Senate The Middle East Discussion Thread

And do you want Iran nuking Israel?
Iran still has a nuclear program going and they do intend to use those nukes if they make a bomb.

What if the Taliban that once did welcomed the Chinese army in Afghanistan turn on them too?

And if China exterminates the Uighur peoples and if the Taliban and al qaeda ignores that would sure be a big boost for Isis recruitment don’t you think?

 

Iran not having nuclear weapons aside, that didn't address what we should do about Israel nuking Afghanistan.

Though it seems you also missed the broader point that baseless made-up scenarios are not useful, as instead of noticing that, you tried to outdo it.

 

US or UK university feminist?

 

Ya know, that would actually help the Taliban. LOL. They could use some wokeness....

 

Well I think we can agree on that. But they aren’t going to be and the Taliban has outlasted America for 20 years and hasn’t changed much. They are just biding their time until we leave. And since we can’t just stay their forever we don’t really have a choice.

 

I mean, you know Vivec isn't going to support the UK -- they're all TERFs.

 

Yeah that was the jo... you know what, never mind.

 

Israel is not nuking anyone unless they are attacked by A nation state. There is a reason the Arab nations have left fighting the Israelis to the Jihadists and Palestinians since 1973 and thats the fact that Israel has Nukes. outside of the Scud attacks from Saddam during the first Gulf War(which took a US guarantee to prevent Israel from retaliating). Israel cannot nuke the Palestinians because they would be exposing their own population to fallout but if attacked by Iran, they would because it far enough away to not risk their own people.

Israel's nukes are a deterrant. Compare the frequency of Wars with its neighbors to from before and after they had nukes. Heck Israel having nuclear capability is one of the main reasons Sadat and King Hussein finally came to the table and signed peace treaties that have actually lasted.

The Taliban are too far away for them to be a real threat to Israel outside of maybe a suitcase nuke/dirty bomb and the Mossad and the Western intelligence agencies are so good at tracking Nuclear threats that they would likely stop that in its tracks before it became a real threat and likely have already.

 

My god none of that is correct. Arab nations stopped caring about Israel. The only nation that is bent out of shape is Iran, hence why saying "the Arab nations" is wrong.

 

My point about that was Israel has nuclear weapons and Israel nuking another country is less likely, and the real countries you should worry about using the nuclear warhead launch codes is Iran because they are trying to make nuclear weapons intend to use them on Israel and other countries too.

Pakistan is a worry because they already have nukes and it could fall easily into the hands of the Taliban,isis or even al qaeda.

Elements within the Pakistani government are allied with the Taliban, al qaeda or even other jihadists groups.

 

If they were going to nuke each other, India and Pakistan would have done it by now.

As to Iran, it sees nukes, not unreasonably, as the best means of self-preservation against invasion - the history of the last 20 years says they are right. Would the invasions of Iraq or Afghanistan happened if they had had them? Probably not.

 

Categorically, I'm more concerned about Israel nuking any country than I am about Iran nuking any country because only one of them can do that.

 

Why would you be worried about Israel nuking another country when Iran, North Korea, Russia, China or even terrorists groups in Pakistan are intentionally trying to use them?

They pose a much bigger danger to national security and international security than Israel does when it comes to nukes and chemical weapons.

It’s obvious that Iran doesn’t have that capability yet but Iran is trying to achieve that goal.

If your thinking Iran is applying to international law about not building nukes, the mullahs of Iran are lying and cheating on the deal.

 

There's a man on either side of you. One has a gun, and one does not have a gun. Which one do you think is a greater risk of shooting you?

That's why.

 

There is a rather massive gap between acquisition of nuclear weapons and use of. The one should not be confused with the other.

As to terrorists, while a non-state actor possessing and using a nuke or dirty bomb was once a policy nightmare spectre, it's being found the end result - that of terror and unease in a population - can be far more easily achieved with low tech means. And more easily replicated and repeated.

 

There's absolutely a gap, just as I don't think getting a gun does not indicate a high risk to use it. But acquiring it is a necessary prerequisite of using it.

 

Which country in your opinion do you think Israel is trying to nuke?

I don’t think Israel threatening a nuclear Holocaust.

There other countries far more dangerous that Israel like Russia, North Korea, and China.

But the biggest bullies in the Middle East is the Iranian mullahs, al qaeda, Russia, Turkey and isis.

 

@black_saber This was about which country I'm currently more concerned about nuking other countries between Israel and Iran. Which, again, is Israel for obvious practical limitations. You seem to have a devotion to vaguely racist arbitrary hypotheticals here that keep you from even responding to the points made.

 

I like how in 15 or so years, Black Saber hasn't grown even a centimetre politically or intellectually. It's the same takes of an alarmed but otherwise unworldly teen.

 

How I wish that could just be the standard general reply to any political posts black_saber makes.

 

Same reason North Korea wanted and got Nukes. Any reasonable country that had a lot of enemies would think about nukes. Especially if your enemies with America.

North Korea saw what happened to Libya and Iraq and decided that the only way to protect themselves from an American invasion was Nukes. The same logic applies to Iran. Although we have tried much harder to stop their nuclear program. And Israel doing the same as well.

 

dear god you people.

You have nuclear weapons for two reasons only; one is to assert influence and control (i.e. ambition) and the other is to act as a deterrent against other nuclear states. That's it. It's not to nuke anyone.

 

It's pretty obvious why Iran wants nuclear weapons. Looking at Iraq, a country without nukes, getting fully invaded by the US and having its government replaced. Or Ukraine, a country that used to have nuclear weapons, gave it up under the guarantee of sovereignty, getting invaded by Russia and literally have an entire region annexed. Then you look at North Korea, who has tested nuclear weapons and has all its guns pointed at South Korea, and all the US can do is military exercises off the coast.

Anyone here, in the position of policy making for Iran, looking at its enemies Israel (who has nukes they just won't admit) and Saudi Arabia (who has a nuclear powered Pakistan ready to join them in a war) who would pursue nukes. And if you don't, you have no business making policy for your country.

 

I disagree with your analysis, Vivec. Iran's not interested in nukes as a deterrent. It's interested in them to support its ambition for greater strategic influence over the MidEast. As I pointed out before, when anakincol was incorrectly calling them Arabs, Iranians are emphatically not Arabs, and this makes Arabs suspicious of them. They do not want Iranian influence over the whole region. Nukes give Iran an advantage they don't have with conventional means of soft and hard power and overt and covert diplomacy.
It's a mistake to think they have nukes with regard to US and/or Israeli intentions and actions.

 

The reality is that more nuclear proliferation is far too dangerous for any equality it brings towards different nations.