confirmed. You assert that it is not an attempt to bring Iran into the fold of nuclear weapons states, but rather that it is a peaceful endeavor to develop nuclear energy and facilitate economic development. There are many problems with this idealistic position.
You hold that Iran seeks nuclear energy. As you can hopefully see from the data provided in the link, Iran is an energy rich state. One would be inclined to ask why it pursues the development of nuclear infrastructure, which is extremely capital intensive, especially when the per capita income of its citizens is taken into account.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ir.html
As far as economic development is concerned, Iran’s nuclear program has indisputably hamstrung it’s economy. The sanctions levied against Iran by the United States and its allies have had a devastating effect on not only the wherewithal of the Iranian regime, but upon the well being of its populace.
If Iran’s energy security is marginally impacted by the addition of nuclear energy infrastructure, and its economy has suffered greatly as a result of its nuclear program, why does it continue to pursue its nuclear ambitions? Iran seeks neither energy nor economic gain, but rather the preeminent goal of all states - security.
The Iranian regime believes that the Western world and its lackeys in the region seek nothing short of the overthrow of the Islamic Revolution. Nuclear capability would provide a formidable deterrent to the United States and its allies, and to the numerous Sunni states in southwest Asia.[/quote]
You are correct.
Of course the Western world and its lackeys (a pejorative term for allies, why did you use it?) would like to see the overthrow of the Islamic Revolution. The Islamic Revolution is led by thugs and whackos. They’ve been responsible for a significant amount of terrorism against both Muslims and infidels since 1979. They’ve repeatedly threatened Israel with annihilation.
If North Korea is the north pole of nutjob states then Iran is the south pole. Thing is, Iran is in the geographical and political position to be far more dangerous than North Korea. There is no such thing as a China to restrain them.
[/quote]
Apologies. I meant to put quotations around lackeys. I’m a terrible writer when I’m limited to my phone. Hopefully we can find common ground when it comes to the misinformed idealism of our new friend Kareem.[/quote]
Just because I disagree with you that Iran “should” get the Bomb or that you can apply a “Cold War theory” to the post Cold War asymmetric world doesn’t mean you’re not a very smart guy. I simply hold a different position (even though Iran holds the same goals as a rational actor–and you already know I think they are sub-rational which is another reason they should not be allowed to get the Bomb–it should not be allowed to attain its goals because they conflict with both ours and Israel’s goals, and I’m batting for the home teams.)[/quote]
To be perfectly honest, I started this thread to argue from the position of a devil’s advocate. My intent in defending the premises of the article was to better understand the argument of the author, and to gain a greater understanding if my own positions. I believe that it is in the interest of the United States to maintain Israel’s nuclear monopoly in southwest Asia. American preeminence is undoubtably a positive influence in the international system. A nuclear armed Iran is more likely to act like Pakistan than the USSR or China during the Cold War, which is troubling to say the least. While I believe that the Iranian regime is far more rational than most posters here would maintain, my largest concern lies with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps units that provide security at Iran’s nuclear sites, and is known to have direct ties to terrorist organizations. Initially, Ayatollah Khomeini didn’t hold ambitions to possess CBRNs. When Iraq deployed chemical weapons against Iranian forces during their war, the mullahs came to the reluctant conclusive that it was in their interests to have defensive and offensive CBRNs capabilities themselves. Tehran sought security from Iraq, and now seeks it from the West. Deterrence against regime change is the single greatest incentive for Iran’s nuclear weapons program. As Pakistan has contributed to proliferation through poor command and control of its military, intelligence services, and nuclear scientists, so too do I fear the effects of a nuclear armed Iran.