An obvious question about Iran - Democratic Underground

INdemo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-29-06 06:14 PM
Original message

An obvious question about Iran

Edited on Wed Mar-29-06 06:24 PM by INdemo

How can Bush legitimately question Iran's nuclear enrichment program after going to India and agreeing to furnish that country with nuclear technology. I mean the US will not have any control over who they share that knowledge with right? Oh of course this agreement has to be approved by congress but this is just stupid....Just plain stupid..
edited.....

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

BillZBubb

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-29-06 06:16 PM
Response to Original message

1. I believe it was India, not Pakistan that got the tech deal.

Your basic premise is correct though. Consistency and logic aren't the strong points of the right wing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

unblock

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-29-06 06:17 PM
Response to Original message

2. because iran has oil. duh.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Pavulon

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-29-06 06:35 PM
Response to Original message

3. NPT

India is a non signatory. Iran signed the NPT. India has had the bomb for years. India has an existing nuclear program. India does not chant death to america every friday. India does not threaten to wipe other nations off the map. India will not be getting weapons technology, they will be getting ge reactors. Ones that are less probable to blow up than soviet era crap.

Iran should choose, unsign the treaty or stop enriching uranium.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Donald Ian Rankin

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-29-06 07:42 PM
Response to Original message

4. It's not a matter of "legitimately", unfortunately.

"Realpolitik" is a nasty word, but in this case what matters is what American and Europe can do, and what they can't. They can't stop India getting nuclear weapons, so the best thing they can do is accede gracefully. They probably can't stop Iran getting nuclear weapons, either, but it's worth a try.

Also India (or America, or European nations) having nuclear weaponry is a very bad thing indeed, but it's not as bad as Iran having it, because they're less likely to use it or supply it to those who will.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Pavulon

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-29-06 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #4

5. FYI

India has had the bomb since 74 and has thermonuclear weapons in its stockpile.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/india/nuke/

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

WestSeattle2

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-29-06 07:59 PM
Response to Original message

6. All is not what it appears....

http://www.iht.com/getina/files/319868.html

As a side note, I believe Iran states in its constitution that they believe in the total destruction of another soverign state. That can be a bit unsettling if they are sitting on nukes.

That being said, both the US and the USSR, and the entire world for that matter, lived under the threat of nuclear annihilation for decades during the cold war. MAD, or mutually assured destruction, was an effective deterrent to first strikes, insane as it sounds.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Fri May 10th 2024, 08:04 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.