Can someone explain to me why...

The right answer is we don't have any rights. But the dynamics of world politics are much more complicated than that. Frankly, nuclear proliferation is a real treat.

Considering you have a bunch of weirdos talking about the "day of reckoning" and willing to push the buttons necessary to kill "the axis of evil" right here at home, what makes you think there's no such weirdos ready to do the same in the name of whatever flavor of deity they have?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DoK

Which allies do we have left other than Israel that support our imperialistic ambitions in the middle east? The war in Iraq alienated almost all of them. I can also think of two very powerful countries (perhaps the 2nd and 3rd most powerful countries in the world) that are adamantly against the US fucking with Iran.

As far as the part about America being the world's superpower, you're saying that if country A is stronger than country B economically and militarily then country A is allowed to control country B however it wants and sanction it for whatever reason it wants? That's a really scary way to think, "The one with the guns can do whatever he wants!" Thank god our country isn't set up like that.

---

Most of the UN countries support sanctions against Iran if they attempt to build nuclear weapons. Yes, China and Russia oppose more serious action in Iran, but I doubt they would actively support Iran getting nuclear weapons.

As for your second point, I'm not saying that's how it should be, that's just how it is. When you have the money and the guns people tend to listen when you speak. After the Soviet Union fell we had the most money and the most guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

"could argue that unstable leaders possessing nuclear weapons are a legitimate threat to our sovereignty."

The fatal counter-argument is that Mutual Assured Destruction has kept nuclear out of the game for 65 years, except for America murdering non-Christian, non-white non-combatants for political ends, aka, terrorism.

---

MAD only works if both sides care about not dying.

tbh, I think I just opened another can of worms... but since I already did, we'll just talk about it.

DoK, we put in control a dude that "god told him" we had to start a war in Iraq. I mean, what if the phone to god is kinda broken and he hears he should wipe the world clean?

That's bad enough. The question is do we want to have more of those or less of those?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DoK

Americans like AFBlue have already been brainwashed into thinking Iraq had WMDs that threatened us and were gonna be used on us, those Americans can easily be tricked all over again :lol

Exactly, Russia and China are both allies to Iran and have no obligation to side with the US. A war in Iran would also probably lead to our deficit getting even more out of control and ultimately defaulting. China won't be very pleased with the US when they default on a payment to China because they're busy spending money occupying China's ally.

---

First, you don't know me...stop trying to act like you do.

Second, the whole argument of the U.S. defaulting on a loan to China is ridiculous. Besides, who says occupying Iran is the logical course of action for preventing them from getting nuclear weapons?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AFBlue

MAD only works if both sides care about not dying.

---

is it your impression one side doesn't?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AFBlue

Most of the UN countries support sanctions against Iran if they attempt to build nuclear weapons.

---

They don't oppose sanctions but sanctions are never the end of it, you're more likely to go to war with a country after you sanction it. If the US sanctioned Iran and stopped there, I wouldn't give a shit either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AFBlue

Yes, China and Russia oppose more serious action in Iran, but I doubt they would actively support Iran getting nuclear weapons.

---

Maybe they don't actually support Iran getting nukes but they also don't want Iran's oil getting under US control.

You're also kidding yourself if you think this is only about Iran having nukes. There are plenty of other countries with unstable governments that have nuclear ambitions, the only difference is Iran happens to have tons of oil. The US, China and Russia wouldn't give two shits about Iran if it wasn't for oil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AFBlue

As for your second point, I'm not saying that's how it should be, that's just how it is. When you have the money and the guns people tend to listen when you speak. After the Soviet Union fell we had the most money and the most guns.

---

History has proven that when world powers get too brazen and too imperialistic, they eventually collapse completely or lose a lot of power (Roman Empire, British Empire, French Empire, Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, etc.). The, "We'll put a boot up your ass, it's the American way!" attitude is what's gonna be this countries undoing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

tbh, I think I just opened another can of worms... but since I already did, we'll just talk about it.

DoK, we put in control a dude that "god told him" we had to start a war in Iraq. I mean, what if the phone to god is kinda broken and he hears he should wipe the world clean?

That's bad enough. The question is do we want to have more of those or less of those?

---

I don't think you opened a can of worms. It's a legitimate point that we'd rather have less countries with less nukes across the globe. And I think that's what most global leaders had in mind when they signed the Non-proliferation Treaty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

tbh, I think I just opened another can of worms... but since I already did, we'll just talk about it.

