If Iran gets a nuke, what do they do with it?

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by OklahomaGator, Jan 24, 2014.

  1. OklahomaGator
    Offline

    OklahomaGator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    34,190
    Likes Received:
    1,147
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Miami, OK
    Ratings Received:
    +1,849
    Throughout all of the sanctions and recent negiotations with Iran over their nuclear facilities and activities I have wondered what they would use one for if they got one. Here are my thoughts:

    1. Give it to a terrorist. While I see this as a possibility, it doesn't seem likely UNLESS they have complete control. They very well could maintain control but they would lose physical control which I don't think they would do.

    2. Threaten "insert name here". They keep it but threaten anyone who crosses their ideological line with nuclear attack.

    3. Do nothing, say nothing! Yeah right, like that would happen. They protest over a video, so they won't keep quiet with thus.

    4. Attempt to use it to attack Israel. Unfortunately, I see this as their option with a nuclear weapon(s).

    I'm not sure what other options there are. What are your thoughts?
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,153
    Likes Received:
    4,057
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,920
    Good question, excellent thread! I'll just respond to your bullet points.

    1. Unlikely. They aren't going to develop something just to 'give away.'

    2. Saber rattling, yes since that is what they do.

    3. Most likely choice, imo. They use it, they gets reduced to dust. End of story.

    4. I know this is a real concern for Israel and the rest of the world, But I have to be straight, I just don't see it happening. I really don't. As much as Iran's had it's fingerprints all over a lot of violence and terrorism in the region, use of a nuclear weapon would be of such a different order of magnitude that they know using it would be a certain societal suicide mission.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  3. tim85
    Online

    tim85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    3,774
    Likes Received:
    278
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +969
    The thing is jdr, I almost wonder even if they did use it, how hesitant would others be to also use one on them? I honestly can imagine some questioning what exactly should be done if they did indeed decide to use it, which obviously would be a good thing, but I wonder how swiftly we (or others) would act.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,153
    Likes Received:
    4,057
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,920
    Well we probably would 'rightly' be hesitant, but I think we could crush their major cities with conventional weapons, or if they really did use one just annihilate them. There might be some blowback and I know I would never want to see this come to fruition, but we would almost be forced to just eliminate them. And so even if they had such a passing thought that the world would be hesitant, they aren't all nutjobs in that Iran. I suppose though this is the core of the issue, right?
  5. HallGator
    Online

    HallGator Administrator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    42,497
    Likes Received:
    839
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Outer Limits
    Ratings Received:
    +2,876
    Here's another question:

    What would they gain by using it or giving it to terrorists?
  6. wargunfan
    Offline

    wargunfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,567
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Inside your head.
    Ratings Received:
    +189
    Iran will most likely use their nuclear arsenal as a second strike threat against Israel. Once their weapons are hardened against an Israeli first strike they will have neutralized Israel's nuclear threat. This will allow Iran to turn Hezbollah and Hamas loose on the Jewish state without fear of an Israeli nuclear strike.
  7. OklahomaGator
    Offline

    OklahomaGator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    34,190
    Likes Received:
    1,147
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Miami, OK
    Ratings Received:
    +1,849
    Thanks jdr for your responses. I think in regards to #1 they won't give the bomb away but they might give up waste material to a terrorist.

    #4 seems to be a 1/2 MAD. I just hope the Iranians realize that.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. HallGator
    Online

    HallGator Administrator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    42,497
    Likes Received:
    839
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Outer Limits
    Ratings Received:
    +2,876
    Why would they have to wait till they developed nukes to harden their sites against nuclear threat from Israel?
  9. MichiGator2002
    Offline

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    15,421
    Likes Received:
    388
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,579
    With a nuclear arsenal and an intermediate range ballistic delivery system, Iran becomes de facto head of a new caliphate contained under the Persian nuclear umbrella. Through the mere threat of force they can coerce the price of all middle eastern oil and effectively dictate the end of any sanctions on their own supply. If they choose to make a nuclear strike, they'll do it through the usual plausible deniability proxies like Hezbollah (with the willing cooperation of use-LESS idiots in the West). This would be all it would take to frustrate any will from the US or anywhere else to retaliate against them. But contrary to wgb's hopes, Iran would not exist under this muted threat of annihilation (is this the delusion by which liberals seem to shrug at a nuclear Iran? Dangerous) -- any nuclear response against Iran, whether Iran launched a missile or turned loose their minions in Lebanon or elsewhere, would be dramatically provocative to several other nuclear powers, not least of which is Russia, who could be directly impacted by the aftereffects AND considers Iran a pet project of theirs; Iran as a nuclear power basically gets to borrow the MAD shield without having the similar MAD sheath for their own sword.

