Will America be willing to scrap its nuclear power and WMDs so it wont appear as a hypocrite to the world?
450703
There is hardly any need for America to conceal its hypocrisy.  \n\nPost war (World War II) American Governments have supported autocratic regimes in Central and South America.  Such regimes in the Persian Gulf region receive American support.  America had the tradition of suppressing democratic movements in these regions.  Yet America claims to be in the forefront for establishing democracy everywhere in the world.\n\nExistence of WMD  was flaunted as one of the reasons for attacking Iraq, while all reports clearly indicated that there was no WMD with Iraq.
1003814
america doesn't give a shit about other people, they've supported probably half the dictators around the world at one time or another, we supplied both iraq and afghanistan with weapons when it was in our best interest. The wmd thing is bullshit, do you really think the united states would attack country that actually had nukes? of course not that's we invaded iraq and not north korea
650869
Somebody will as the world's existance could easily be at stake. If Iran develops nukes it almost assures WW III will come about inside a decade of them aquiring Nukes. If somebody dosen't all that stood by signs a death warrent for the world.
499177
Like it or not, Iran and North Korea are not allowed to have nuclear weapons because an alliance of nations (namely the UN and NATO) have passed restrictions against thier developing of such weapons... That being said, I do (and any reasonable person should) think it is AT LEAST a little hypocritical that we attempt to disarm the world, and yet spend record amounts to arm ourselves (we, as in the the US)... I do agree with you that Bush (at the moment) is a far greater threat to world peace (like him or not, actions are louder than words), than any two nations combined... What angers me is that we are trying to stop Iran from developing nuclear power... they have the legal right to develop nuclear power under the UN, but also must submit themselves to inspection (something they have refused to do)... but, keep in mind that the US openly has a nuclear weapons program, and only a small fraction of it is "visable" to the UN (despite what the politicians say)... With ALL of the above being said, if Iran would openly submit to inspection, I would not be against their RIGHT to develop peaceful nuclear energy (note that all US nuclear POWER facilities are open for inspection)... as for nuclear weapons, it is my firm belief that if one country wishes to disarm another peacefuly, it must do so its self... that is not to say we should completely disarm our nuclear stockpile, as this would create an imbsalance between us, and other world powers (namely China and Russia)... I do know for a fact, that a nuclear (weapons) Iran is a danger to the world, in particular, the US, Europe, and its neigbors... really it is a far more complicated issue than it seems on the surface, and WAY more complicated than our political leaders (and those of other nations) want us to believe. Sanctions (economic, and material) have been proposed (against Iran), but I believe, that given our fragile economic state, imposing such sanctions, would be the economic equivelent of "kicking ourselves in the (censored by yahoo)", and would therefore most likely fail quicly, or WE would face the consequences of economic recesion (thus succeeding in punishing ourselves!?!)... most politicians are playing this economic impact down, and I fear that our government may start bombing Iran soon (much like Iraq under Clinton)... now I know you asked to minimize the "Bush bashing", but I just gotta get it out of my system... It is my thought that the war-monger, chickenhawk, ideological, neofacist, Bushite, republican morons (notice I insulted republicans, and not conservatives, as they are not always one and the same), will drag us into another unecisary conflict... now that I've got that out of my system... I just am not sure what is the BEST solution (or if there is a "best" solution), but I know what we certainly shoudn't do, and I fear we will do it anyways...\n\nto directly answer your question, we are alowed to have a say, only because of our size, and military might, if Iran had these two factors over us, (they were the super power), THEY would be telling US what to do... it's not right, but such struggles between human powers/groups/factions have been going on since the begining of humanity... and will probably go on until humanity is gone... I hate to say it (and as a member of the human race, I am ashamed to), but nothing has changed, same concepts, just different weapons, and different names... same old desires, fortune, land, and power... don't think about it too hard, or you'll wind up like me... the sad thing is majority is power, and in this world, the individule has little say, something I recognize, but never really like to believe...\n\nAnyways, sorry for the long, drawn out, boring rant, but it is a complicated issue, like I said, don't stress about it to mutch.\n\n*************************************\nNever fear "marty barber", I am 100% sure that a good portion of your people are hypo
261152
Yes, if they can manage a nuclear power plant safely. Even if we (the 'free' world) do not trust them, we are not the world's police and until the actually are a threat that we must defend against, then let em do what they want.
