i personally think thats a reallly scary move iran is known for its nuk threats i just dont trust them that they are gonna do what they say they will with it? whats everyone elses thoughts? should iran be able to have it?

I personally believe that Russia will supply Iran, and eventually attack Israel. It's no secret that the Iranian (and many other) governments won't be happy till they wipe Israel off the map. Russia's got the power, and Iran's got the guts. Just my two cents.

*edit*
Uh, yeah. It's not a good thing. Nuclear energy itself is dangerous, using it in a war type manner is definitely not a good thing. Sorry if I came across as I thought it was a good thing, no, it's a bad thing. A very baaaad thing. But I do believe it's going to happen none the less.

well yeah but that isnt a good thing what about nuclear fallout etc?

Uh, you guys DO KNOW, don't you, that the Bush administration, to it's undying embarrassment, released an NIE report just two weeks ago that reported that Iran had stopped all nuclear WEAPONS research. That, in fact, it did so back in 2003. So all this crap about Iran with nukes has been hyped beyond the point of absurdity for years now with no basis in fact. And many of us expected a third war, one with Iran, this spring, but for the fact that this report came out, showing the Bush administration once again as enormous bald-faced liars.

Worry about something else, please.

It's crazy. All those lives lost... and for what ?

Why on the hell would Russia want to erase Israel from the map?

C'mon...

I think you're making the unfair assumption that the direction steered by the leadership of both Russia and Iran won't change...that somehow, it will always be as some of it perceive us now.

Many countries have nuclear weapons--and almost all of these states have nations they consider pariahs. And yet, the United States never used nuclear weapons against Iran after our dictatorship there was deposed, and our citizens were taken hostage. The Soviet Union didn't use nuclear weapons against West Germany, despite the fact that the whole country was basically run by survivors of the earlier Nazi government that killed +20 million of their citizens.

That's because use of nuclear weapons is the hardest decision to make, and because every nation, no matter how "on the fringe" we think they are, as well as our own leaders, realize that there is no returning from it (espceially when you only have, say, one or two of them).

President Ahmadinejad probably won't be in office by the time Iran becomes a nuclear power, if ever. We can't just assume the entire Iranian political leadership feels the same way about Israel--never mind the fact that the Iranian Ministry of Culture approved of a soap opera set in 1940s French that is overwhelmingly pro-Jewish (it's about a Persian businessmen whom helps Jews escape the Nazis). Ahmadinejad isn't going to be in office forever, nor is he the single most powerful figure in Iran presently--in fact, thanks to the Iranian emphasis on jurisprudence as national policy, he's something of a puppet for the Ayatollah.



As it stands, there's not a whole lot of reason. It's not a complete impossibility, mind you, but it's somewhat unlikely.

Historically, the USSR and it's successor states, as the CIS, were divided on their policy towards Israel (compared to ourselves--we've invested a huge amount of money in the state, not to mention given Israel nuclear capability). The USSR was closely aligned with Egypt and Syria, but at the same time, despised by less "radical" states like Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Iran (during the Shah's rule). Soviet-Israeli relations started out quite positively (the Soviets were the second nation to recognize Israel after the United States), but degraded over the course of the Cold War.

But considering the modern Russian Federation has rejected many of the old diplomatic ties that belonged to the USSR/CIS, there's nothing to imply Russia wants Israel "off the map"--Israel has fought many states through its history, Russia has not been one of them.

And what stops them from picking the research back up after we are no longer in Iraq? Do you think it might be possible that they stopped the research out of fear that we would consider them next? Just because its stopped now, doesn't mean they won't start it back up again when the heat is off of them, geez Doc, I would think you would be a little more cynical of Iran than that...



So, Russia doesn't trust Iran either. The fact that the United States and Russia both seem to agree that Iran isn't to be totally trusted is telling. What does it take to get the US and Russia to agree on anything? If Russia is concerned about something we are concerned with, shouldn't that concern us?



Iran seems to dispute that Russia has concerns...claims they have full confidence in the peaceful nature of their program? These guys have the best spin doctors in the world I think...as its obvious by the statements released from Russia that they clearly do NOT have full confidence in the peaceful nature of Iran...

Sorry Doc...but, if both the US and Russia are concerned over the same thing, that causes me to be concerned as well...

I support Iran with it's nuclear ambitions on a peaceful level. Warfare is something I am against.

If Iran believes that it needs to arm itself against an enemy then I will understand. As for them being evil and trying to destroy Israel I have two things to say:

1. America isn't in any position, nor will it ever be, to point the finger on another nations with the history it has on meddling with other governments.
2. As for the comment about they want "Israel off the map." We all do! Since it started there was nothing but war and hate for 60 some years.

Being concerned about Iran... We should be concerned about any country developing nuclear weapons. We were upset when Pakistan was developing nukes. And India. And they both were and are allies! We would be very upset if Mexico or Brazil developed nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are bad things for other people to have.

Having said that, there is a peculiar and out-of-touch with reality thing going on with those on the extreme right with regard to Iran's nuclear capability. How many times do you need to hear it? They haven't had a nuclear program since 2003!!! And all this time, we have been hyperventilating, preparing for a war over an imaginary program, and our president has been telling the world about how we may be on the verge of World War III... over a weapons program that hasn't existed.

Are you NEVER HAPPY?????