    A nuclear Iran is a worst-worst for our national interests in just about every context. Hard to believe there are people with actual policy making influence in this country that don't understand that.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  10. HallGator
    Online

    HallGator Administrator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    42,497
    Likes Received:
    839
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Outer Limits
    Ratings Received:
    +2,876
    Sorry, I don't buy it. There are ramifications to strong arming the region by use of nuclear threats. Several countries who have much bigger nuclear arsenals than Iran have valid stakes in the Mideast and I don't see them just sitting by while Iran gains hegemony over the region and holds the world hostage.
  11. MichiGator2002
    Offline

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    15,421
    Likes Received:
    388
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,579
    Well, right off the bat, you can rule out Western Europe, Canada, and (at least an Obama-esque led) US -- a country with one nuclear weapon they are willing to use is more powerful than a country with 100,000 that they aren't. So before you even start, you're down to Israel, Russia, China, Pakistan, and India as putatively nuclear states who might have both the will and the reasons to counter aggressive economic moves by Iran in the Middle East. Of those, I don't think Pakistan or India would factor in. Russia considers Iran a pet project of sorts, a potential proxy state and economic ally, much as they do Syria. China's plaything in North Korea is the most likely source for a delivery system for Iran, and if they wanted to stop that possibility they could. Which leaves Israel.

    So who is it you're counting on to actually oppose moves like that by Iran with force? And which of them do you think is more in the national interest of this country than just preventing them categorically from getting weapons in the first place?
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. HallGator
    Online

    HallGator Administrator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    42,497
    Likes Received:
    839
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Outer Limits
    Ratings Received:
    +2,876
    Some of the very countries you mentioned. The U.S. first and foremost because they have several allies in the area. I also think you are far too quick to rule out the Europeans as there oil supplies are less stable than ours are. Russia may be an Iranian ally but I don't see they have much to gain by allowing Iran to totally destroy any balance of power that now exists in the Mideast.

    My main concern is there are too many people in this country chomping at the bit for a war with Iran or some type of military intervention. It never stops as we ramp up and move from one war to another. Not saying you are wanting this but there sure seems to be a lot that are. This is one of the very reasons I would not vote for McCain.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,153
    Likes Received:
    4,057
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,920
    #4 is the the number one worry, of course. I really just do not see them ever doing it, though I agree, maybe it's more I hope

    I want to know from folks, what end would it really serve?
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2014
  14. mastoidbone
    Offline

    mastoidbone VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    7,239
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Ratings Received:
    +18
    If they give the bomb to a proxy---there are reliable ways to determine where the uranium was enriched and point finger to iran---therefore they wont give it to anyone.

    I would hate for them to develop a bond---but I think they would be more reliable then Pakistan or N Korea---both of whom have had the bomb for years.
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  15. wargunfan
    Offline

    wargunfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,567
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Inside your head.
    Ratings Received:
    +189
    I'm referring to hardened weapons systems as in missile silos. Once that occurs a second strike capability becomes a deterrent to an Israeli first strike just as the US second strike capability deterred the Soviet Union and now Russia/China/North Korea etc.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. HallGator
    Online

    HallGator Administrator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    42,497
    Likes Received:
    839
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Outer Limits
    Ratings Received:
    +2,876
    If I was them and my enemy had nukes I would be a bit worried too. I don't see that as being an unrealistic fear. Whether that translates into them wanting to attack Israel when they develop nukes is a different story.
  17. wargunfan
    Offline

    wargunfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,567
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Inside your head.
    Ratings Received:
    +189
    Once MAD is established between Israel and Iran Hezbollah and Hamas with the aid of Iran can unleash a campaign of terror inside Israel. Iran will have no fear of Israeli nuclear retaliation. They hope to destabilize Israel to the point that it is no longer viable as a nation state.
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  18. wargunfan
    Offline

    wargunfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,567
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Inside your head.
    Ratings Received:
    +189
    The folks with the biggest worry will be Gaza and the West Bank. Pushed into a corner Israel is likely to eliminate both of these areas as havens for terrorists. Then there will only be Hezbollah to the north to contend with. That's a much tougher proposition.
  19. HallGator
    Online

    HallGator Administrator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    42,497
    Likes Received:
    839
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Outer Limits
    Ratings Received:
    +2,876

    Israel is not going to just sit by and allow this to happen. For that matter neither will the U.S. Iran is not going to all of a sudden become invulnerable by acquiring nukes.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. wargunfan
    Offline

    wargunfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,567
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Inside your head.
    Ratings Received:
    +189
    If recent history is any indicator that is exactly what is happening. The current administration seems not to have the will to play hard ball with Iran. They seem more interested in meaningless treaties designed to keep the lid on until they are out of office. The time has probably passed when Israel could take out Iran's weapons programs short of several nuclear strikes. Not going to happen with the OA refusing to support Israel in a conflict. Netanyahu has little regard for Obama's willingness to stand with Israel.

Share This Page