Why are we fighting so hard to prevent others from having nukes?

I was just listening to a news broadcast about how 52% of Americans want Dems to take over Congress in Nov. and 39% want the Pubs to keep it. Then they said there's no support for the war in Iraq.

I started thinking about Shrub threatening to bomb Iran for refusing to give up their nuklear program. If people don't want the war in Iraq, surely they won't support one in Iran!

But more than that, the US has MOST of the nukes in the World, so how can we insist that nobody else can have any? I know many say it's because the leader of Iran is a nut. And to them I say, SO IS SHRUB!

edited for spelling error

A few years ago, they came really, really close to nuking each other over Kashmir. Maybe not quite "Missiles of October" close, but really damn close.

including the US to get rid of all nukes? Destroy all of them! I really CAN understand why a Country who is being threatened by the US, with a Nuke attack, to want to have their own just for self protection!

I just think it's a situation of "I can do what I want but you can't" syndrome.

Son't you think that causes more trouble than it cures?

it limits our options.

to limit our options so we can't invade them.

they have something we want to invade them for.

control the nuts in the US! If it takes something that radical to make Shrub, Cheney & Rummy sit down and shut up, that I'm thinking I'm for it.

I don't support military action against Iran, not unless it is lead by a VERY VERY large Coalition and sanctioned by the U.N., but I surely don't want them to get Nukes. The guy who is the head of Iran is a religious nut job (imagine Pat Robertson but a Muslim). He believes the world is going to end in a few years, and has flat out said he intends to wipe Israel off the map.

Now imagine the guy who nukes Israel. Israel has the nuke, so they nuke them back. Then Pakistan joins in... hell the entire region will just turn into a giant crater.

I agree, I'd love to see the elimination of all nukes on the face of the Earth - they are dangerous weapons. However, I think at least for the moment that is a pipe dream. I'm more content to at least seeing no one else gets them, especially militant governments guided by religious faith than science and reason... oh my, I think I just described what the United States is quickly becoming...

Either way, Iran and Nuclear Weapons do not mix. We should be trying our hand at diplomacy and working hard with Russia to resolve the matter rather than invasion. If we do invade, it has to be with the full support of the United Nations.

I've been thinking that since Clinton was still President. I figure if we have them, there is absolutely no reason why we should be surprised when other countries want them. And while the Shrub is talking up expanding our nuclear program to provide energy alternatives, it certainly shouldn't be acceptable that he's telling Iran that they can't do the same thing.

I was having this argument with someone just the other day. They pointed out the Iranian leader nut factor and when I pointed out the crazy shrub factor, they simply claimed that "we have better intentions". My ass.

Iran is our enemy. If it gets nukes our enemy will have the power to kill millions of us. I don't want to get killed or have anybody else get killed. So, I don't want Iran to have nukes. I hope we can stop them.

I'm willing to overlook an unequal distribution of global power, especially when its in our favor.

I'm hopeful that Iran will cave in before this gets too out of hand. The only thing we are arguing about anymore is Iran's insistence on conducting nuclear research. With all that is at stake, something ought to be worked out over that.

If the guy with nukes (Iran) doesn't give a shit if he or millions of his people die, then he has no fear of being nuked himself. plus his already above mentioned statements.

Iran + nukes = bad news.

If military action is the only way to stop it, then I support it but like someone mentioned we DO need to have a large coalition.