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. MichiGator2002
    Offline

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    15,589
    Likes Received:
    403
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,707
    I am sure you really like to believe that, but I can't imagine what basis you have. For instance, Iran *does* nuke Israel, a first strike, ballistic missile attack.

    What do you actually see happening after that? There would NOT be a nuclear response, first of all. Even if we had an intuitive desire in our leadership to do so, at least two members of the UN Security Council would veto and one would probably even saber rattle that it would consider any sort of nuclear bombardment an attack given the potential downstream effects. And that is even before political pushback within the country, environmental and otherwise.

    So we already know we would be talking about conventional war to avoid setting off World War 3, but surely if we have learned anything in 15 years is that we lack the cultural and political will to wage a conventional war to a decisive and victorious conclusion -- after all, isn't victory an archaic term?

    So there really is no way to effectuate this war that pulverizes Iran. And they know it, of course. That is what an asymmetrical nuclear dynamic in the world would get us; asymmetry. Iran gets would get a relatively free reign to threaten nuclear attack at the very least as long as they keep the wheels greased with Moscow and the Chicoms.

    Even the scenario where Hezbollah nukes Israel for them -- so what if it can b traced back? They would just claim it was stolen. Hell they would say Mossad stole it and then lost it. And most in the political classes of the West would take the out, because calling that BS would mean having to do something about it.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  2. chompalot
    Online

    chompalot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    8,953
    Likes Received:
    82
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +305
    It's refreshing to see that not all Christians are neocons when it comes to the ME.
    • Boring Boring x 1
  3. Lawdog88
    Offline

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    30,061
    Likes Received:
    468
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,551
    Vast assumption by those saying, "Not all Iranians want to use the bomb . . . .", from noticing that those that do want to use the bomb - and who actually run things over there - just might, for their deluded, religiously prophetic (Alah said to use it) reasons.
  4. GatorBen
    Online

    GatorBen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    6,449
    Likes Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,410
    My concern with Iran developing nuclear weapons isn't a strong fear that they would use them - I don't think they would - but sits with the destabilizing effect that it would have. If they build a bomb, it would strongly ramp up the pressure a number of other regional states - most notably Saudi Arabia - would feel to build (or acquire) their own.

    There has been some pretty loud talk concerning a supposed deal between the Saudis and Pakistan to acquire either a bomb or the technology to build one on a very, very short time frame in the event Iran tests a weapon.
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2014
    • Agree Agree x 3
  5. chompalot
    Online

    chompalot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    8,953
    Likes Received:
    82
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +305
    Good point. And it is also my main concern. Hopefully, through the Syrian peace talks, progress can also be made towards a resolution to the Shitte/Sunni conflict throughout the ME. We need to try.
  6. HallGator
    Offline

    HallGator Administrator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    42,852
    Likes Received:
    861
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Outer Limits
    Ratings Received:
    +3,083
    I'm sure not in favor of Iran getting nukes and I don't know if lifting the sanctions is the wisest thing to do. The thing is I believe there is a very strong possibility they will wind up with them at some point and anything short of another war is probably not going to stop them. I am not in favor of us getting into a full scale conflict with them if it is at all avoidable. Right now I feel it is.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. chompalot
    Online

    chompalot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    8,953
    Likes Received:
    82
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +305
    That's total hogwash. You have zero evidence that Iran's leadership wants to use the bomb. And they are no more deluded than many of the Christian right and neocons.
    • Disagree Disagree x 3
  8. Lawdog88
    Offline

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    30,061
    Likes Received:
    468
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,551

    So . . . the moderates are in charge, and utter harmless "death to America" type speech, just for the free speech of it ? I mean, they really don't mean that do they (and of course, they are free to say whatever they want, anytime they want, right?) ? And it isn't indicative of something underneath, and much more sinister ?

    I guess I just washed you.
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. chompalot
    Online

    chompalot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    8,953
    Likes Received:
    82
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +305
    Where have I heard "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb bomb Iran" before? Oh yeah, from one of our senior senators and leading neocons. And then there is the evangelist Hagee and his ilk.
    • Boring Boring x 1
  10. chompalot
    Online

    chompalot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    8,953
    Likes Received:
    82
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +305
    I'll admit that Iran does have its saber-rattlers, but so do we. Check these kooks.

