Why is an Iranian nuclear bomb supposed to be more dangerous than an American, Israeli or French?

Question

This question was asked at the Dropping Knowledge event on 9th September by Wolfgang Jost, 23, Berlin, Germany. To find out more about Dropping Knowledge check out our blog:

Dropping Knowledge in the UK: http://uk.blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-qT1KKPQoRKdVT4lowpJCljbFokkuIzI8?p=1048

Dropping Knowledge in the US: http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-d8pH0dcoRKeB12yOcnUQp.9VCFos?p=12745

To discuss this subject in more detail follow this link to the official Dropping Knowledge website: http://www.droppingknowledge.org/bin/posts/focus/8189.page

Answer 1

Its like a car it doesn't matter who made it, it's who is driving it you need to worry about.

Personally I am not happy aboout the amount if wreckless drivers on the road..........theres one to think about

Answer 2

A nuke is a nuke, dangerous in any hand, and in my opinion, the american hand most ... they're the only ones who used it till now, right?

I also think that if israel is allowed a certain level of nuclear technology, all the surrounding countries should be allowed the same level, or restrict nuclear development in the region equally.
I also think that it's perfectly okay that a country becomes a super power and regulates the political and military stuff between countries, because with power comes responsibility, but this super power must work for the good of everybody not for its own only as the US is now.

Bottom line:
Iran should have their own nuclear facilities whether they're gonna make a bomb or not, as long as other countries have nukes.

Answer 3

The only reason I can thnk of is that people have the perception that the Iranians are more likely to USE it than the Americans or the French. We all know that the French are better at surrendering (Franko Prussioan War, WWI WWII) and the Americans are just too afraid of what the rest of the world would think to even consider the idea. The Iraninas suffer from neither of these disabilities, so people assume that they will use use it simply for s's and g's.

Answer 4

The most dangerous nuclear bomb, of course, would have been a German nuclear bomb. At least, isn't that what Einstein warned President Roosevelt about back when Germans were the first creatures on this planet to conceive of such an abomination? In 1954, Einstein stated, "I made one great mistake in my life . . .when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made; but there was some justification - the danger that the Germans would make them." (Isn't Dropping Knowledge funded by an old Nazi collaborator?)

Answer 5

Iran has the right to develop peaceful uses of nuclear energy under the NPT (the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty which is a flawed treaty). According to this treaty only the US, UK, France, China and Russia (as successor to the Soviet Union) have the right to officially produce nuclear weapons. Many more countries have the capability to do so and some actually have nuclear bombs.
There is no "right" or "less dangerous" nuclear weapon. They are all dangerous and horrible. Even Robert McNamara admitted that at most the nuclear "haves" like the US would need only 10 nuclear bombs as deterrence.
Despite the propaganda flowing out there, I don't see Iran as one of the "crazies". I would be much more concerned about North Korea.
No bomb is a good bomb. No nuke is a good nuke. We must all work towards abolishing them all.

Answer 6

Because the belief in the west is that the Iranians are much more likely to use it. In miltiary confilcts the US does everything it can to prevent their troops for being killed. France tires not to get involved at all and even Israel does it's best to get it's captured troops back. Even most western based terrorist organisations do not conciously kill themselves in the process of attacking the enemy. However isalmic terrorists do send people who's aim is to kill themselves as well as the enemy. This willingness to die is what concerns people about Islamic states having the bomb. Mutually assured destruction is what prevented a war between the Soviet union and the US. If your enemy is not as scared of dying as you are then they could be consider to be a greater threat. Also Iran has publicly statted that it would like to see the destruction of Israel. Give them a Nuclear weapon and they might just try to realise that wish.

Answer 7

It is considered more dangerous by who? By Americans, Israeli, French etc, it is certainly considered more dangerous. If you asked the question to Iranians, they will say it is less dangerous. It's a matter of perspective.

Unfortunately throughout modern human history, white people have gone on plundering, pillaging, raping, ravishing, enslaving and destroying other civilizations. And the means that they have used have often come from other sources than their own brains. Gunpowder was invented in China, but used extensively by Europe against many civilzations. No other race, not a single one, has caused as much destruction in the world as have people of the white European stock.

Yes they have contributed to human progress as well, but their contribution depended entirely on the knowledge they took from many other civilizations. Where would Europe be without paper and gunpowder from China, with the Arabic number system, the decimal system and the number zero from India.

This current standoff is just another example of arrogant, airheaded greed and lust for dominance of this race. Narrow-minded, short-sighted idiots.

In the spirit of the answer below why is a Harry S. Truman armed with a nuclear weapon more dangerous than a Kim Jong Il. Truman used it, right? On defenceless concentrations of civilians. Kim hasn't.

So shove it.

Answer 8

A nuclear bomb is a nuclear bomb. In this case they are worried about the government behind the bomb. They also worry about Korea.

An American, Israeli, or French bomb is probably more powerful, but a lot less likely to be used. An Iranian bomb or a Korean bomb is more likely to be used because the government behind the bomb is unstable and the citizens are not informed about the deadliness of a nuclear explosion.

There is also the possibility that Iran will give a nuclear device to terrorists so their hands are clean, but we still get the explosion. If THAT happens, you can expect very fast military action against Iran. It won't be nuclear because the US isn't that stupid, but it will completely remove every Iranian government figure.

If the US is smart, they will start broadcasting footage of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to both countries and educate the citizens on how deadly a nuclear explosion can be.

Answer 9

The answer is rather simple, Iran is America's enemy. Israel, UK, France, et. al. are not. America feels its enemy having a nuclear bomb is a threat.

Also as a signing member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that at the time did not have a nuclear weapon, Iran is not allowed to have nuclear weapons, it would be a violation of international law.

This all being said, there is no conclusive evidence to suggest that Iran is building a nuclear weapon or nuclear-grade uranium enrichment. There are different grades of uranium, you need a higher grade of it to use in a nuclear bomb. Because of how high grade it is, it puts off an extraordinarily large amount of radiation. Therefore, it is virtually impossible to develop a nuclear bomb in secret. If Iran is or will be building a nuclear weapon, it will not be a secret.

This is something the Western media doesn't report, because it doesn't sell many papers.

Answer 10

It's only more dangerous in the eyes of the U.S. and it's allies that are enemies with Iran. And because the Middle east has a reputation of war since the beginning of time and are constantly fighting to have more power than their neighboring countries, it really wouldn't be a good idea to allow one of those countries to possess a nuclear bomb which could take out one of their neighbors with the push of a button.

Answer 11

This one is very simple. An American bomb is not made to use on me. I can only hope the same is true of the Israeli bomb. The French bomb, well, the French are pretty nasty people toward the Americans but I don't think they will blow us up...yet. But just listen to the words,"Iranian nuclear bomb". Iran wishes to build a bomb for one reason. They plan to use it to attack their enemies. Last time I checked, we are their enemies. It makes more since and is safer to put a small child in a cage full of mad hungry Rottweilers.