|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 10:06 pm Post subject: On a Nuclear-Capable Iran: for the Record... |
 |
|
Just got out of a policy seminar where, no surprise, virtually everyone, led by the professor, agreed that "one could make the argument" that since the United States possessed nuclear weapons, then there was no reason why the Iranians should not possess them, too.
The case against Iran, according to this seminar, rested on American propaganda and hypocrisy on alleged Iranian interference in Iraqi affairs and lies about alleged Holocaust-denial conferences and misinterpreted statements on Tehran's statements about, shall we say, in a "less-racist" way, altering Israel's position on the Middle Eastern map so that it better suits Iranian sensibilities.
In any case, I raised this question there and I thought I would raise it again here:
Please tell me that those who sympathize with these sentiments are not inadvertently justifying a nuclear-armed Iran (and, implicitly, a nuclear-armed North Korea as well) just to spite American foreign policy.
Please tell me that, if this is you, you do realize that, for all the current world-system's faults, shortcomings, and injustices -- issues that we can still work out, or at least continue trying -- that a nuclear-armed Iran (and/or North Korea) dramatically increases the likelihood of our seeing a range of other nation-states hastily adopt crash nuclear-weapons programs and then an actual regional if not global nuclear-weapons exchange in the not-so-distant future -- and that this, then, is a step in the wrong direction for all of us.
In short, please tell me that, in your arguments for a more peaceful world, this does indeed concern you and that you are not willing and ready to see regimes such as Iran acquire nuclear weapons just so that America might be taken down a notch, come what may...
Last edited by Gopher on Mon Feb 12, 2007 10:46 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Please tell me that those who sympathize with these sentiments are not inadvertently justifying a nuclear-armed Iran (and, implicitly, a nuclear-armed North Korea as well) just to spite American foreign policy. |
I will tell you this much (as an alleged sympathizer -- my o my, how that language sounds McCarthyian!).
I do not believe in a nuclear "armed" Iran. This should be dealt with and not by threats and bullying and the spreading of misinformation. It should be through open and face to face negotiation AND also sincerity. By sincerity, I mean that the U.S. itself commit and withdraw from its own illicit development of new nuclear weapons delivery systems (illegal in contravention of the NPT) and further, show in good faith its own agenda to disarm and go non nuclear. As it is, with billions spent on military technology of the highest order and a schedule of its own illicit nuclear testing, America cannot sit across the table and demand.
I don't think these two things are a tall order -- other than the fact that the present administration has always resorted to its own way and not that of concensus (see the issue of Guantanamo vs Geneva conventions or the bypassing of the U.N. at every convenience, for credence to this statement. ).
Iran should not get nuclear weapons, nor any other nation however convenient to the present nuclear crowd. In addition, the present nuclear armed gang should indeed take to heart the ethos of the NPT and disarm.
This will take leadership, I hope someone steps up and even better if an American. There is no wish to spite American foreign policy, only a wish for a better, safer world. America too, has to do its part - which it is a dismal failure at, at present.
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gang ah jee
Joined: 14 Jan 2003
Location: city of paper
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 10:23 pm Post subject: Re: On a Nuclear-Capable Iran: for the Record... |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| In short, please tell me that, in your arguments for a more peaceful world, this does indeed concern you and that you are not willing and ready to see regimes such as Iran acquire nuclear weapons just so that America might be taken down a notch, come what may... |
I don't think any real (i.e. non-socktroll) posters on this board want to see Iran or any other countries get nuclear weapons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sincinnatislink
Joined: 30 Jan 2007
Location: Top secret.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't want any countries to have nuclear weapons. Categorically.
That said, I understand a country's desire to have nuclear weapons when other countries, who have nuclear weapons, loudly say the first country is evil. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Octavius Hite
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 11:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My friend and I were debating this just the other week. He took the postion Gopher is speaking about: How dare the US tell others how to behave when they don't behave and invented the goddamned things!
Now, the usual counter to this is that Iran is not a rational player and therefore cannot be trusted to behave rationally with the power that comes from these weapons.
I was going to use that but then I thought of a new and I think better argument that lets us "lefties" argue against Iran and all others that have these weapons.
Once a country gets these weapons, they atomatically become irrational players. Before WWII the notion of foriegn intervention, while being around, was nothing compared to today and especially nothing compared to the Cold War. The bomb allowed the US and Russia to actively oppress/dominate/conquer/control other countries (US: Guatamala, Haiti, Chile, South Vietnam, S. Korea, etc; Russia: Czech, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Central Asia, N.Korea etc). France getting the bomb allowed it to believe that it could reclaim it's imperial past (Indo-China, the South Pacific, Africa, etc). England used it to determine the outcome of the Falklands (Argentina was never going to win). China used to keep the US at bay while it annexed Tibet and the British had to give up Hong Kong. As well, they could interfer in the Korean war with impunity. Finally, Israel uses the weapon not only to garuntee their survival but to commit war crimes against civilians without fear of prosecution or reprimand.
Countries that get these weapons use them to terrorize others and thats why we should not let Iran have them and why all, yes ALL, countries should be forced to get rid of them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gang ah jee
Joined: 14 Jan 2003
Location: city of paper
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 11:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
| China used to keep the US at bay while it annexed Tibet and the British had to give up Hong Kong. As well, they could interfer in the Korean war with impunity. |
China's first nuclear weapons tests were quite some time after the annexation of Tibet and the Korean war.