    Christian Zionists lobby for US attack on Iran
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2014
    • Boring Boring x 1
  11. Lawdog88
    Offline

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    30,061
    Likes Received:
    468
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,551

    So who said, Bomb . . . Iran ? Not I. And I don't follow Hagee and his ilk, whatever that is.

    But I do think that with nuclear bomb proliferation among countries on more of an edge than others, like Iran (toxic mix of fanatical religion and desire to fulfill human-invented prophesy), that the potential for their use is enhanced.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. G8trGr8t
    Online

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    13,658
    Likes Received:
    933
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    SW Florida
    Ratings Received:
    +1,738
    you make too much sense and have a much too realistic view to have any merit here. Hezbollah "steals" a bomb, puts it on a freighter and detonates in NY Harbor. That is a real world possibility. We had Iran in a corner, their economy was crumbling, the internal pressure was building from the republican guard and the Quds who were feeling the economic pressures, and 0 let em off.
  13. G8trGr8t
    Online

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    13,658
    Likes Received:
    933
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    SW Florida
    Ratings Received:
    +1,738
    • Like Like x 1
  14. MichiGator2002
    Offline

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    15,589
    Likes Received:
    403
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,707
    Or what entirely legitimate reasons there are just don't count, because if it counted, if we acknowledged it for what it was, we would have to deal with the ramifications of it. Chomp's mindset here is exactly why I said Iran could get away with supplying Hezbollah with a nuclear bomb that is unambiguously linked back to them but claiming they had no responsibility -- because to confront the lie of it means one has to deal with the truth of it, and that is more club than they have in the proverbial bag. You need only take Iran's leaders words at face value to be genuinely concerned they would actually use a nuclear weapons, or to be absolutely certain they'd build their foreign policy around the believable threat of it.

    As for "Christians advocating an attack on Iran" -- advocating an attack on Iran for the express and limited purpose of crippling nuclear development is about as immoral and unreasonable as advocating an attack on the Death Star. Who out there on the right prefers the idea of a protracted war with or in Iran to something like that?
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. Lawdog88
    Offline

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    30,061
    Likes Received:
    468
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,551

    Much truth here.

    Just think about it. When a nation-state announces their central foreign policy aim is to anhilliate another country (Israel) as a matter of Divine right, no one can afford to interpret that as, "oh, they don't really mean that."

    When they say stuff like that on the world stage, prudent nations will believe them.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. MichiGator2002
    Offline

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    15,589
    Likes Received:
    403
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,707
    But imprudent nations will gladly lie to themselves that they can't possibly mean it, because... my goodness, if they meant it, that would have to be addressed somehow.
  17. chompalot
    Online

    chompalot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    8,953
    Likes Received:
    82
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +305
  18. Emmitto
    Offline

    Emmitto VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    5,343
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +442
    But because of this, any attack on Israel would come back and sit on Iran whether they were behind it or not. That whole innocent until proven guilty thing doesn't apply when there's a war to wage.

    Plus, since they're so braggadocios about it, why wouldn't they take credit for their ultimate achievement?

    In fact, if you were an enemy of Iran but couldn't gather the resources to take them out, false-flagging Israel would be a good option.

    Then again Iran's big enemy was taken out not too long ago. Heisenberg was driving around in his RV making sarin or something. There were some fancy graphics on a PowerPoint at the U.N. and such. That's the sort of slam dunk evidence you need to start multiple decades-long wars.
    • Funny Funny x 1
  19. Lawdog88
    Offline

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    30,061
    Likes Received:
    468
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,551

    I don't think a nuclear war would last all that long.
  20. Emmitto
    Offline

    Emmitto VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    5,343
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +442
    Agreed. But according to some here there would be no nuclear war. Just Iran getting all jiggy widdit and then a conventional war, or nothing. I don't agree with that, I believe Angry Birds would be flying.

    And while I believe that terrorists detonating a bomb is plausible, I don't buy Iran facilitating it even on the sly. They want the bomb for the same reason everyone else does, leverage. The irrational actor logic is too easy.

Share This Page