Why does the US and others think they have the right to stop another country like Iran from having nukes?

Question

Why does the US and others think they have the right to stop another country like Iran from having nukes? Especially if we are preaching freedom and democracy, how can we deny another country what we and other nations already have? It seems there a fear of leveling the playing field. I personally would feel uneasy about them having it, and don't want them to,but we seem very hipocritical. I can certainly see why Iran feels like they do. Just curious and would like to hear oppinions

Answer 1

It's called hypocrisy. It's also called the "Bully Rule". Bullies only choose to pick on the weaker.
Should parity in weapons come about, then the bully loses power.
I'd prefer it if ALL nukes were disabled but as long as the U.S. continues to develop even BIGGER killing tools....

Answer 2

Could it be because we did use a couple and found out that the effects are much worse on mankind than we originally thought? I do not think there is a fear of leveling the playing field. It is a field that should not be leveled. Think in the long term. How many more people do we need to have playing on that field? It is bad enough that we do have so many now. Why do other people need to throw away their innocence by picking up an added expenditure to maintain? Aren't experiences like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl proof of the wisdom behind nuclear power?

Answer 3

You know what? There are several other nations that developed nukes that we never cared about, because it was clear they would only be used defensively.

N. Korea and Iran on the other hand have been very clear with their words that nukes may be used for offense on the whim of some lunatic.

I think a good case can be made that it is for the world's best interest to keep them from developing or acquiring them. The US just happens to be in the position of the most able to execute such a policy.

If your neighbor decided to build a cannon, started bragging about how he was going to wipe you and others on your street off the map, don't you think you and your neighbors would have the right to stop him preemptively? Perhaps only one of you in the neighborhood had the might to do so. Wouldn't you want that powerful neighbor to intervene?

Answer 4

Iran has proven in the past that they will support terrorism, or terrorist organizations in order to achieve their political objectives.

Their political objectives have been brought to governing organizations in the past such as the UN, and the governments of different countries. But because their objectives, and requests to achieve these objectives where denied they then turned to terrorist activity as a means of attaining a political end instead of using diplomacy.

Currently they fund, train, and support Hezbollah in Lebonon, Hamas in Egypt/Israel, and Al-Qaeda worldwide. This is a fact. Most terrorist organizations intentionally attack non-military targets in an attempt to "bully" the targeted country into accepting their political aims. However terrorist organizations are limited in their ability to kill in that their weapon capability is often crude and limited.

Should a terrorist organization ever obtain a nuclear weapon then they would most certainly use it, if for nothing more than to kill. The more deaths involved then the better. The more terrifying the event, the better. The more horrible the event the better.

Because of Iran's long history of training, equiping, and supporting terrorist organizations the UN, and the US are attempting to stop them from having access to nuclear weapons.

Obviously the US and the UN do not want Iran to have these devices because they are afraid of them using them indiscriminately. They are also afraid of Iran giving these devices to their "friends" such as Hezbollah, Hamas, Al-Qaeda, or any other group of mindless idiots who will attack those Iran wishs to inflict damage on without the blame coming back to Iran. Atleast this has been their pattern in the past, I see no reason for their tactics to change now.

I do not think there is a fear of leveling the playing field. Should Iran, or any other country attain a nuclear weapon and actually attempt to engage the US in a nuclear exchange they would be completely annihilated.

Aside from the intercontinental ballistic devices housed in the US, one Ohio class submarine from the US fleet could completely wipe out the middle east by itsself. Needless to say the "playing field" is never going to be leveled even if they do get nuclear devices.

Answer 5

THere is something called the United Nations...so US is not the only one stopping the nations who may and are a threat to the freedom and peace of many countries, not just the US. I love Iranians and have many friends in the country, and do not feel that Iranians are a threat...but governments often make decisions that drag their nation into stress and war with other countries. For me I think peace, harmony and reciprocity is the way to be. Also many of the countries do not allow their citizens freedoms that we here take for granted.

Answer 6

Iran is virtually floating on a sea of oil, and could purchase alternative energy sources with oil revenues if it wanted to.

Instead, it spends billions on a nuclear program with the stated intent of enriching Uranium.

There is only one reason Iran wants to enrich Uranium, and that is to produce materials to make nuclear weapons.

Iran has only one reason for wanting to possess nuclear weapons.

That reason is to explode the weapons in the lands of the Infidels as part of their insane religious war against every non-Moslem on the planet.

I think that is a pretty good justification for wanting to stop Iran from bulding nuclear weapons.

Answer 7

Reach way down for any lick of common sense you can muster and then tell me why Iran should not have nukes. What a stupid question.

Answer 8

Because the US believes that it has the sole right to dictate what other countries do.

Power corrupts. Superior military power corrupts foreign policy.

Because the US has greater force of arms, if it decides it doesn't like someone, it claims that as authority to attack them.

People keep citing UN resolutions. But those are just non-binding votes where a bunch of countries collectively decide they don't like someone. It has no force of law.

Answer 9

we as a nation are scared . the land and the inhabitants have been held down with scare tactics sice the inception and what goes around comes around . now that its our turn { the people } or getting close to it are we going to run the same kind of game ?

Answer 10

Had they not spouted off about wiping Israel off the face of the planet, I don't think it would bee the problem it is now.