What do think of Iran having a nucleur weapon.?
443516
i'm against any1 owning them.. but as far is what's happeneing i'm so pro that.. maybe the USA will lose it's monopoly over the world by force! i think if 1 country doesn't deserve them it's the USA coz it's the only county that used them to kill people.. iran, arabs and muslims didn;t do hiroshima n nagazaki
322283
Iran hasn't even claimed they have an Atomic weapon yet.  They only announced today that they can enrich uranium.  they still have work to do to get the bomb.
460969
Why is everybody so paranoid about Iran having Nuclear .\nOther countries have nuclear too ,USA pakistan Israel UK,
482425
Iran it self in not threat, but when they sell their technology to other mid.eastern countries and they got their hand on nucks that would be the real threat.
138749
The rest of the world is willing to let Iran have nuclear power; that's not the problem.  The problem is that Iran has proven itself to be a rogue nation that produces and harbors terrorists.  The blatant hatred that Iran has for anything Western is reason enough to doubt its motives when it comes to the development of nuclear energy.  As I said, the rest of the world is willing to allow Iran to have nuclear power, provided that it is willing to allow UN inspectors access to verify that Iran's motives and capabilities are peaceful.  Iran is unwilling to allow this. That's why the rest of the world is skeptical of Iran.
874761
Unlike other nuclear powers, Iran said they intend to use the bomb.\n\nThey want to release their 12th Iman from the well in the worst way.
359647
That's a misconception.  As much as I dislike the current US government, I must say that they do not resist nuclear power in Iran.  They, along with most other democratic governments, do not approve of the type of reactors that Iran is building.  \n\nIran is developing "breeder" reactors and  making enriched uranium, whose only "reasonable" application is weaponry.  If Iran were truly interested in nuclear reactors for domestic power there are a number of different designs that are cheaper and more efficient, and don't create weapons.
523367
Nuclear energy is very cost efficient if it is used carefully obviously.  However everyone knows that Iran is not interested in nuclear energy for just energy alone.  They want to be a bigger fish in the pond so to speak.  I think that some of the radicals in Iran would not hesitate to drop a nuke on Israel or the United States.
893248
If they are smart enough NEVER...\nAs long as there is no proof of nuclear weapons being build,there is no reason for someone to attack Iran...
775119
But are they only making nuclear power stations? The fear is they will infact use these instalations to make enriched uranium or plutionium for use in nuclear weapons. Iran is an unstable country in the hands of fundementalist Islamic clerics and are sworn to eradicate Judism and Christianity. These people can not be trusted with WMD.
300195
Iran has no nukes, independant inspections have proved this, they do have a few certerfuges (used to enrich uranium), and a small amount of enriched uranium... for the most part, even our government recognizes the fact that as of yet Iran doesn't have nuclear bombs... in fact, Iran is many years away from developing even a simple uranium fission bomb (in my opinion, probably 4-10 years if advancement continues at its current rate)... however, they are on "the path" to develop such devices... but as of now, the advancement of thier nuclear program depends ENTIRELY on forign technology (yea, they could eventualy build it, but it may then take them more like 30-40 years), and machienery (that is how they got centerfuges, they didn't build them)... they do have radiologicly active munitions ("uranium bullets"), but most countries do, and they are not a signifigant threat (the bullets are made from depleted Uranium)...\n\n(dependant mainly on thier design choice) They are far from developing the hardest (scientificly speaking) parts of a nuclear device, such as the "pit", which is primarily made of plutonium, the technology to machine the "lense" (high explosive charges), and the trigger.
656776
I say that you are crazy.  Iran cannot have nukes, no if's, and's, or but's about it.  They have vowed to wipe Israel off the map, and a nuke would give them the means to do it, and permanently.  A weapon that deadly in the hands of insanity is just that- insanity.
404471
Oh yeah, Iraq is working out so well.  Iran, with a laregr populice that actually supports its government, would work out even better.\n\n(Incidentally, I think the idea of trying to convince Iran that it doesn't need nuclear weapons by threatening to drop nuclear weapons on it, as the Bush administration floated over the weekend, is brilliant psychology.)
673737
Both India and Pakistan have tested nuclear weapons by denotating them underground, so there is little doubt that they have "the bomb".\n\nIsrael on the other hand has never actually tested any weapons, although there is little doubt that they do possess them, although it is not clear just how many they have or how big they are.\n\nIran is a different kettle of fish, as none of the above countries have ever advocated using them unless attacked, unlike Iran, whose supreme Ayatollah has already stated publicly that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth.\n\nIran has stated that it wants to develop nuclear power stations (a basic requirement for building a nuke) in order to help reduce a reliance on oil, a stange thing since the country has the 4th largest oil reserves in the world !!!\n\nThere is no doubt that Iran wishes to build a nuclear bomb, with which to threaten it's neighbours, and possible to use against Israel.\n\nUnlike other countries, which don't wish to be excluded from the rest of the civillized world, Iran is still out in the cold and refuses to acknowledge any of it's duties and responsibilities, hence it doesn't care what the rest of the World thinks.\n\nThe same is true for North Korea, hence the conrcern over these two countries.\n\nBoth are extremely unstable and any nuclear weapons they possess might not be used as a deterent against attack, but might be used to "strike first" at another country.\n\nOther nuclear powers have already agreed not to use such weapons unless attacked - neither Iran nor North Korea have signed up to this agreement. \n\nBasically, you wouldn't place your John Bobbit in the hands of a lunatic with a pair of scissors, so why trust Iran with nuclear weapons ?   Just doesn't make sense.
779771
Nice ideal, but absolutely impossible. If I was an Iranian Leader, I wouldn't even think about it until I saw several American leaders convicted & successfully impeached. He is well aware our leaders speak with forked tongues.\n\nBy the way, what about this alleged nuclear weapons development? Is it any more real than what was in Iraq? It's the same people saying it, folks. Think. They were never found in Iraq because they never existed. You can hide a bomb, or several bombs, where they are difficult to find. Not true for the facilities that make them. Iran has a facility to enrich uranium for power plants.But nothing has been found suggesting bomb grade uranium, or the facilities to make it. And they are under constant inspection. think.
344348
Iran won't have a deliverable nuke for 5 or more years so we have plenty of time to work an alternative solution.\n\nMaybe the world will get lucky and they'll nuke themselves or fry enough of their technicians in accidents before they get "The Bomb".
444679
With the rise in power of countries these days, we are lucky all we need to develope are bunker busting weapons.  Many countries have developed nuclear technology since the end of the "cold" war.  I'd be more concerned with the Iranians and North Koreans obtaining nuclear weapons than with the U.S. developing a weapon that could take out nuclear weapons in their silo's.