NationStates Jolt Archive

Why wouldn't Iran build nuclear reactors?
I mean... the uranium they use comes from their OWN land. They have large uranium deposits, and thus they don't need to import it.

Why wouldn't a nation be allowed to use its OWN resources????

Your opinion on the subject.

Personally, I reckon Iran should be allowed to have as many power plants as they want. They're gonna need the energy, and it's better for the environment than coal or oil/gas.
As for the bombs, one could argue Iran could need them, but then again, them wanting the bomb gives the US the reason to attack. Like a self-fulfilling prophecy.
So, in the spirit of mutual collaboration, I think they should allow UN inspectors to watch what's happening.
Which then of course begs the question: What about Israel? Why can they have nukes but Iran can't? Israel has been involved in far more wars than Iran, so wouldn't they be an ever bigger risk, statistically?

Which then of course begs the question: What about Israel? Why can they have nukes but Iran can't? Israel has been involved in far more wars than Iran, so wouldn't they be an ever bigger risk, statistically?

Because they wont give nukes to terrorists.

I don't think that the building of nuclear powerplants is at issue. The issue, simply put, is whether Iran should obtain fuel for nuclear weapons.

It's easier for the world to prevent nuclear weapons from being built than it is to disarm nuclear powers. By a significant factor.

Trying to prevent the nuclear genie from doing what it wants now that it's out of the bottle is a hopeless strategy, in my opinion. We better face up to the fact that one day everyone will have nuclear weapons capabilities. And definitely nuclear power - what, we're going to force them to use coal and oil power? Nuclear power plants are not bombs, and so what if they were? Iran's got bombs. So it's bigger. Israel's got bombs too. Everyone's got bombs. Try shooting the plane instead so it doesn't bomb you. Missile, warhead etc. Go for ABL and SDI. But no, people see that as wrong somehow, whereas keeping other nations in the industrial age just in case they might make a nuclear reactor that might be used as a weapon that might be used against our nation is just fine. Hey let's occupy Iraq because it might give rise to people who don't like us, who might help people who don't like us, who might attack our nation! Since this will ALWAYS be the case, we'll just have to occupy Iraq... indefinitely.

/rant

I am all for the use of nuclear power if plants properly constructed and supervised.

Because they wont give nukes to terrorists.
oooh, yes of course, I didn't think of that one. Out of sheer fanaticism, Iran is going to give away its' most powerful weapon to unreliable thugs, who might just turn against them whenever they want.
Again, I credit Iranian leaders with just a little more brain than that.

Trying to prevent the nuclear genie from doing what it wants now that it's out of the bottle is a hopeless strategy, in my opinion. We better face up to the fact that one day everyone will have nuclear weapons capabilities.
Dr. Strangelove, or: How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the Bomb :D

oooh, yes of course, I didn't think of that one. Out of sheer fanaticism, Iran is going to give away its' most powerful weapon to unreliable thugs, who might just turn against them whenever they want.
Again, I credit Iranian leaders with just a little more brain than that.

Exactly. For a /major/ nuclear power to give away/lose a nuke, it's possible. For a country which would make maybe half a dozen of the things? Not particularly likely.

Unless, of course, they're /employing/ the terrorists, which is a whole nother kettle of fish.

oooh, yes of course, I didn't think of that one. Out of sheer fanaticism, Iran is going to give away its' most powerful weapon to unreliable thugs, who might just turn against them whenever they want.
Again, I credit Iranian leaders with just a little more brain than that.

But then look who the Manhattan Project handed their bombs to.

Because they wont give nukes to terrorists.

Israel was selling weapons to the governement of South America during aparthied, and they have already sold purified U235 to terrorist organizations in Nigeria.

Unless, of course, they're /employing/ the terrorists, which is a whole nother kettle of fish.
But even then, you wouldn't give your nuke to them. To your secret service, yes, but not to those types.
Apart from the fact that any newly developed nuke might have a size of something like a car. Difficult to smuggle about, especially into a country like Israel or the US.

And what's this BS I hear every once in a while that 'in a few years they will have the knowledge of how to build a nuke'? I'm a highschool chemistry student and I know how to build a nuke.

And what's this BS I hear every once in a while that 'in a few years they will have the knowledge of how to build a nuke'? I'm a highschool chemistry student and I know how to build a nuke.

And I'm a university student whose textbook gives the exact formula and method to make mustard gas. Why haven't the US invaded me yet?

But even then, you wouldn't give your nuke to them. To your secret service, yes, but not to those types.
Apart from the fact that any newly developed nuke might have a size of something like a car. Difficult to smuggle about, especially into a country like Israel or the US.

I think the thing to realize here is that Iran can A. Do alot more damage by giving away nukes instead of directly using them and B. Can make alot more money by selling them to said terrorists. I am not saying if Iran gets nukes the first thing they will do is start selling them to anyone whos willing to buy. What I am saying is that the chances of them giving said nukes to the wrong people is much higher than Isreal doing so.