The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 60
bj_945
I am talking about what is right not about what America wants. Those two things are almost always distinct:p:


According to you, what's right is for the US to allow someone to threaten it with nukes, then you wonder how come the US doesn't do what's right.
Obviously because your notion of "right" is absurd, politically biased and hypocritical.

It's very much like your view on the right of return - to you, what's right is to have another civil war, then you criticize Israel for not accepting the right of return.

Grow a spine, for Pete's sake. Get it through your head that your politically biased notions of "right" are merely your own.


Israel is destabilising the middle east today to a far greater extent than Iran. Yet they are allowed nuclear bombs and the Iranians aren"t?


It's not a matter of "allowed".

Either we get along, or each of us has to pick sides and do what we have to do to survive.


They offered to help the Americans by giving them information about the Afghani Taliban. They did and the US did not give anything to the Iranians in return, despite having promised they would.


I'm sure Ahmedinejag got a nice iPod when he visited in the US.


The Iranians helped the USA throughout the war and then offered to help the US rebuild Afghanistan.


What does that have to do with building nukes?


Despite having been treated this way by the Americans, they went back to them to offer help with Iraq. Which the US refused.


Of course. Letting Iran meddle in Iraq is like letting the cat watch the cream.


They went to America. They got past pride etc and offered to help the Americans. That is not stubborn or arrogant but quite the opposite and seriously shows great maturity and restraint from the Iranian government. By refusing their help, the US acted in a stubborn, arrogant and reckless fashion.


And all the while - threatening to destroy the US's allies, and threatening it's neighboring Arab countries.
jburdett
I don't see the problem with it, as they already get enough grief from the rest of the Middle East, and so I think nuclear weapons are a good way of proving that Israel is the boss. I also don't think it's up to other countries to decide who owns weapons capable of mass destruction, unless we all want to disarm (which will never happen anyway).

What does everyone else think?


I agree. Countries like India, US, UK, Israel having nukes is fine by me. That is because I know these countries are democratic and respect innocent human life.

I would be more petrified at the thought of a rogue nation having nukes. Gaddafi's Libya, Pakistan, any African State.
geminibubblegum
Iran is far less likely to be funding Hamas than Hezbollah because of sectarian divides. Besides, Hamas has enough help already, without Iranian contributions....


They all piss in the same pot anyway. All are terrorists.
Cover Drive
I agree. Countries like India, US, UK, Israel having nukes is fine by me. That is because I know these countries are democratic and respect innocent human life.


Just because they cover their killing of innocent people with a facade does not mean they respect human life. What about all the people killed in the War on Terror. These countries are breeding terrorism by acting in such a despicable manner and our own country was involved in all this.
Also, just because they might not always kill people doesn't mean they respect human life. What about the siege of Gaza? Limitations to Palestinian movement in the West Bank? The case of Binyam Mohammed? I don't think that amounts to respecting innocent human life.
Israel having nukes is the driving force behind Iran's program, and personally, I would rather they achieved an equilibrium where they both had nuclear weapons than Israel hiding behind vague comments and calling in Uncle Sam whenever they get the tiniest bit threatened.
Cover Drive
I agree. Countries like India, US, UK, Israel having nukes is fine by me. That is because I know these countries are democratic and respect innocent human life.


What about China?

I would be more petrified at the thought of a rogue nation having nukes. Gaddafi's Libya, Pakistan, any African State.


Seriously? :colonhash:
Reply 65
borismor

a) It's very much like your view on the right of return - to you, what's right is to have another civil war, then you criticize Israel for not accepting the right of return.

b) And all the while - threatening to destroy the US's allies, and threatening it's neighboring Arab countries.


Right, I"m not even going to bother you anymore but I"ll do these two.

a)
1) My idea of right is not to "have another civil war". My idea of right is for the land to return to the Palestinian people.
2) Considering that is never going to happen, the right to return is the best thing we can do for the Palestinian people. They might have to live under a government that is not their own, but at least they should have the right to their private property back. Talking real-world practical solution, I advocate the right of return. It is the least Israel can do and of course anyone with a brain would criticise Israel for refusing to give back property they forced people out of.

b)
Right as I explained carefully to you, I do not expect Iran and the US to agree on everything. However, if the US are given opportunities to reconcile and reduce tensions they should take it. If they reconcile, they can better discuss their differences and compromise. Iran extended their hand and the US threw it back at Iran.
Neville 'Facking' Bartos
What about China?




Seriously? :colonhash:


Not a fan of China but at least even they wouldn't kill millions in this modern era. Yeah why not about Pakistan :rolleyes: Pakistan Taleban are gaining power and it only would take one slip up or covert assistance from the ISI for them to have it. I don't think that's a good thing tho u may disagree but considering they hate anyone non muslim I would have fear the worst.
geminibubblegum
Just because they cover their killing of innocent people with a facade does not mean they respect human life. What about all the people killed in the War on Terror. These countries are breeding terrorism by acting in such a despicable manner and our own country was involved in all this.
Also, just because they might not always kill people doesn't mean they respect human life. What about the siege of Gaza? Limitations to Palestinian movement in the West Bank? The case of Binyam Mohammed? I don't think that amounts to respecting innocent human life.
Israel having nukes is the driving force behind Iran's program, and personally, I would rather they achieved an equilibrium where they both had nuclear weapons than Israel hiding behind vague comments and calling in Uncle Sam whenever they get the tiniest bit threatened.


