Iran Ready to Transfer Nuclear Know-How

Just when I thought that this whole situation couldn't get any worse. Iran's supreme leader has decided to advertise to the world that their nuclear technology is available to friends and neighbors. Oh, and they've called for the destruction of Israel. And um, they have told the United Nations to forget any ideas of sanctions, reviews and observations of their programs. Does anyone else see the problematic potential of it all?

Debate all you want on the pros and cons of nuclear technology. I've worked with it (power producing, not weapons grade) before, and it can do wondrous and amazing things. When the sister technology of weapons grade nukes is boasted about and held secretly in the closet... watch out. It's amazing that they're hold such a swaggering stance as they wave the threat like the banner of some long forgotten and noble cause. In their culture of hero worship and dogmaticism, whoever is in charge will only push the envelope until they reach their own self-destruction.

I think it's hard for them to envision these things. Their culture is not built upon the same principles as Western civilization, so their purposes and motives behind this technology must be veiled and nefarious. Enhancing the danger is the inherent irresponsibility associated with great power achieved without the struggle and work involved in its creation. They don't respect the scientific processes and methods that brought this technology to light, and hold even less respect for their neighbors. The region is not known for its pacifistic nature nor candid openness. If it's not us they find a way to deliver destruction to (again), then bet the house on them tossing nukes just a couple hundred miles over the border. If Iraq can gas their own people, then I am sure that Iran won't think twice about sending a nuke around the corner.

If anyone can offer a counterpoint to this megalith of impending doom, please do so. I'm looking at the light at the end of the tunnel, and I think I hear a train whistle blowing.

 

 

 

Reply

If you ask me Iran is preparing for a showdown with the free world. They are constantly ignoring laws passed by international organizations like the UN. I do not see why they want to create a world conflict so much. I think that NATO and other alliances should take this as a direct threat to international security and take swift, immediate action.

Reply

That's what they tried to do with Iraq, and succeeded, but now they are simply standing in political ruins, being hit from all sides by verbal blows about their actions.

Maybe it's time we just said "screw it" and let the Middle East deal with it themselves. It'll save American soldiers, and that's all anyone seems to care about (I'm saying this in a very cynical and sarcastic way).

Reply

While I'm not necessarily disagreeing that they're out to cause trouble, to say that they're nefarious just because they're not Western is the sort of attitude that's causing the Western world so much trouble with the Middle East these days.

Reply

You're right - good catch. The statement could be seen as inflammatory. My conclusion I still hold for the above mentioned reasons. When a nation, culture or people call for the destruction of another nation, culture or people, while boasting of their military advantage, and while calling on their local allies to do the same, and offering the same military advantage... the term 'nefarious' sounds appropriate. Why else would they bare their teeth?

Iran has also recently suggested they will withdraw from the UN nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Their antagonistic mannerisms affect not only the United States, but the nations of the world. It's difficult to understand how any self-respecting nation can agree to treaties for as long as such is convenient, and then withdraw as soon as they feel strong enough to threaten others. FTW is their diplomacy of the day. It's really a shame that their people will continue to suffer for as long as they are kept weak and cowering in their hovels by their autocratic leaders.

To elaborate on my cultural comparison, I think there is something inherent in their culture that prevents them from (a) working with other cultures and ( seeing beyond their present condition, let alone their generation. Iran seems only to want to work with people of the same subscribers of hate, and their leadership seeks only the quickest, easiest and most deadly upperhand over their perceived enemies. Can't there be an Islamic country that can reject their seething hate and concentrate on raising their people out of their third-world status? Why not accept nuclear power for its infrastructural cornucopia and allow the world's aggred upon inspectors to come look if it's for peaceful purposes? If that were the case, then why all the resistance?

The world's greatest leaders, from cultures all over, provided peaceful gains for their grandchildren and generations to come all over the world. The Greek polis and civil service taught us to live and work together for the greater good. Gandhi and his peaceful resistance showed us the might is not always right. Reagan's doctrine of peace through strength gave birth to a quiet arms race in which the winner didn't light off a single warhead. The ancient Roman empire's representative governments gave power (initially - there are glaring dictator exceptions) to the people and emphasized on infrastructure and public health. Can comparable examples be pulled from the middle east region? (Plenty of bait in this paragraph!)

 

 

 

Reply