NationStates Jolt Archive

http://nytimes.com/2005/11/13/international/middleeast/13nukes.html?ei=5094&en=1cf163da1b519f36&hp=&ex=1131858000&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print

Well, if it's accurate and real, then there's something to worry about.

Something to consider - what are the penalties for being wrong?

If it's not real evidence, and they aren't developing any bomb at all, and we do something about it on the basis of "we think it's real" then what happens if we're wrong and we impose tough sanctions, and over time lead to invading Iran?

If it is real, and we don't do anything about it on the basis that "we don't trust our own intel services anymore on anything", then what happens if we're wrong and they accomplish their President's stated goal of striking Israel with a nuclear weapon?

If it is real, and we don't do anything about it on the basis that "we don't trust our own intel services anymore on anything", then what happens if we're wrong and they accomplish their President's stated goal of striking Israel with a nuclear weapon?
Then Israel strikes back, Iran is destroyed, Arab armies invade Israel again, Israel wins, and the Middle East problem is solved. America and Europe bicker about whose fault it was that it ended this way, and while they're not looking China takes over the world.

Iran insists it is pursuing only peaceful energy, and notes that nations like Japan, South Korea and Brazil have advanced civilian nuclear programs and sophisticated missiles, but have been aided by the West in building their programs rather than being accused of trying to make atomic warheads.

"Second-class countries are allowed to produce only tomato paste," said Mr. Larijani, Iran's nuclear negotiator. "The problem is that Iran has come out of its shell and is trying to have advanced technology."

It's a shame that formal logic is no longer taught.

If it is real, and we don't do anything about it on the basis that "we don't trust our own intel services anymore on anything", then what happens if we're wrong and they accomplish their President's stated goal of striking Israel with a nuclear weapon?
They're unlikely to do that (Israel hasn't resorted to nukes thus far, after all): nobody who hasn't heard of fallout is likely to have a clue how to going about making a nuclear weapon.

They're unlikely to do that (Israel hasn't resorted to nukes thus far, after all): nobody who hasn't heard of fallout is likely to have a clue how to going about making a nuclear weapon.

I guess you don't hear the speeches of the current Iranian President... :rolleyes:

If Bush went around, saying he wanted to "wipe <insert country name here> off the face of the Earth", there would be international panic.

The Iranian President has already said the same words in real life.

So, what if you're wrong? And Israel does get nuked by Iran?

At a detonation altitude of 2000 feet, there's not going to be very much fallout at all.

I guess you don't hear the speeches of the current Iranian President... :rolleyes:

If Bush went around, saying he wanted to "wipe <insert country name here> off the face of the Earth", there would be international panic.

The Iranian President has already said the same words in real life.

So, what if you're wrong? And Israel does get nuked by Iran?

At a detonation altitude of 2000 feet, there's not going to be very much fallout at all.
Well I tell you what: if Iran does nuke Israel, you can tell me so.
Until then, this is merely speculation.

Well, if our military wasn't already in shambles because of this Iraq bullshit, maybe we'd have options.

The united states has a recent history of presenting forged documents as evidence for nuclear arms.