Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
We do not have to wait for the Iranians to have nukes, to have seen them use nuclear diplomacy unwisely. Ahmadinejad has talked about hopefully seeing the end of Israel "if we are just patient for a little while longer". This is unacceptable language from a country even dabbling in nukes. They don't get it.
|
I don't see how Ahmadinejad's statement translates into actually performing a nuclear attack on Israel. He wants to see the end of a Jewish state in what was Islamic land, it is a very popular belief in the Islamic world but that doesn't mean he will do anything more than give support to groups that directly oppose Israel. As I've said before, Iran does not have the suicidal goal of "nuking Israel off the map", but becoming a regional power, which would be cemented if Iran became a nuclear power.
There is also the subjectivity of what he means by the "end of Israel". Technically my view of the solution in that area, the bi-national to one-state solution, would be the end of the Jewish state of Israel. I don't want to kill any Israelites, just that a Jewish state in that region will keep causing problems in the future so a secular state will be the best solution. If Ahmadinejad means bombing the region into the ground, then we have a different situation but I have not heard any concrete evidenced pointing to either of those two meanings.
On top of that, many other nuclear powers have talked about taking down other countries but never actually resorted to using nuclear weapons. The United States is the sole exception but, while still unjustifiable, the conditions were different than today. The United States publicly announced its intentions to eliminate Communism but we never nuked the USSR. The Soviets can say the same.
I do have some uneasiness when it comes to Iran and nuclear weapons but I still don't believe they would use them for offensive purposes. Going against US and UN regulations to get nuclear weapons makes sense when looking at Iran's goals, but performing a nuclear attack or selling nuclear weapons to terrorists to attack Israel will directly go against their goals because there would be no Iran afterwards. I don't trust Iran either but they are not that stupid.
Quote:
|
If they wanted nukes as defense against Iraq, well we have sort of neutered that reasoning for the time being. Which makes it hopeful that a recent intelligence report suggested that the Iranian nuke program actually took a breather in 2003, stopping all work on it.
|
Yes, but I still wouldn't be that surprised if they continued in hopes of preventing an attack by the United States, which isn't unreasonable.