Iran 6% away from nuclear weapons

[dit 46,738]

I kind of dont believe they will get one  I just do not see the world allowing it. Iran isn't a North Korea where it is difficult to infiltrate them. Their country is semi open to anyone...cannot be that difficult to destroy their nuke program...though it will have massive and horrible consequences either way. 

I get having Nukes as deterrents from foreign aggression but I also hate the current Iranian regime and if they succeed to obtain nukes it will mean they will reign eternally 

[Economy 52,902]

1 hour ago, Dennis said:

We have to be sensical with our expectations. How can the U.S just casually destroy its nuclear deterrant without other countries doing so? It's just not gonna happen. And it's the sensible position to not disband them until China and Russia also agree to do so. Otherwise, U.S would be exposing itself to nuclear blackmail. 

This is what bothers me about politics these days, people are more interested in "gotcha" arguments and whataboutism, rather than realistic and reasonable proposals.

More nukes in this world is objectively a terrible thing that could lead to the extinction of humanity. Yes there are already nuclear countries, doesnt mean that "nuclear equality" should be a goal now. 

The only solution there is if humanity becomes civilized enough to collectively denuclearize. But no single nation will take such step on its own without the others doing so.

If the US denuclearized they would be like 95% of other countries on earth who don't have nukes

 

The only reason the US is even a special target to begin is because how big it's made it's military presence in the world and how much it's flexed it's muscles over the last century

 

But I agree it's complicated to just get rid of it. But only cuz countries made it complicated in the first place

[Togekiss 3,130]

A conversation about nuclear arms policy that’s basically aMErIcA bAd and weirdly apologist for the Iranian government? On GGD?!

never 

[Dennis 8,391]

1 hour ago, Togekiss said:

A conversation about nuclear arms policy that’s basically aMErIcA bAd and weirdly apologist for the Iranian government? On GGD?!

never 

I just hope that people in the real world think differently from what I see online... because if not we're really doomed. Wierdly people are arguing for nuclear equality now, everyone gets nukes including crazy and brutal regimes. What a nice way for the world to end quickly.

[Dennis 8,391]

3 hours ago, Economy said:

The only reason the US is even a special target to begin is because how big it's made it's military presence in the world and how much it's flexed it's muscles over the last century

Oh okay, I'm sure WW1 and WW2 also happened because evil U.S made its military presence felt in the world, not like the U.S was isolationist prior to 1945 and yet two big world wars happened anyway.

Let's stop kidding ourselves, authoritarian regimes will make a play for world dominance, with or without U.S military presence. Just look at what Russia is doing today, and if NATO did not exist, Putin would've probably recreated the soviet empire, invading all the eastern countries one by one.

Yes, I disapprove of what bush did in Iraq but at least he was out, and I much prefer to live in a world where democracies are the biggest power, where at least we can vote out our leaders when they **** up rather than a world dominated by an unhinged dictator who's president for life (Xi/Putin).

 

 

[Chromatography 10,186]

nuclear weapons was the biggest mistake of mankind