Loss of innocent life cannot be avoided in wars. Yes I feel sorry for any innocent person dying but what about the Kashmir genocide of Hindus since the 1980's? 9/11? War on Terror is a just war to remove the stupid ideology of islamic terrorists. As for Binyam, this is one guy who is from ethopia and converted to islam recently and thought afghanistan would be a good place to start learning :rolleyes: If you believe that then you are stupid. If he knew of a serious terrorist plot to kill thousands then we are duty bound to get it out of him at any cost.

As for Palestine, the message is clear. If they stop firing rockets and stop blowing themselves up, they will eventually be granted a state to co-exist with Israel. You can't talk about Israel and Iran in the same breath-one is a free democratic state and one is backward, stupid, run by some unjust Council that denies the holocaust and wants to eradicate Israel of the map.

That is in both interests now as we can't change the past.
Cover Drive
Not a fan of China but at least even they wouldn't kill millions in this modern era.


Why not? if they were in a brutal war whos to say they won't?

Yeah why not about Pakistan :rolleyes: Pakistan Taleban are gaining power and it only would take one slip up or covert assistance from the ISI for them to have it. I don't think that's a good thing tho u may disagree but considering they hate anyone non muslim I would have fear the worst.


If you would like to know, the Taliban even hold other Muslims in hateful contempt, myself included. So you wont find any love from me. I thought cos u listed Pakistan earlier, you were unaware they had nukes. Never mind
Neville 'Facking' Bartos
Why not? if they were in a brutal war whos to say they won't?



If you would like to know, the Taliban even hold other Muslims in hateful contempt, myself included. So you wont find any love from me. I thought cos u listed Pakistan earlier, you were unaware they had nukes. Never mind


I am aware they have nukes lol, I am of Indian origin. I know the Taleban hate many types of muslims, but the bottom line is they are gaining in strength in Pakistan so must have alot of support.
Reply 70
borismor
Not very likely at all. What's the point in going to war against someone that
has nuclear weapons?

As long as there's a clear tie breaker in the middle east, there won't be another army vs. army war like we've seen in 73.


Muslim countries think Israel wouldn't dare use nukes against them because they clearly don't have any of their own...:wink:
Cover Drive
I agree. Countries like India, US, UK, Israel having nukes is fine by me. That is because I know these countries are democratic and respect innocent human life.


1 million+ dead Iraqis would probably disagree with you.
Reply 72
Jay Riall
1 million+ dead Iraqis would probably disagree with you.


They weren't Christians...hence its alright... :eek:
Jay Riall
1 million+ dead Iraqis would probably disagree with you.


One error doesn't define a nation. The intentions were right. Whatever way you paint it, the west is more democratic than african and middle east states-tin pot dictatorships. So therefore I prefer nukes in the hands of the west really. Quite simple :smile:
Cover Drive
One error doesn't define a nation. The intentions were right. Whatever way you paint it, the west is more democratic than african and middle east states-tin pot dictatorships. So therefore I prefer nukes in the hands of the west really. Quite simple :smile:


Vietnam, Korea, Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, many South American countries. lol at one error.
Jay Riall
Vietnam, Korea, Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, many South American countries. lol at one error.


Nobody is saying that Western state's foreign policy is perfect, but that it's preferable to the potential foreign policy of more unstable, less democratic states.
Jay Riall
Vietnam, Korea, Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, many South American countries. lol at one error.


As I said, whatever u say the west is democratic and has held free elections for centuries :smile:

There are so many catalogue of errors in african s***hole states and in middle east, but it's the norm that's why no one analyses it. If you like these places more than the west and they make you feel "safe" by all means f*** right of there :rolleyes:
Reply 77
Israel are always under threat from other countries, and they need a "one up" so to speak, so ye, they should be allowed them.
CoverDrive

I am aware they have nukes lol, I am of Indian origin. I know the Taleban hate many types of muslims, but the bottom line is they are gaining in strength in Pakistan so must have alot of support.


really, so the US pushing them out of Afghanistan through a porous border has nothing to do with it then...... the government is so weak they can't do ******** and if the army gets involved heavily with govt etc. the US will cut aid.. 'due democratic process' for mr 10%, oh wait mr 100% :rolleyes:
Do you think that everyone in that region isn't terrified.. anyone vaguely educated and who can afford to leave is doing so, they want to give their children an education. the stupid, pathetic government has copped-out by allowing them shariah law which basically means the taliban rule that area so they can do whatever they like.
like whipping a 17 year old girl for going out in public with her father in law ( i think)
now, even under STRICT sharia law, she should have been allowed to take her punishment in private, not humiliated on camera. the high court ordered a copy of the judgement and the girl to be presented in islamabad for a review of the judgement under sharia but will that happen? no. the taliban has no popular support, but neither has the government. They both like rent-a-crowds.
Reply 79
Cover Drive
I agree. Countries like India, US, UK, Israel having nukes is fine by me. That is because I know these countries are democratic and respect innocent human life.


The UK and US have killed thousands of "innocent" civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan etc.
Israel just killed thousands in the Gaza strip, often through illegal methods that have been deemed by the Human Rights Watch as "evidence of war crimes"...
India and Pakistan largely threaten each other with nukes...