Yes, Sanctions Against Iran Can Work!

Discussion in 'Middle East' started by Realite, Feb 4, 2012.

  1. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,717
    Likes Received:
    884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As originally proposed in the late 1990's the only real solution is the establishment of a WMD Free Zone in the Middle East. This case becomes more urgent over time.

    http://www.defencemanagement.com/feature_story.asp?id=19684

    To my knowledge every country in the Middle East, including Iran, agrees with the establishment of this WMD Free Zone except Israel.
     
  2. Margot

    Margot Account closed, not banned

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    Messages:
    62,086
    Likes Received:
    340
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That is true... Saudi Arabia and the GCC have been pressing for a nuke free region for decades.. IMO the reality is that the Arab countries need to spend their money on education, healthcare, clean water rather than wasting it on WMDs.
     
  3. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,717
    Likes Received:
    884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I believe that all rational individuals know that to eliminate nuclear proliferation the first and most urgent task is to disarm the four rogue nuclear weapons nations of N Korea, India, Pakistan, and Israel. Their possession of nuclear weapons fuels nuclear proliferation by other nations in their respective regions.
     
  4. OJLeb

    OJLeb New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    4,831
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Actually Iran has been prevented, up until now, to get involved in any diplomatic solutions to the unrest in Syria. Being Syria's closest ally, you would wonder why certain governments have not wanted Iran at these meetings on Syria?

    Iran has sent plenty of humanitarian aid to help North Korea.

    Iran helps many developing and less developed African countries as well.

    lol Borat, do you ever use the truth in your arguments?


    Yep, terrorist organizations target "Israeli" women and children. When was the last time a rocket has killed a women or child in "Israel"?

    When was the last time a drone strike killed a women or child in Palestine?

    How many women and children have Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PRC, and Hezbollah killed in "Israel"?


    How many women and children has the IDF killed in Palestine and Lebanon?

    It seems you are just sad because after the Shah was removed Iran stopped supporting your terrorism? :( so sad, I know.

    Blah blah blah... How wonderful, you not only know more about Palestine than Palestinians, Lebanon than Lebanese, and Egypt than Egyptians, but also of Iran more than Iranians do.

    You would be an invaluable CIA/Mossad asset. How lucky is PF to have your presence among us.

    Warnings? Uh oh, Birat giving warnings... Yikes...

    And by the way, ummmmm, your second sentance in this part contradicts the first part of this post. Heehee.

    And please, we know you are an internet warmonger, but, try and keep your calls for mass murder and genocide to yourself. Please and thank you :)

    Beside, you and I both know "Israel" does not have the power, balls, or the means to attack Iran without US assistance. So your "threats", as if they were not childish enough, are even more pathetic. Keep that in mind.
     
  5. hedayat_yafte

    hedayat_yafte New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2012
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Who said that North korea is our ally ... you are wrong.
    Syria ... you think about Syria like that????
    There is many Documents founds on that country show that Mosad , Alqaude and many Foreigns enemy are responsible for killing people. and you should know Iran never want to be ally of the government which kill their own people. and also you should know that all the nations has the right to chose their own government like Syrian people did.

    We are so sorry for people you said but none of them aren't killing and murdering by killer soldiers. But Palestinian people have been killed every day since 1948. and you are blind on them because I think you are one of those killing soldiers...

    And be logic boy which side of Israel and Palestinian have more Killed from child and women. Zionism Kill them with all of weapons that USA got to them and You expect that they they encourage the people who killed their children and women???

    Your word hasn't any logic. I think you want to sleep and not seeing those children who is under Israel's Bombing now. So Sleep as deep as you can. but be aware when you stand up from your sleep , you will see another world created by people that you don't expected.

    I think I told you IF YOU DON'T KNOW SOME THING JUST SIT DOWN AND BE QUIET. I'm sure you don't even know what is the rule. And what our rules ... Rules are not for reading or writing they are created for obey ... like killing children and women in war is a very big criminal act but you may right with them cause you never said that's bad and Zionism shouldn't did that...
    this rule is more inhumane to read and not obey by who has bigger power.
    and for your knowledge: Just read some of our rules then say such things little kid.

    I'm Scared :lol: ... for your knowledge: Israel is not thing and If one of those you called sovereign do a stupid do. they aren't against the military of Iran they will begin a war against more than 70 million soldier that love their country and ready for Dye because of their country and their Religion.
    we Don't Scare of not thing just god. and we are ready always. I'm too.

    thanks I'm agree but for all nations should disarm their nuclear weapons.
     
  6. OJLeb

    OJLeb New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    4,831
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You are wasting your time with Borat. He thinks he knows everything about everything.

    But he doesn't.

    And he constantly calls for genocides, whether it is against Palestinians, Lebanese, and now Iranians.

    He wants "Israel" to attack Iran so badly, so while "Israel" suffers from retaliation he can come on this forum and brag or complain or whatever.

    Typical internet general.
     
  7. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,717
    Likes Received:
    884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Pandora's box has been opened on nuclear weapons and it cannot be completely closed. To ensure against any nuclear war there must be nations that have the capability of completely annihilating any nation that uses a nuclear weapon, ever. If any nations uses a nuclear weapon for any reason then it falls upon the authorized nuclear weapon nations to completely annihilate the offending nation.

    I don't even care if it's the United States that uses a nuclear weapon because it would become the responsibility of Britian, France, Russia and China to wipe the United States off the world map. The use of nuclear weapons simply can't be allowed for any purpose, ever again.