327406
Personally .. \n\ni think Americans wouldnt even bat an eye,, I think we are so removed from the fragility of life that war to us is all about Heroes and Freedom and Honor.. Just words... the truth is war brings death and bloodshed.. no honor there, doesnt matter what you are fighting for.. (no disrespect to those who have lost loved ones in any campaigne, my sympathies)\n\nHaving said that sometime we do have to stand up for ourselves.. of late though we seem to be doing it on a whim. Of late it seems that we look more for a reason to go to war then for a reason to avoid it..pre-emtive strikes dont save lives... regardless of how accurate the threat assesment may be or have been.. they will be deaths in launching the premtive strike and what happens if the threat was over stated or frabricated for a different agenda?\n\nWith Iran I think we would open the biggest can of worms ever.. I doubt it will come to that though (war).. or atleast i hope so... A few years ago a report on the middle east highlighted Iran with its large youth popullation as the most likely to become fully democratic and open stronger ties with the west.. And most experts on the region will tell you the Iraq war and the images of civilian casualties and buse has turned the tide.. They have elected the most radical leader they could find and seem to have developed a renewed animosty to the west.. \n\nThe idiotic thing is, we keep telling other nations that they cant have Nukes and that their nations are a liability and here we are not only in possession of nukes but actually doing research on new nuclear weapons while we have a mad man at the helm who has already proven that he will not hesitate to go to war (faulty intelligence or not)\n\nWe are making mistakes in our foriegn policy and we have been for a while and in doing so we are creating some of the problems that we will ourselves have to contend with in the future. Ironically with the middle east if you look into the history of the region you will see cycles of western betrayal, force and exploitation, the French, the British and U.S.. They honestly have no reason to want to work with us and we are doing everything we can to make sure it stays that way.  \n\nNot sure if many of you remember Donald Rumsfeld Attacha' to Iraq in the 1980's calling Saddam a fine gentlman and actually supporting and assiting him in his weapons build-up against Iran. Or the fact that we armed the Mujaihadeen... who today make up a large part of Al-Quida.. \n\nAnd how do we know that the civilian casualties we call colatarol damage or the price of freedom, or casualties of war.. will not lead surviving family to turn to terrorism to evange those that have died in this conflict.\n\nSee what everyone has forgotten is, that it is not so much who Osama Bin Laden is or what these terrosists want or how we can kill them.. but rather how are a few really, really evil people able to mobalize so many to the point of suicide attacks.. what is it that makes them believe.. that is what we need to tackle.. and they hate our freedom is the most idiotic attempt at explaining this.. \n\nTerrorism is the most effective form of war far.. we ourselves used it in the war of independence (Gorrila warfare is a form of terrorism, so was the malitia tactics).. and you will also find that whenever a people are faced with a power greater then their own they turn to terrorism.. that does not make it right.. but the question is simple what are we doing wrong... \n\nThey hate our freedom.. do you really believe that ... ?\n\nbloody mess.
357209
Absolutely not going to happen.  We've signed treaties left and right saying we won't use nuclear force.  The US has absolutely bent the rules when it comes to foreign relations but they absolutely would not completely abandon them.  With that being said, I predict a high probability of them using force OTHER than nuclear force...
450195
No. Lots of countries have WMD.\nWhat are we waiting for, let's get N. Korea and Iran!!!\n\nIt actually WAS our duty to act as the police of the world but now it is not since we are not moral anymore--I.E. torture of prisoners, locking them away without trials or lawyers or telling them the charges, etc.\n\nWe no longer have the moral high ground in the world.\nWe are no better than a third world country morally now.
