Unfortunately, it has become common among nations to regard the possession of nuclear weapons as an important status symbol. This is largely because the longterm possessors of nuclear arsenals have been in the habit of throwing their weight around, starting in 1946 when Truman told the Soviets to get out of Iran or they'd be missing Moscow (or something like that). That got the Soviets very interested in joining the club, and subsequent members have been similarly convinced that it's better to become an equal than to allow yourself to be bullied.
As the first U.S. intelligence assessment NOT controlled by a guy whose job was to come up with excuses for wars has concluded that Iran is no longer developing nuclear weapons, it's difficult to guess not only how long that development would take, but when and whether they would resume it.
The head of Iran's hard-line religious leadership, which largely controls the government, explicitly declared some years ago that the possession or use of nuclear weapons was not acceptable to Islam. That certainly reduces the chances of them restarting the program, at least in the short term.
2007-12-05 03:50:59
·
answer #1
·
answered by Samwise 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
First of all, having a nuclear weapon would put Iran at the political talking table. Without a nuclear weapon Iran could never be taken seriously in global community. There an antiquated oppressive regime. Most of the nations of the world have moved beyond this point.
This sort of political structure has very little political sway to be recognized and respected among the nations of the world. We know that Iran wants to destroy Israel. I've attached here a quote from a recent press conference with President Bush.
"But this -- we got a leader in Iran who has announced that he wants to destroy Israel. So I've told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon. I take the threat of Iran with a nuclear weapon very seriously."
2007-12-05 11:48:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by Ian 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Iran wanted nukes to offset Saddam and Iraq. Remember, they fought 3 wars between them during the 1980's. And Saddam used chemical weapons during those battles.
When India and Pakistan started fighting over Kashmir, both countries developed nukes.
When the US dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Stalin ramped up production in the Soviet Union to counter the US.
So when the US got rid of Saddam in 2003, Iran backed off production....no surprise.
If they were to restart their program it would take at least 5-10 years to have a viable nuclear bomb.
2007-12-05 11:37:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Let's see, we name the Axis of Evil, and invade the one nation that our government knew (we have since discovered) didn't have any WMD programs (Iraq), while doing nothing to North Korea, which developed nukes. WMDs were a stated reason for not going to Baghdad in the early 90s, when they still had some stocks of chemical weapons.
Pakistan has nukes, helps to train and brainwash terrorists, has proliferated nukes to rouge nations, but we do nothing.
Unless you're an idiot, the clear message we sent is "get your nukes as fast as you can."
Why do we have nukes? To use? To say "don't f*** with the US?" To bully smaller nations?
Oh, right, but it's okay because we're the good guys, and they're bad, right?
Besides, Iran has stopped all activity towards gaining a nuke for four years now, as a result of NEGOTIATIONS with European nations and China, so it seems open to question whether they really want them or not, or at least how urgent it is in their minds.
2007-12-05 11:45:42
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
There is little likelihood that Iran will have nuclear weapons soon. But to answer your question, put yourself in their place:
The most powerful nation in the world has been saying for years that your country is part of the "axis of evil." They never miss a chance to criticize or to impose sanctions that make life harder for you. They have positioned satellites in permanent orbit over your country so they can watch your every move. They have built large military bases in Saudi Arabia, one of your neighbors, and invaded Iraq, another neighbor. Many people in that country, including high officials, publicly call for the invasion or bombing of your country. You have little hope of standing up against such overwhelming military might, and their economic pressure is making things increasingly desperate for your people. What do you do? How can you protect yourself?
2007-12-05 11:39:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by TG 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
U.S. report says Iran halted nuclear weapons program in 2003
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/12/03/america/cia.php
2007-12-05 11:38:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by qb 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
That's exactly right...
They want them for the same reason we have them.
It's a detterent against invasion. The best defense is a good offense.
If Saddam really did have wmd's...we never would have invaded. It would have been too risky.
NK has nukes, which is why they are still under communist rule.
Israel has nukes which is why they still exist.
Russia has nukes which is why Putin is still there.
Pakistan and Idia both have nukes, which is they haven't gone to war yet. Too risky.
and virtually every country in Europe has them.
2007-12-05 11:38:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