Mola_Ram wrote:
Oh, the person in charge? You mean the Supreme Leader who has final say on all decisions, and who has declared a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons on numerous occasions? You mean that person in charge?
Or do you mean Ahmadinejad, who isn't in power anymore (and was really just a figurehead even then)? The one who was such an idiot that even the clerics in his country were telling him to cut it out with the crazy talk?
Forget rhetoric and think about action. The only war that Iran has been involved with in the past couple of decades was with (notably non-theocratic) Iraq, and that was a war that *Iraq started*. So where are we getting this notion that Iran, of all countries, is going to bring about a nuclear apocalypse?
Again to be clear, there are legitimate reasons to not want Iran (or any nation) to develop more weapons capable of destroying entire cities. There are legitimate arguments to be made there.
But exaggerating the threat, and making shit up about how irrational the Iranian leadership is when significant evidence points to the contrary, does not help those arguments. If anything it makes them weaker, on account of the whole "boy who cried wolf" effect.
I didn't say Iran was going to bring about a nuclear apocalypse. All I said was that the leadership of the country has made very serious statements before that pointed to war. I also said it was little more than hot air.
I don't believe one can fully trust theocratic nations to keep their word. However, I do believe we should give them a chance (while keeping a close eye on them) and if they blow it and decide to start making nuclear weapons, we'll take care of it then.
Edited by Riven326 at 01:10:19 29-08-2015 |
Riven326 57 posts