323620
I am thinking that we should stop being racist and arrogant.\nI am also thinking that we are not in charge of the universe.\nI am also thinking that if we have the right to have nuclear arms so should they.\n\nAfter all, we are not better than anyone else.\nAfter all, Iran is far less dangerous than the US ehich already has its own nuclear weapons.\n\nIn the last 50 years Iran has attacked exactly zero countries. In fact, through US enccouragement it was attacked by our former clients, the Iraqis.\nThe US has attacked Iraq, Vietnam, Guatemala, Grenada, Korea, El Salvador, Cuba, Panama, Egypt, and the list goes on.\n\nMaybe we should get rid of our own nuclear weapons before we ask others to do. We dont want to be hypocrites, right?\n\nBy the way, Iranians have never claimed or said they are developing nuclear weapons. Only the US has made this claim. And I sure beleive what W and Cheney say, right? ;-)
166981
Definite NO! If that were to happen, then freewill would be forfeited to that power. If one disagrees with that power, it could mean death for that person.\n\nThis is going to happen though, in the not-too-distant future. America is that Superpower. You've already witnessed what happened in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. Soon America's going to just overrule the UN Security council & do what she pleases with the world. I say overrule in the assumption that 1 or 2 countries may disagree with this but most of them will agree with being ruled by America.
148428
This is a country that has been openly preaching hate and advocating obliteration of its enemies for nearly thirty years. I HOPE the U.S. attacks Iran rather than allowing it to become a nuclear power. I'm afraid that if it does, it will have to carry the burden by itself, because the rest of the world has shown itself unenthusiastic for unrewarding but necessary hardships.
466631
No, especially considering the fact that would make the average American a hypocrite.\n\nWhoops, already happened.
515070
Not soon enough. We have the technology to build extremely safe nuclear plants. And if they are standardized would be even more cost efficient. What to do with the waste? Launch it into the Sun. It won't even be noticed there.\n\nSave the oil that is in the ground for things which can't be made from anything else. (which means Iraq, Iran, and everyone else can keep their oil)
78496
Really doubt it, I think Israel with destroy any attempts of nuclear fission, as they did in Iraq.\nIf the discussions carry on the same way, then the US & EU will enforce sanctions, probably with the backing of Russia & China.\nIran may inflate the price of Oil, which could be an issue, as they're the 4th largest supplier in the World... & the US could go in to sieze the oil fields, as they did in Iraq.
287042
thats a logical Q, yes its true that the usa is using double standards when dealing with the nuclear issue,they allowed and helped israel to have it and the usa have a lot of it and in the same time they are fighting any other country who only think of having it even for peaceful use.\nby the way,the usa didnt have any choice or way to stop russia or china from having it because those are powerfull countries and this happened long time ago before the soviet union tumbled,so actually the usa couldnt do anything to stop that,and if they could they would.\nThe usa acts strong ONLY when they deal with smaller and less powerfull countries ,they cant impose there will on strong nation like russia or china,they only do with afganistan,iraq and all small countries that they r sure they cant fight back!!!!!!is this courage???is this democracy???\nif the usa want to be fair with all the world ,they should first destroy all the WMD they have and ask other nuclear countries to destroy there WMD, BEFORE they ask others not to have it.\nNow the point is,nuclear power is the only thing that stops the usa and there allies from trying to impose there will on other countries or think to fight it,thats why evrybody is trying to have it,not to use it against anybody,but to stop others from threatning them.\nso,its very simple,get rid of your WMD first,then ask others not to try to have it.\nthats my opinion from a logical point.
537394
of Course ! that will be one of US hiding reason after WMD for invade Iran. Bush will take that option coz Iran is a threat for economic and politic of US.especially for rhe democracy program in middle east.
330604
A couple of issues with your question.\n\nThe US is no longer testing nuclear weapons, and production is limited to what is required to replace older systems that are obsolete (read the SALT-II treaty).\n\nNext, of the countries that currently have nuclear weapons I would say the ones most likely to use them are Pakistan (which would lead to its anihilation) and Russia, out of desperation and impotence.  The chances of the US using nuclear weapons is fantastically small.\n\nThe US, and the UN for that matter (if you come up out of your hate america haze long enough you would realize that France, Germany and the UN are the ones leading the charge against Iran) don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons because it seems very likely that they will use them on their neighbors.\n\nBesides, would you give a loaded pistol to a three year old and expect no one to get hurt?  Same idea with Iran.