Not having one since 2003 doesn't mean they can't immediately resume that program as soon as our troops are outside if striking distance! Right now, if we found an active weapons program in Iran, with our troops nearby in Iraq, we can easily strike at it...Of course they TEMPORARILY stopped their research, because they knew we would be close by in Iraq, and they didn't want to get caught. If I am a crystal meth producer, and I know the cops are next door, you can bet I am gonna get rid of the evidence too! Having the cops that close will make me nervous. But, as soon as the cops are gone, what is to stop me from resuming my meth production? You are assuming that just because they stopped, that they won't start again as soon as we are gone. And, if they stopped in 2003, clearly, the weapons program DID exist. You can't stop a program that never existed, can you? Did Iran destroy all of its research, or did they file it away? Did they destroy all of their labs, or did they merely move the machines, and transform the labs into something innocuous? What did Iran do with the scientists that were researching it? Until we know those facts, I am sorry Doc, but if you seriously believe that Iran all of a sudden went "you know, we really don't need this, lets just stop our research now, and never resume it..." you are being incredibly naive.

Iran didn't stop its nuclear weapons research in 2003 for the hell of it, or because they lost interest. They stopped it because they were afraid to continue it while we have troops that close by. They stopped it because they didn't want to get caught with a current program as long as we were still hanging out in the Middle East. We leave, they resume it...

The only sensible foreign policy is one that adheres to the following addage:
"Hope for the best, prepare for the worst."

Iran is like a kid in the kitchen, after he asks for a cookie, and you say no. On a hunch, you go to the kitchen, to find the kid standing there, looking at you innocently, with the cookie jar down from the cupboard. When you ask if they were trying to grab some cookies, they say no. You didn't catch them with a cookie in hand, after all, so they must be completely innocent...now...what happens when you leave the kitchen again? Does the kid innocently put the cookie jar back in the cupboard when you leave, unmolested, or does the kid steal a cookie when you leave? When you weren't in the kitchen, the kid got the cookie jar down, after you already said no cookies, why should you believe them when they say they weren't attempting to steal a cookie?


And really, enough with the political hyperbole. You act as if America is the only nation that has condemned Iran's nuclear research programs.

I do believe however, that Russia is being smarter than they might appear with this. Essentially, Russia believes Iran is bluffing, and Russia decided to call that bluff. The plutonium that Russia provided them is traceable, if it ends up anywhere other than an innocent power plant, Iran will have a lot of explaining to do. Iran will have to come up with more excuses as to why they refuse to back down from their uranium enrichment research, as they now have access to a nuclear power source for their "innocent" endeavors. If they persist, it raises the question as to why they need to. Russia believes that Iran doesn't have any convincing arguments to sustain its research. Russia has been almost as critical of Iran's nuclear research as the United States has, they are just going about it differently...they are giving Iran a rope, and waiting to see if Iran makes that rope a noose to hang itself with...Russia didn't just blindly give Iran nuclear grade plutonium. They thought this matter through. Russia isn't that stupid. They believe Iran is disengenious, and are testing that hypothesis.

Davious, if Iran is so worried about the proximity of the United States to it's borders, why did they resume their enrichment program?

Why wouldn't they do a North Korea and simply withdrawl from the NPT instead of VOLUNTARILY agreeing to sign the Paris Treaty?

Since you like to make analogies, I'll make one of my own. I know that you are a supporter of the second amendment... I'll presume on that basis that you probably own a gun. How do I or anyone else know that someday you won't pick up that gun and go shoot up a school? Why shouldn't society use that fear of what you MIGHT do as a basis to confiscate your weapons and keep you under constant surveillance?

We've already launched a war against Iraq based upon pure speculation, and it's been a disaster. A few of us saw through the rhetoric the first time around, and accurately predicted the outcome... that no WMD would be found, that it wouldn't do anything to stop international terrorism, and that we would end up getting involved in a long term occupation that would cost us dearly.

"Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me".

Finally, if Russia is as critical of the Iranian nuclear program as you claim, they aren't doing a very good job of showing it.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europ...iran/index.html



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...7/wputin117.xml





Putin selling the Iranians aircraft and arms? Helping them build a nuclear reactor? Now selling them fuel? If I didn't know any better, it would almost sound as if the Russians are playing off Iran against the west

I do support the Second Amendment...but I do not own a gun, nor have I ever owned a gun. I have never hunted using someone else's gun, nor have I ever fired a weapon at anything living. The extent of my firearms experience is limited to shooting at clay pigeons at my brother's bachelor party. However, my lack of gun ownership doesn't mean I can't support the Amendment. If I support the 19th Amendment, giving women the right to vote, would you assume that I am a woman, as you falsely assume I own guns because I believe in the right to?

Your analogy might be applicable...if I had a history of violence, and had threatened to wipe out my neighbor's family with that gun.

I fully stand by my statements that Russia is not thrilled with Iran's nuclear research. Again, from the full article linked to in the original post:



Why would Russia insist that with the shipment, Iran had no reason to continue its uranium enrichment if they trusted Iran with nuclear power?



Why would Russia want Iran to make its nuclear program more open, if they trusted Iran with nuclear power?



Why would the Russians require the used reactor fuel back if they trusted Iran with nuclear power? (used reactor fuel could be reused in a nuclear weapon...FYI)



Why does Russia want Iran to halt its plans for an enrichment facility, if they trust Iran with nuclear power?



Why does Russia repeatedly urge Iran to cooperate (which it isn't) if they trusted Iran with nuclear power?

Russia did it as a way to keep its eye on Iran. By requiring Iran to return all used reactor fuel back, it ensures that Iran isn't taking it and building bombs with it...Its a failsafe. Its a way to track what happens to the plutonium they send. Russia isn't blindly trusting Iran, Russia is smarter than that.