|Quoting Tupolev160 (Reply 35):|
but if Iran shouldn't be allowed to possess nuclear weapons so shouldn't Israel or the US, who are far more belligerent and irresponsible towards other nations than Iran and who didn't hesitate to use those or other weapons of mass destruction in the past, far beyond their borders, when their national security wasn't compromised at all.
|Quoting ushermittwoch (Reply 36):|
What do you mean by "externally unstable?" I cannot recall Iran invading other countries, unlike the United States (which they do on a very regular basis).
Good points, and I did anticipate these arguments as potential logical "holes" in my last "FACT." However, let me say what I mean by "externally unstable," and a few other things as well.
- Neither the U.S. nor Israel have the destruction of another country inherent within the founding documents of their countries.
- The president of Iran speaks often about the Holocaust and typically deems it a lie or overall unfounded
- Along with being a Holocaust denier, he also says things like:
"The September 11 incident was a big fabrication as a pretext for the campaign against terrorism and a prelude for staging an invasion against Afghanistan."
"Iran is ready to transfer nuclear know-how to the Islamic countries due to their need.”
"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury,”
Those things are what I mean by externally unstable. I have a decent idea about how posturing works in the middle east and that it is somewhat different than what we are used to in the West, but at the same time, a minor drawdown in the rhetoric by Iran would be exponentially beneficial for the entire country. Merely saying something like "Israel is still our enemy but we will no longer work toward its eventual destruction" would be a huge deal and probably lift many of the economic sanctions that have been placed on it for so long.
The fact that Iran refuses to even act a little bit reasonable in its own best interest tells me that they probably aren't reasonable, at least from a foreign policy/external standpoint. I'm fine if they don't want to cowtow or appease the United States ever, but keeping up their hardest of hard-line stances against Israel is holding them back from being the dominant economic and military power in the Middle East that they really want to (and can easily) be.
Beyond that, yes, Israel and the United States have nuclear weapons and have gone to war; however, the U.S. has only used them once, and only then to end a terrible conflict that would have cost hundreds of thousands of additional lives beyond those who were killed at Heroshima and Nagasaki. Since then, both Israel and the U.S. have engaged in many conflicts and have for the most part have never been close to using their nuclear arsenel (exceptions being the Yom Kippur war for Israel in 1973 as a last-line of defense, and the Cuban Missle Crisis for the U.S. in 1962).
Iran doesn't have that track record because they've never had nuclear arms (and I'd say the same thing for any other country who wants them but doesn't have them - if you don't have them you don't need them). Personally, I wish we could somehow eliminate the concept of nuclear weapons from physics so as to never have to deal or worry about them, but that is obviously not how it works.