The New Invasion of Palestine and Kidnapping of Cabinet Members. Another Reason Why Iran should Have Nukes?

Question

Nukes get you respect and negotiation.

No nukes get you Invasion and Occupation?

Tabs... nations have agendas, called the "national interest". No matter how peaceful they claim to be, they all want something. When they want something bad enough they go to war.........unless the other nation has a credible threat.
If the Palestinian Govt. had even 1 nuke (enough to destroy the Israeli economy and thus Israel) do you think there would be an invasion of Palestine now? Iran, who supports the Palestinians and who is watching its neighbor Iraq get occupied, are no fools.

Answer 1

Hard to say, cause in general I'm against nukes .
But you have a point that if you have nukes other countries respect you.
I don't think that US is afraid of nukes and they don't invate Iran. They are afraid that it is going to be worse for them that it is in Iraq. It is said that Persians are very hard fighters.
As for the invasion in Palaistine, oh well that its a very long story that goes ages behind.
Bottom line no nukes at all.

Answer 2

Man, I read one of your other answers to a lady with a child and a boyfriend that was complaining about the bedroom. Your good advice blew me away with its wisdom.

What's more, it made me think how many times has a white guy given a black guy a compliment on Yahoo? Or visa versa?

Anyway, I don't like nukes at all and hate to see them in the Middle East that has been warring for centuries. So many people will die if one goes off and it may start a chain reaction.

Anyway, I didn't come here for this question but to say that I really respect you for your comments to that lady. I hope to hear some more. You've got a good head!

Answer 3

Yes and no. Yes, nuclear proliferation kept the USSR and United States from going to world war 3. No, we can not allow unstable nations to have nuclear weapons. The selling point of the Second Gulf War was to beat Iraq down before they could produce a nuclear weapon that would prevent us from invading in the future. North Korea had been known for quite some time to be very likely armed with nuclear weapons. We stayed out of North Korea because we knew we would not be able to win a conventional war. They would launch their nukes and bam! 30,000 US troops are gone. Public outrage would overthrow the government.

Now lets put things into prospective. What if every country in the world had a nuclear weapon? Would the threat of mutual assured destruction really deter anyone from launching? I don't believe so. There are plenty of people in the world that are willing to die for an idea. For hope. For pride, and for a few miles of land. Only in nations like the United States where we have everything are we afraid to loose anything. When you are hungry and suffering, and your leader blames the country next door for your problems, would you hesitate for one moment to destroy them?

Answer 4

It's not Iran that is invaded, is it?
Why would Iran need nuclear weapons to negotiate? Negotiate what?
Besides, I very much doubt that they want nuclear weapons only for respect and negotiation.
You may call it negotiating but I call it threatening!
And by the way, I'm not pro America or pro Bush I just don't see why the world needs more weapons that can cause yet more fear and more terror....

Answer 5

Just the opposite, try a little thought before you ask.