Something fun I learned while confirming my facts: Taiwan also has a claim on Tibet! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie Cheswyck
Joined: 31 May 2003
Location: University of Western Chile
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 11:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
China entered the Korean War in 1950.
China annexed Tibet in 1951.
China got the Bomb in 1964.
China took on the US and took over Tibet without the Bomb. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Octavius Hite
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Man you guys are such commies!
Just kidding, you're right and I am man enough to know when I've made a mistake. However I still holdup my theory as a better one than just the usual left-wing one of "america is bad so iran can be bad" argument! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
| ...ALL...countries should be forced to get rid of them. |
Yes, agreed. Nice idea. Unworkably-grandiose idealism, however.
These seem to be the real options we confront (at least as I see them):
(a) Status quo. No more nuclear powers. (Deal with disarmament later.)
(b) Tehran and Pyongyang acquire nuclear weapons and this causes others to develop nuclear weapons and rethink their military postures.
Here is what I am hearing (thankfully, not so much on this thread as in the seminar from where I came earlier):
Since a hypocritical, unprincipled America proposes and enforces (a), then there is no reason we should object to or not support (b). After all, fair is fair; Tehran and Pyongyang just want the equality they deserve.
This is not about equality, however, but rather thermonuclear weapons. And potentially intercontinental delivery systems. These weapons could make Hiroshima and Nagasaki look like firecrackers. They could very well fundamentally alter if not destroy all genetic life for a very long time.
I do not think people who advocate letting Iran develop these weapons understand this. It is not a matter of national sovereignty.
And just because the United States wisely refuses to unilaterally cast aside all its strategic weapons (and who would force Beijing, Moscow, and all the others to go along with this, Octavius? what enforcement mechanism might you propose if you were authorized to disarm everyone who possessed nukes...?) this should not authorize the Iranians to build their own, as I already know you agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
I feel tired every time I hear of any country attaining nuclear capabilities. When North Korea tested them last year, I thought "Oh bloody hell...not another..." It just brings us that step closer to a possible catastrophe.
I don't even like nuclear power plants. The more nuclear power plants, the more chance of some stupid disaster. People seem to think Chenobyl can't happen again. I wish I had their confidence.
I think we are all really playing with fire. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Location: Nearly in NK
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Total deaths at Chernobyl were less than 80. Anything more is specualtion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pligganease
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| It just brings us that step closer to a possible catastrophe. |
I think eventual is a better word than possible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seoul_nhl
Joined: 18 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Please tell me that those who sympathize with these sentiments are not inadvertently justifying a nuclear-armed Iran (and, implicitly, a nuclear-armed North Korea as well) just to spite American foreign policy. |
I will tell you this much (as an alleged sympathizer -- my o my, how that language sounds McCarthyian!).
I do not believe in a nuclear "armed" Iran. This should be dealt with and not by threats and bullying and the spreading of misinformation. It should be through open and face to face negotiation AND also sincerity. By sincerity, I mean that the U.S. itself commit and withdraw from its own illicit development of new nuclear weapons delivery systems (illegal in contravention of the NPT) and further, show in good faith its own agenda to disarm and go non nuclear. As it is, with billions spent on military technology of the highest order and a schedule of its own illicit nuclear testing, America cannot sit across the table and demand.
I don't think these two things are a tall order -- other than the fact that the present administration has always resorted to its own way and not that of concensus (see the issue of Guantanamo vs Geneva conventions or the bypassing of the U.N. at every convenience, for credence to this statement. ).
Iran should not get nuclear weapons, nor any other nation however convenient to the present nuclear crowd. In addition, the present nuclear armed gang should indeed take to heart the ethos of the NPT and disarm.
This will take leadership, I hope someone steps up and even better if an American. There is no wish to spite American foreign policy, only a wish for a better, safer world. America too, has to do its part - which it is a dismal failure at, at present.
DD |
I have a two questions for you ddeubel.
1.How do you feel about a nuclear Israel?
2.What do you think of the state of Israel.
The reason I ask you these questions is because you say that you are a sympathizer. I am an Arab myself, my father was born in Alexandria Egypt and immigrated to Canada. Where he met my mother an Irish women. So, yes I'm not a full blooded Arab. But my upbringing was very Arab-esque. I heard tons of anti-semitic talk growing up, but I attended a high school where 90% of the student body were Jews. My brother are married to Arab women one a Palestinian and the other an Egyptian. But I have no sympathy for the Arab cause. The Arab nationals are by far the most backward, brutal and corrupt in the world. What gets me is that Arabs always wants equality and fair treatment by other nations. Yet, they don't even treat there own people with equality in there our countries. I've travelled through the middle east, in both liberal countries and conservative countries. The one thing that you will always see is that Arabs don't except foreigners, with the exception of those who are highly educated or working in the tourism trade. The worries I have over Iran are that they are known for causing conflicts abroad in countries like Algeria, Tunisia, Lebanon and many other countries. With all the anti-semitic talk that comes out of Iran how could anyone not be worried that a radical theocratic government bent on spreading its own ideology on Islam threw which ever means necessary, be trusted with a Nuclear weapon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Location: Nearly in NK
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
guitar:
Your comments are irrelevant.
seoul-nhl made a comment which included this:
What gets me is that Arabs always wants equality and fair treatment by other nations. Yet, they don't even treat there own people with equality in there our countries.
Very very good point.
The only thing DDuhh knows that he hates America so much nothing else matters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