    So there is a need for a strategic nuclear weapon capability to ensure that no nation ever uses nuclear weapons again. That does not imply that the number of nuclear weapons can't be substantially reduced by the NPT treaty authorized nations. We don't require enough nuclear weapons to wipe out all advanced life forms on the planet 20-times over.

    At the same time there is no rationalization for more than the five original nuclear weapons nations to possess nuclear weapons. They can't use them and they are defended from nuclear weapons attacks by the five authorized NPT nuclear weapon nations. If any nation were to attack them with a nuclear weapon that nations justifiable should be wiped of the map. If they use their nuclear weapons then their nation would be wiped off the map.
     
  8. OJLeb

    OJLeb New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    4,831
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    0
    While I do see your point, can't the same be said to justify all nations having nuclear weapons?

    The last - and only time - a nuclear missile was used (twice), there was no retaliation against that country - the United States.

    Now, this was 1945, and the US was the only country with it at this time. So the option to nuke the US was not available. But how did goverments of the Allies react to the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima? This is a serious question.

    Would Russia really nuke the United States if it nuked Iran (hypothetically speaking)?

    If India or Pakistan nuked eachother, the other would respond, but would other countries also nuke the instigator?

    This is a very dangerous game to play, and we are all affected by one launch of a nuclear weapon.

    Another scenario, in contrast to yours, is if lets say "Israel" nukes Iran, and the United States and possibly Britain threaten any country which retaliates against "Israel"? I feel this could also he a possibe scenario.
     
  9. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,717
    Likes Received:
    884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The problem is with "all nations" having nuclear weapons is that it only takes one suicidal nut-case to be responsible for the deaths of millions of people. We did not choose the five authorized nuclear weapon nations and in theory only two are required (so long as they're willing to nuke each other if either uses a nuclear weapon).

    It is true that there was no nation that could retalliate against the US in 1945 and, in fact, after the bomb was dropped on Nagasaki even the US was out of nuclear weapons. We dropped to only two bombs in existance at the them.

    We didn't realize the dangerous game being played with nuclear weapons. We have since learned with the Cold War and the creation of thousands and thousands of nuclear weapons that could literally wipe out all of mankind in a matter of minutes that it was not a "game" that could be played.

    The use of nuclear weapons by any nation overrides any other consideration. If Israel uses a nuclear weapon then it should be annihilated and the US should perform that dreadful task. I'm not for any nation being annihilated by nuclear weapons but the dangers inherent in nuclear conflict are so great that there is no other option.

    Of note, something that hasn't been addressed to my knowledge in this thread, is that Iran really doesn't want nuclear weapons. What they want is for Israel to dismantle it's nuclear weapons. For years Iran has insisted that if Israel will dismantle it's nuclear weapons and submit to IAEA inspections that Iran will also submit to the identical inspections. If, for example, Israel allows IAEA inspections of it's nuclear theoretical research then Iran would do the same (it currently refuses those inspections because the NPT does not require them).
     
  10. OJLeb

    OJLeb New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    4,831
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I understand all nations having nukes is also a terrible idea. But again, that willingness to retaliate might be lacking is what I was trying to say. Which is why I am for no nuclear weapons, which will never happen.

    The Cold War did change things, and we might be in Cold War II right now.

    But nuclear weapons have become a useful deterant. Look Afghanistan and Iraq, compared to Pakistan and North Korea, respectively (as I feel they are somewhat similar in their situations).

    A country that launches a nuclear weapon should, but in all honesty I do not believe that would happen. And at the same time, millions of more lives will be destroyed with such a policy.

    Unfortunately it is too late to turn back.

    The fatwas, and denials by Iranian officials falls on deaf ears. The people who want war, want war. Nothing Iran says will change that.
     
  11. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,717
    Likes Received:
    884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not to ignore other comments I wanted to focus on this. Yes, nuclear weapons do present a serious deterant against foreign attacks which is one "logical" reason that Iran might seek to produce a nuclear weapon. I have long maintained that a nation with nuclear weapons should be prohibited from ever initiating any military conflict with another nations for any reason. They should be restricted to only responding defensively against an invasion attempt against them.

    Of course all offensive military actions are prohibited under the UN Charter and all member nations should abide by their treaty obligations as members. The United States and Israel are unquestionably the greatest violators of their treaty obligations as members of the United Nations. Both the US wars against Afghanistan and Iraq violated the UN Charter as neither received express authorization from the UN Security Council which is the sole authority for authorizing any offensive military operations.

    Many "right-wingers" in the United States like to complain about the UN but they are generally hypocrites as they generally endorse violations of the UN Charter. The singular greatest problem with the UN is the veto authority of the five permanent members of the Security Council. The United States has shielded Israel from sanctions for decades when Israel is in direct violation of numerous UNSC Resolutions. Why aren't the same economic sanctions being imposed against Israel that are being imposed against N Korea? Both are rogue nuclear weapons states and should be subjected to the identical treatment by the members of the United Nations. If there is one thing I hate it's hypocracy and the US plays a game of hypocracy in the United Nations.
     
  12. OJLeb

    OJLeb New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    4,831
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Sorry for such a late reply.

    I agree totally, unfortunately most aggressive nation on this planet happens to be nuclear armed.

    Once again, completely agree.

    The veto power has both pros and cons. While historically it has been used to protect a certain state, more recently it is being used to prevent the invasion of Syria.

    However I feel the veto right undermines the legitimacy of the United Nations.
     

Share This Page