Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
The entire premise of Iran building Nuclear Weapons requires that they have someone to use those weapons on.
There is only one realistic possibility in any scenario that makes sense in the real world. Israel. Without a target to actually use them on
and make the threat in a credible way, there is no point to making the weapons. The resources as well as cost would be patently insane.
Iran has FAR too much to lose in simply building them as a deterrent as others have before. SO....It's with the Target I'll focus this.
The idea Iran would use a nuclear weapon on Israel is absolutely, certifiably insane.
I started reading your post, but found your foundational arguments terribly flawed, so that I didn't even get to your technical analysis. Let me
address the issues I have, taking each of your quoted paragraphs, one by one.
By your logic any nuclear-armed country has a clear target for their weapons, which is not the case. Yes there are likely targets, but no definite
ones. A country can have nuclear weapons for purely defensive/deterrent reasons. It could be argued that the country(ies) they are meant to deter
is(are) the targets, but then this could be said of any nuclear armed country, including the US and Israel.
The fact that under the Bush II administration the Pentagon played around with the notion of pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons (which, is, of course
against current nuclear weapons treaties, but when did that stop the US from breaking international law?) would seem to give Iran every reason in the
world to develop nuclear weapons as a deterrent. The fact that Iran is surrounded by hostile US forces in neighboring countries and has a bellicose
regional adversary, Israel, gives it even more reason to want a deterrent against these more powerful enemies threatening it.
And make no mistake about, these countries are threatening Iran. The US and Israel are supporting terrorist groups hostile to Iran, sending drones
into Iranian airspace and perhaps even sending soldiers covertly to recon Iranian facilities. Iranian scientists are also being killed and industrial
sabotage is being committed against Iran, and this been admitted to, although officially retracted since. If a foreign country were doing this to
Israel or the US, you can bet they would be carpet bombing said belligerent.
Also keep in mind that the US and Iran have a bad history. The US overthrew a democratically elected government and installed the despotic Shah and
helped him retain power through oppression and violence until the Iranian revolution. The US has also shot down a civilian Iranian airliner, killing
hundreds. This was done just off the Iranian coast. Imagine if a foreign power shot down an airliner of ours just out of LA or NYC that was flying
over the ocean. We would surely declare war on such a country.
My point is Iran has every right to fear the US and Israel to to protect itself the best it can. The fact that N. Korea, a US adversary, acquired
nuclear weapons and is no longer threatened militarily by the US shows just how powerful a small nuclear deterrent can be against a major or super
You say there is no other target besides Israel to use Iranian nuclear weapons on. How about the US 5th fleet, which sails around in the Persian Gulf
and is based in Bahrain, a country unfriendly to Iran? How about major US military bases in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kuwait?
You claim the cost of such an attack is too much for Iran to do so. Well one can also argue that the cost of the US or Israel trying to attack a
nuclear-armed Iran might then be too costly for them to do so, fearing such nuclear retaliation.
Israel is a small country. It would be easy with a relatively small number of atomic bombs to destroy most of it. Sure, Israel could then lob a lot
of nukes back and the US may do so as well, but Iran is larger and more spread out; more of its people will survive a nuclear exchange than will
Would there be collateral damage to Palestinians and other Arabs/Islamic peoples? Sure. But the US intended for decades to defend western Europe
with tactical nukes. You don't think this would have caused massive collateral nuclear death?
Although I don't think you mean to, your argument seems to have a cultural bias to it, which disregards the fact that other countries have nuclear
deterrence strategies that wouldn't work out any better or worse than Iran's. Iran's possible desire to have nuclear weapons for national defense
is no more insane than the US's or Israel's. And given the record of what the US and Israel have done to other countries in the Middle East, a
sensible person can not blame Iran for wanting a nuclear deterrent to keep the US out. Just look at the bloodshed and destruction wreaked on Iraq and
Afghanistan by the US, and upon the Palestinian territories and Lebanon by Israel.