Is war with Iran inevitable?

Question

There seems to be undisputable evidence, in my oppinion, that Iran will continue its nuclear programme and will be able to build nuclear weapons in 10 years or so. Iran already funds and supplies arms to terrorism in Lebanon and with a nuclear weapon.... well isn't that like letting Osama have a nuke??? Surely a war now would be better in the long term for peace and democracy?

Answer 1

Iran simply wants to be known as the power in the middle east. What they are doing is simply saber rattling. Even with a nuclear weapon they would simply use it as a "deterrant" as every nuclear nation does. If Israel or any other country were nuked by an Iranian nuclear weapon there would be mutually assured destruction. The Iranian President, who has some truly idiotic quotes, is actually fairly intelligent (teaches a graduate level course at a local university). There's no way that he would allow his country to be destroyed, no one is that foolish. Do I believe that his nuclear program is completely clandestine? Of course not, but I highly doubt he would risk his nation over a war he knows would be impossible to win.

Answer 2

There may be other ways to "discourage" Iran from pursuing their nuclear program... we can bring any number of measures to bear on that long-standing theocracy. We must first "connect" with the youth of Iran, and let them understand how separation of church and state works... and the personal freedoms & rights it assures when "religion" is kept in its place. We need not defame Islam to get the point across... we need only show how pursuing the paths of extremist religious fanaticism when invariably lead to a "no-win" scenario where both the Arab world and the region - Persians included, will ultimately suffer severe economic setbacks and damage to their country's infra-structure... leaflets can be dropped, etc. asking them to get online to various websites, to gain a balanced perspective. If we cannot usurp the power or strangle-hold that the present theocratic regime weilds over its populace,then ,yes, we may indeed need to eventually carry out some tactical, "surgical" strikes against the various suspected programs being carried out by Iran's nuclear initiative. But we can do this without need of a protracted war or 'police' involvement... Iran only needs to be sent a clear message that we are on "zero-tolerance" where nuclear proliferation in the area is concerned.

War, in this day & age, is SO unnecessary as to be laughable: the only real reason we "invaded" Iraq was to secure a strong foot-hold in the Mid-East beyond the "strained" relationship we "enjoy" with Turkey. Just watch: At very least, we will maintain a sizable air base & reconnaisance presence over there, even after we have "officially" 'pulled out.' Another "good" reason that the 'war' in Iran was pursued was so that the US military could expend significant amounts of its already "obsolete" arsenal...this way, the miltary industrial complex can justify expenditures to Congress for building the newest "lastest & greatest," without selling the outdated, though still highly classified weaponry into foriegn hands.

We have what we need now, except for regionable stability. Someone said the a "degree" of instability in that region is actually better for the serving of American interests: I don't believe that this is necessarily the case, but there are any number of schools of thought "out there" & political scientists are creating new "perspectives" on the Middle East all the time.

Answer 3

Unlikely - USA won't give up the right to drive their gas-guzzlers.

On the other hand I^m a bit perplexed. What right have countries with a nuclear arsenal to say other countries can't have one? I mean I'm not convinced that the USA government, for example is psychologically sounder than that of, let's say for example, North Korea. Maybe the haves should set an example by becoming have nots.
Osama bin Laden almost certainly already has the knowledge and the wherewithal.
A war now better for peace and democracy. There's nothing democratic about war and enforced peace i.e. brought about by defeat, eventually results in an attempt at revenge. (WW1/WW11)

Answer 4

Iran is a state who stands up for their rights and people. Osama didn't have a state and is called a "terrorist".

Hizbulah was created for defence purposes and to keep outsiders from entering Lebanon. It seems as though the govt of Lebanon didn't mind Hizbullah defending their country. Perhaps you can point us to proof that they didn't want them there in the last 25 years.

It's a threat to any muslim state if it is threatened by its neighboring muslim states. Well, it's more of a threat now since Bush has been in power. Bush hasn't demonstrated that he respects muslims at all. Therefore, muslims don't trust Bush and we shouldn't expect them to.

All these problems exist because the US gets their hands in other people's business and now it's backfiring, everday, it seems. In Iran, it started in the 50s, at the latest, when the US intervened.

By the way, I am not religious.

Answer 5

Iran it's one more step too actually calling this world war 3!


I will repeat what i have said previously in a similar question! relating to the planes today! but has a similar theme!

assumptions set aside.. what we have here is everyone jumping the gun... the media does have a tendency to over elaborate... i respect fully the services that have come into practise, with a job well done!

But lets assume this is Al Quida! just how is it that they can influence our friends and nationals the British Muslims! Also our friends Muslims around the world... Be You a racist or Peace lover... Muslim people are our friends... There are a lot of people on both sides whom just refuse peace, some because of some mad delusional dream! Some because they are trying to impose democracy and not promoting democracy!

Look we are going on about simple education here... Understanding, guidance... we are talking about human nature and the greed that goes with it...

be you martyring yourself for a cause... or being shot at on a battle field, or sat at home watching ABC News taking in all and sunder, I know deep down none of you wish for terrorism to destroy your lives... none of you wish your children and families lives too be cut short by bombs and guns from the various armed forces, be they occupying or defending even protecting!

Now Racists everywhere take note... extremists (even if you deem your organisation as just!) everywhere take note...Greedy persons take note...

YOU ARE ABOUT TO DESTROY OUR WORLD AND SOCIETIES>>> Remember when you have destroyed everything and looked out onto your destruction, you'll see the wastelands you all once called home, and never live too see your dreams and aspirations become reality...

You will either have to suffer the wrath of globalised shutdown of services and amenities, banks and institutions...

you will need to embark on the major task of rebuilding all that has been destroyed... (Your childrens children may not even see a world even close to how we have it today!)

your technology may well be put back 100 years...

there will be underground networks of people who want too look after themselves!

THINK IT IS ALL NONSENSE! Carry on blowing things up! Carry on threatening until One of these countries release a Nuke!
That is what we all will reap!

Time will tell!

PEACE!

Answer 6

No one shoulod have nuclear weapons. Any place they are set off can not be used for 1000yrs.
http://www.lastdayswarning.clearwire.net/
I saw this site. It talks about nuclear war and says that it will come Sept. 12, 2006.
Whether you believe it or not the site is interesting.
You may believe or just have a laugh.
Take a look!

Answer 7

Not inevitable, but very likely. I also think the western nuclear powers are hypocritical in that they are quite happy to have the bomb but don't want anyone else to have it. There is already an Islamic nuclear bomb as Pakistan has nuclear weapons, but it is more responsible so it is leess likely its bomb will help Al Qaeda.

Answer 8

Yes, Iran is completely determined to use nuclear weapons to bring on global destruction.

It is Shiite belief that by doing this, the "Muslim messiah" will come.

The sad part is, history tells us that such threats are usually ignored. Until it's too late.

Answer 9

no let them make the first move. Even if it taht did mean a nuke was fired w would have the excuse to either annilhilate the country or go in and topple the governmant.

Answer 10

Yes, it is inevitable. Thats the way Bush and his cowboys are going.