Ahmadinejad's speech and the future of Iran's nuclear programme

[King Henry V]

I was watching yesterday Mahmud Ahmadinejad's, President of Iran, excellently delivered speech yesterday. I am no supporter of Iran but most of the things which he said struck me as true. By what way are certain countries allowed to dictate who and who doesn't have nuclear technology and weapons?
Link. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4257278.stm

[Strike For The South]

Iran is a sovereign nation and they want to pursue nuclear enegy so be it but the USA is a sovereign nation and if we feel tactial strikes on there facitles are needed so be it Iran is an unstable theracorcy known for some extreme viewpoint get the wrong guy in power with couple of ICBMs bye-bye New York London Moscow Berlin Paris Its not good for them to have it

[King Henry V]

Actually Iran is a democracy. If the people choose a mad evil maniac how can the US, the champion democarcy, challenge that? Only if Iran clearly threatens a country can anyone else strike against Iran. It's like someone who has shot someone twice forbidding someone else to get a gun, in case they might shoot someone.

[Strike For The South]

They can build if they want but just don't excepct roses for them international community just another attention crazed country

[Geoffrey S]

Actually Iran is a democracy.
Albeit one where the clerics can choose which politicians are allowed to enter elections; not exactly the sign of a good democracy.

[Meneldil]

Still, Henry V is correct. Iran is nominaly a democracy. Amadinejab has been elected by the Iran nation. I'm not a fan of Iran either, but since the anti-nuclear proliferation treaty is clearly outdated and not respected anymore, I don't see why the US, a country well known for it's almost constant disrespect of international laws, are entitled to allow (or not) a country to own nuclear weapons.

International laws are, as far as I've been taught, based on national sovereignty (sp?). It's part of Iran sovereignty to pursue its nuclear research, either for a civil aim, or for a militaristic one (knowing they're surrounded by hostile countries such as Pakistan and Israel).

[Crazed Rabbit]

I find it odd that those who advocate banning guns don't seem to care about a fanatic theocracy of despots developing nuclear weapons and giving them to other fanatic dictatorships in the middle east.

Nuclear weapons are phenomenally powerful weapons, and there should not be more of them in the world. We should not allow every dictator who wants one to get one, thus evening power with every other country in the world. What if Saddam had had nukes in 1991? What happens when IRan gives some terrorists nukes?

And Iran is only a veneer of a democracy; the clerics choose who runs, probably rig the voting, and then still control all the power anyway.


By what way are certain countries allowed to dictate who and who doesn't have nuclear technology and weapons?

The US is a force for good in the world; Iran has an evi regime. It is only natural, to those who have not yet drowned themselves in the sea of relativity, that the US would try to keep nukes out of Iran's hands, as we strive to keep guns out of criminal's hands.

Crazed Rabbit

[Adrian II]

I find it odd that those who advocate banning guns don't seem to care about a fanatic theocracy of despots developing nuclear weapons and giving them to other fanatic dictatorships in the middle east.That would be your ally Pakistan?

By the way, I find it ironic that opponents of gun control such as Your Rabbitness favour a ban on nuclear arms. Reminds me of a brilliant scene in Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine where he interviews James Nichols, the brother of the Oklahoma City federal building bombing accomplice Terry Nichols. Nichols affirms that everybody should have the right to own a gun. Moore asks: what about a bazooka? Sure, says Nichols, a bazooka too. And tanks? Yeah, tanks as well. And fighter planes? Sure, why not? And nuclear bombs? After thirty seconds of silence suggestive of some deep thinking on his part, Nichols answers that no, not everybody should own a nuclear bomb. Moore asks: why not? Says Nichols: 'Because there are a lot of crazy people out there.'

Best scene in a great movie.

[King Henry V]

So clerics can disbar those who run. But the people can still abstain if they want to. Last time when the candidate was a reformist or a radical, they chose a radical. You can hardly call Iran a dictatoship and like to Saddam Hussein's Iraq. And how is it evil? Because it disagrees with America? There are plenty of evil regimes who are best pals with America. And what would stop America firing off nuclear missiles at a country which doesn't have any. The UN? I agree that nuclear weapons are horifically powerful, so let us get rid of them full stop. Every last warhead should be decomissioned and destroyed. No one should have them. Only that would be fair.

[Tribesman]

The US is a force for good in the world; Iran has an evi regime.
Whats the difference Rabbit ?
Both support terrorists , both interfere in other countries affairs , both have relations with unsavoury regimes , both invade other nations ......oops scratch that last one , Iran only moved masses of troops to the Afghan border and threatened to invade against the Taliban . They didn't go through with it . ~;)

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Still, Henry V is correct. Iran is nominaly a democracy. Amadinejab has been elected by the Iran nation.

The operative word here being nominaly. Anyone who believes Iran is a true democracy is deluding themselves.


Both support terrorists , both interfere in other countries affairs

Your typical moral equivalncy response from the left. You just make yourself look foolish making absurd comparisons like that. I suggest you move to Iraq for a few years and keep us posted on how well you like it there. If you cant tell the difference I suggest you seek proffesional help. I hear Sat has cheap rates for online line consultations. ~D

[Tribesman]

Your typical moral equivalncy response from the left. You just make yourself look foolish making absurd comparisons like that.
Really ?
I consider the whole good/evil nation thing to be complete rubbish .
Absurd is a good word for it .
Look at any nation they all have good things they all have bad things .
Moral equivalancy ?
Are you trying to say that a good nation only supports good terrorists and an evil nation only supports evil terrorists ? Or are you trying to say nothing at all ?