DoK, we put in control a dude that "god told him" we had to start a war in Iraq. I mean, what if the phone to god is kinda broken and he hears he should wipe the world clean?

That's bad enough. The question is do we want to have more of those or less of those?

---

Wake up. Bush was just a puppet put in control to advance the neocon ideology. The ideology that they could take over an oil rich country and have a eutopia for their corporations. Cheney/Rove were the ones actually pulling the strings on behalf of the neocons.

These neocons are alive and well and would still be close advisers to guys like Romney, Santorum, Perry and Gingrich.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AFBlue

I don't think you opened a can of worms. It's a legitimate point that we'd rather have less countries with less nukes across the globe. And I think that's what most global leaders had in mind when they signed the Non-proliferation Treaty.

---

I think it's a noble goal. I just can't say with a straight face that those countries that don't have nukes don't get extremely nervous when we have our own case of a nutjob in control of pushing the buttons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

Wake up. Bush was just a puppet put in control to advance the neocon ideology. The ideology that they could take over an oil rich country and have a eutopia for their corporations. Cheney/Rove were the ones actually pulling the strings on behalf of the neocons.

These neocons are alive and well and would still be close advisers to guys like Romney, Santorum, Perry and Gingrich.

---

che guevara is a Ron Paul supporter... the real Che is probably rolling in his grave right now :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AFBlue

MAD only works if both sides care about not dying.

---

Maybe ahmadinejad doesn't care about a few thousand (or even more) Iranian people dying, but his own life is a different story, and he'd be dead pretty quickly if he ever nuked the US. On top of that he'd lose all the support he has from China and Russia. Iran would be a parking lot if it ever nuked the US and ahmadinejad isn't stupid enough to not know that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

che guevara is a Ron Paul supporter... the real Che is probably rolling in his grave right now :lmao

---

:rolleyes El Che would be cheering for Ron Paul to the US presidency

Ron Paul Revolution

Liberty or death

any of those ring a bell?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DoK

Maybe ahmadinejad doesn't care about a few thousand (or even more) Iranian people dying, but his own life is a different story, and he'd be dead pretty quickly if he ever nuked the US. On top of that he'd lose all the support he has from China and Russia. Iran would be a parking lot if it ever nuked the US and ahmadinejad isn't stupid enough to not know that.

---

Ahmadinejad wouldn't even be making the call whether to use nukes or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

:rolleyes El Che would be cheering for Ron Paul to the US presidency

---

You either know nothing about Ron Paul or nothing about Che Guevara.

I can't tell which tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

is it your impression one side doesn't?

---

"Is there art that is more beautiful, more divine, and more eternal than the art of martyrdom? A nation with martyrdom knows no captivity."

- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Just sayin'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

:rolleyes El Che would be cheering for Ron Paul to the US presidency

---

If you truly like what el che did, you would stop posting as him in the political forum right now, tbh... :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

:rolleyes El Che would be cheering for Ron Paul to the US presidency

Ron Paul Revolution

Liberty or death

any of those ring a bell?

---

The man said he wouldn't support the civil rights act so much for liberty?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AFBlue

"Is there art that is more beautiful, more divine, and more eternal than the art of martyrdom? A nation with martyrdom knows no captivity."

- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Just sayin'

---

Not the actual leader of Iran.

Just sayin'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

If you truly like what el che did, you would stop posting as him in the political forum right now, tbh... :lol

---

Yet El Che is here, and cheering for a Ron Paul Revolucion

and he ain't going nowhere :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Not the actual leader of Iran.

Just sayin'.

---

Exactly the Ayatollah makes all the final choices, the president seems like a puppet to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AFBlue

"Is there art that is more beautiful, more divine, and more eternal than the art of martyrdom? A nation with martyrdom knows no captivity."

- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Just sayin'

---

"I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace."

- George W. Bush

Just sayin'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurs da champs

Exactly the Ayatollah makes all the final choices, the president seems like a puppet to me.

---

replace Ayatollah with Corporations and you are describing the United States of America

:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

Yet El Che is here, and cheering for a Ron Paul Revolucion

and he ain't going nowhere :lol

---

:lol

ElNono actually brings up a good point about other countries probably being scared about the neo-conservative influence over America's government. When a country like Iraq that posed no threat to the US and never showed any aggression towards the US gets invaded and sent into chaos by the US government (something it'll probably never recover from), it probably makes the people of Iran a little uneasy.