Would a nuclear Iran threaten Middle Eastern stability?

Question

This is a hypothetical situation.

Answer 1

No...............,

Answer 2

The degree of stability is the key issue here, and a nuclear Iran would threaten world stability. Were you alive during the Iran Hostage Crisis during Jimmy Carter's Administration? If not, look it up. No nukes then. Just the same fanaticism. Why do you think we are after N. Korea to calm down it's nuclear activities? Why do you think Israel pulled off the greatest military strike ever when it sent jets over Baghdad in the 1980's I believe, for the sole purpose of bombing their brand new nuclear power plant built by the French? It was during Reagan's administration so it had to be in the 1980's, and EVERYONE IN THE WORLD was incredibly surprised at the surgical strike against the nuclear power plant in Baghdad where that was the ONLY thing bombed, and a minimum of individuals were killed. If it was destablizing in Iraq back then, and Iran is supporting Iraq, why would you doubt a nuclear Iran would threaten Middle Eastern stability, and moreso, world stability. God Bless you.

Answer 3

Have you been under a rock? If Iran gets nuclear weapons, the world will be at full out war in a matter of weeks. The idiots in Iran have sworn to wipe Israel off the map. Israel, with nukes of their own, will not go down quietly. China and Russia will side with the radicals in Iran for the oil. The US will continue to back the only democratically elected government in the region, Israel. The only winners will the the French. Without the will to stand for anything, the French will be left standing alone. But, who will buy their over priced wine then. So, yes a nuclear Iran will destabilize the middle east more than it already is.

Answer 4

It sure is strange how so many of these types of countries want nuclear weapons.They eventually have them and still nothing has happened. Look at India and Pakistan. How could Iran setting off a nuke somewhere possibly help them or their economy? Once they have them they'll be just as unlikely to want to use them like anyone else. When they start to threaten oil shipments though watch and see what The Saudi do then. Than Iraq or anyone else are just the monkeys in the middle. Such an oily mess uno.

Answer 5

The Middle East outside of the Israeli-Pallie issue lost all of its stability thanks to Jimmy Carter. In case you were not around or forgot.

1976. Carter elected president. Shah of Iran in power. USA and Iran are close allies. Iraq is contained.
1977 Carter sworn in and immediately leans on the Shah to "be nicer" so the Shah allows protests. Protests move to riots. Riots move to attacks on the troops..
JAN 1979. The Shah is forced to flee Iran. A fundamentalist Radical Muslim leader takes control
NOV 1979..... Hostages taken.
DEC 1979. The USSR, seeing the USA has lost control of Iran and has no power base in the Middle East, Invades Afghanistan.
JAN 1980.. President Carter is "shocked" the USSR took advantage of the situation. He starts arming "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan. Osama later joins the groups.
1980 Debates with Reagan. When Carter was called "weak on the military" his campaign leak the secrets of STEALTH (2 years before the stealth fighter became operational) and the B2 bomber, more than a decade before it became operational.
SEP 1980....Iraq, seeing the USA no longer supports IRAN, attacks Iran. A eight year war begins.
NOV 1980 Reagan wins and says he will deal with the hostage situation differently than Carter.
JAN 20, 1981. Reagan is sworn in at the exact same time the hostages are released from Iran.

Like I said, the Middle East was relative stable until Jimmy Carter pulled the rug out from under the shah, destabilizing the entire region.

Answer 6

LOL. Middle Eastern stability! That's a good one! That's like talking about the "glory" of France, Britain, Germany, Spain, Italy, America, ancient Greece, Rome, Egypt, Assyria, Persia, etc.

Answer 7

Considering the fact that they are currently in pursuit of an attempt to overthrow the Iraqi government, packing Hezbollah in Lebanon and openly want to destroy Israel, yeah I would say that Iran with nuclear weapons could cause a problem.

Answer 8

Nope, I think it would stabilize it, The Zionists could not push everyone around anymore and would be forced to make peace with the Palestinians

Answer 9

it fairly is Persian Gulf, no longer the Gulf or the rest. It makes me snigger whilst westerners say "the gulf"! What gulf? The gulf on your outdoor?! How do you assume others to comprehend you by potential of exclaiming the gulf! it fairly is Persian Gulf the the oldest and the final call for the gulf placed in the south of Iran.

Answer 10

I do not think so! It is a matter of have's and have not's.
The only country that should not be allowed to have nuclear weapon is the USA. we are the only one's who have used it.
My be Iran feels threatened by the presence of nuclear weapon in the reagon and is trying to bulid its own defense.

Answer 11

Try global stability!!