I suggest you move to Iraq for a few years and keep us posted on how well you like it there.
Iraq ????? I thought that was supposed to be the wonderful new model of freedom and democracy in the middle east ~D ~D ~D
Such a pity its a rather messy war zone at the moment isn't it :dizzy2:
Or did you mean Iran ?

[Crazed Rabbit]

That would be your ally Pakistan?

Hmm, no. Pakistan is not a theocracy, is not a bunch of despots (just one unelected President), is under attack itself by Muslim Fanatics, and does not have a policy of giving nukes to other Arab countries (one scientist sold info to NK, by himself).


By the way, I find it ironic that opponents of gun control such as Your Rabbitness favour a ban on nuclear arms. Reminds me of a brilliant scene in Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine where he interviews James Nichols, the brother of the Oklahoma City federal building bombing accomplice Terry Nichols. Nichols affirms that everybody should have the right to own a gun. Moore asks: what about a bazooka? Sure, says Nichols, a bazooka too. And tanks? Yeah, tanks as well. And fighter planes? Sure, why not? And nuclear bombs? After thirty seconds of silence suggestive of some deep thinking on his part, Nichols answers that no, not everybody should own a nuclear bomb. Moore asks: why not? Says Nichols: 'Because there are a lot of crazy people out there.'

Best scene in a great movie.

Bah, what a piece of crap. A bunch of lies and half truths blended together and heavily edited to make it seem true.

And no, I don't want a Nuclear weapons ban. I only want the US to have them.

Could we try and discuss facts instead of refrencing crappy movies that have nothing to do with the topic and trying to get in a witty sound bite?


Are you trying to say that a good nation only supports good terrorists and an evil nation only supports evil terrorists ? Or are you trying to say nothing at all ?

There is good and evil in the world. Do you know any history? Do you know of Stalin and Hitler? You are blind if you don't see it. The US does not support terrorists, while Iran does. Iran also oppresses its own people and plans on giving nukes to other crazies.

Crazed Rabbit

[Tribesman]

The US does not support terrorists
Ha ha ha ha ha , you really are a crazy rabbit aren't you . It did , it does and it will continue to do so .

You are blind if you don't see it.
It is well documented , if you are too myopic to see it then you may possibly be in the early stages of Mixamatosis Rabbit .
If you are in in any doubt about the reality of it then ask Gawian what he thinks of the American backed muslim terrorists in Kosovo ~D ~D ~D

[Crazed Rabbit]

Ha ha ha ha ha , you really are a crazy rabbit aren't you . It did , it does and it will continue to do so .

Proof?


It is well documented , if you are too myopic to see it then you may possibly be in the early stages of Mixamatosis Rabbit .

So the Allies were just as good or bad as Hitler and Stalin in WWII?

Crazed Rabbit

[Papewaio]

That would be your ally Pakistan?


Technically Pakistan is an ally of Australia and hence that of Britain and the USA. Based of course on Cricket. ~:cool:

Also it has held elections again and its trend is towards democracy enough that it has been allowed back into the Commonwealth of Nations.

You should also see why the President held the coup and what he did after the coup... far more in line with Lee of Singapore then Hussain of Iraq.

[Tribesman]

Proof?
Get real Rabbit :dizzy2:
Who is the man currently in America on Immigration charges who is wanted by other counrtries for bombing tourist resorts and blowing up civilian airliners ? Which American Government agency was he working for when he commited those acts of terrorism ?

Which Iranian terrorist group that was involved in the US embassy hostage siege is currently operating out of Iraq , and is having motions put before Congress by US politicians to allow it to reopen its US offices for fundraising ?

Which Kosovan terrorist group was helped by America , who also aided the movement of thousands of fundamentalist Muskim militants from all over the world to get to Yugoslavia ?
Who are all these strange groups that are operating with the US backed governmnet in Iraq ?

Proof ????? what planet have you been living on ?

So the Allies were just as good or bad as Hitler and Stalin in WWII?
I hate to break it to ya , but Stalin was one of the Allies :book: ~D ~D ~D

[Adrian II]

Pakistan is not a theocracy, is not a bunch of despots (just one unelected President), is under attack itself by Muslim Fanatics, and does not have a policy of giving nukes to other Arab countries (one scientist sold info to NK, by himself).No theocracy? And Khan acted all by himself? So much for your factual knowledge.
Bah, what a piece of crap. A bunch of lies and half truths blended together and heavily edited to make it seem true.You probably never watched it anyway. That interview was a single cut. Never mind, we know the truth hurts, and I love it when the mere mention of Moore brings out the four-letter words in American Conservatives. The fact that you guys feel such hatred and fear for a concerned citizen like him, and a loveable character at that, says more about you than about good old Michael.

[King Henry V]

And no, I don't want a Nuclear weapons ban. I only want the US to have them.


Oh wonderful. So what will stop the U.S from exercising golbal tyranny. Give us your oil FOC. No? Boom. Countries protest? Boom. Anyone else doesn't like what we are doing? No one. Good. ~D

[Dâriûsh]

I was watching yesterday Mahmud Ahmadinejad's, President of Iran, excellently delivered speech yesterday. I am no supporter of Iran but most of the things which he said struck me as true. By what way are certain countries allowed to dictate who and who doesn't have nuclear technology and weapons?
Link. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4257278.stm

Don’t fall for their ploy. Of course they’re interested in Nuclear weapons.

Should they ever acquire any, and God forbid that they do, I very much doubt that the revered Gorgons of Tehran intend to give them away. They’re not suicidal. They want these weapons as a deterrent. To prevent any foreign nations from enforcing regime changes. Keeping Iran in their vile grip for as long as possible.