Do Second Amendment supporters also support Irans right to protect itself with nuclear weapons?

page: 1
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+7 more 
posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:12 PM
link   
First of all, I was really uncertain where to place this thread so if any Mod / Admin can think of a better fit please do so.

Over the years I've gotten into many a debate here on ATS about the pro's and cons of The Second Amendment to the US Constitution.
I've also participated in quite a few Iran related threads.

I was wondering do those who support The Right To Bear Arms for self-protection etc agree with Iran's alleged desire to develop independent nuclear capability so that it can defend and protect itself from what it views as potential aggressors and threats to its sovereignty?

Many might not see a connection or similarity, some may - just wondering.




posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I do. Of course I believe that Israel has been blowing the threat of Iran out of proportion for a while now. Not to mention, Israel has nukes and if they can keep their itchy finger off of the button, I'm sure Iran can demonstrate the same restraint.



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Do you view a nation as the same as a single person?

The 2nd Amendment covers a basic unalienable right that an individual has in order to protect it from our government. So, IMO if you were arguing on behalf of individual Iranians, then yes, an individual Iranian absolutely has the basic right of self defense. However, Iran does not recognize our COTUS, so their government does whatever it feels necessary, and the basic rights of its citizens are oppressed or upheld as it desires. I doubt any of them are much allowed their basic right to self-defense.

And if we are extending that argument out and calling nukes weapons of self defense, should individual American citizens be allowed to have them?



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


Iran has the right to do whatever they want. The thing is they need to appreciate the response.

i.e. If you walk down the street waving a gun it will draw a response.

If Iran is okay with the repercussions then so be it.



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:18 PM
link   
I fail to see the logic as Iran is no a us citizen and therefore 2 amendment doesn't apply


In a more serious note Iran is part of the NPT so they should not pursue nukes, were they forced to sign it?



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Iran is not governed by the US constitution. Apples and Oranges, apples and oranges. No they should not have the right to have nuclear weapons. They are entirely too stable a region and a people to have such devastating power at their fingertips.



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Christian Voice
 


Says who? Israel? The U.S.? You do know that the only country that has demonstrated the capacity to unleash these weapons on another country, you are currently living in right? The U.S. certainly has no right to tell another country what weapons they can and cannot have.



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ketsuko
 


Kind of what I was going to ask. Do they have the right to bear arms? I'm not familiar enough with their laws, but ketsuko asked it properly, individual against government.

For the record though? Why is it ok for one country and not another? Ban them all. It isn't like they won't all find a way to have them in secret, as will we if they were all banned.

Or come up with something even worse.
edit on 3-1-2014 by chiefsmom because: I can't spell today!!!!!!!



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:26 PM
link   
I think every sovereign country should be allowed to have whatever the heck they want. Sure even little Kim jung. Use it in a bad way then your history. They should be allowed to have them to protect themselves from us! We only attack non nuclear countries why? Because we don't want to get nuked!
Firepiston



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:27 PM
link   
Surely if individuals have the right to protect themselves from other people and 'the state' doesn't the same right extend to an independent sovereign state?
Of course along with that right comes a duty and responsibility.

Seems many supporters of The Second Amendment are fierce opponents of Iran's right to defend itself from what it perceives is a threat from other nation states.

After starting this thread I've just done a quick Google search and have just read an interesting article;
www.policymic.com...

I don't necessarily agree with all of the argument presented against the sanctions that have been placed upon Iran but I can't find much fault with this;



Ironically, many conservative politicians in the U.S., including the usually liberty-loving Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), are simultaneously among the strongest opponents of Iranian nuclear capabilities and the strongest supporters of domestic gun rights. The paradox here is that many pro-Second Amendment arguments depend on the notion of creating a more peaceful society through mutual deterrence: a man will not rob his neighbor if the neighbor has a gun. The Iranian government could justifiably employ this same logic in defending its nuclear ambitions, seeking not to engage in aggression, but primarily to deter countless powerful enemies.



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


While the 2nd amendment is in the US Bill of Rights the concept of protecting yourself (individually or nationally) is a natural right IMO. Therefore yes, Iran has the right to have a nuclear arsenal.

If you were surrounded by as many nuclear powers as they are (a couple are very hostile) you'd want equivalent protections. Pure hypocrisy saying they cannot protect themselves with similar armaments.



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Sure....As long as they are not threatening the annihilation of an entire race of people which they HAVE done in the past.



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Krazysh0t
reply to post by Christian Voice
 


Says who? Israel? The U.S.? You do know that the only country that has demonstrated the capacity to unleash these weapons on another country, you are currently living in right? The U.S. certainly has no right to tell another country what weapons they can and cannot have.


They do if that country is threatening to wipe our allies off the map. Iran is too antiquated in thought to handle such a sophisticated arsenal. They need about another 3000 years of sophistication before they can even be taken seriously. I mean really, their leaders believe some dude in a well is going to spring up and open a can of kick azz on the world in their favor. LOL!!!



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


Sure we do. If you are referring to WWII, that was the only thing that ended the war and saved Democracy. Japan received several warnings and would not comply. I do not agree with that kind of weapon anyway. Who wins when something like that is used ? NO ONE!!! Why should one of the most volatile regions ever be allowed to own such destructive power ?



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by ketsuko
 




The 2nd Amendment covers a basic unalienable right that an individual has in order to protect it from our government


So you are saying that nations don't have the right to defend themselves only individuals do?

It's irrelevant what Iran or anyone else thinks of The American Constitution, all I'm asking is doesn't the same basic principle apply?
And if it doesn't then why not?
Why can't Iran be allowed to arm and defend itself from what it perceives as a threat?



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


As a nation, they have the right to defend themselves and their national sovereignty.

I guess then the question is whether or not you believe that is what they want nukes for.

I understand that Israel has nukes which is a threat, but how many years has Israel had them without using them? At this point, the US is still the only country to have used nukes aggressively.

So what clear and present danger requires the Iranians to have nukes, and when they constantly spout off about Israeli genocide, no matter what you feelings about Israel might be, does that inspire you to trust that their only motive after all these years with a nuclear neighbor is defense?



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Zeppp
 


And look at some of the wackiest beliefs of the more fundamental Christians in the US - and they have a hell of a lot of influence in your country.
Should the religious zealots in the US be denied their Right To Bear Arms because many view them as cranks and whacko's?

What gives the US or anyone else the right to dictate what other nations can do to defend themselves?
I agree that possession of such weapons brings with it a heightened degree of responsibility.



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Zeppp
 


Complete bullcrap. That view you have is developed from the media's portrayal of the region. Pakistan has nukes and they are Muslim country located in that region as well. Quick question, how many nukes has Pakistan lobbed at other countries?
edit on 3-1-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ketsuko
 


How many people in the USA have not been burgled or mugged by someone with a gun but they still possess one allegedly to protect themselves in the event that they are or to deter someone from doing so?

Same principle is it not?



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:45 PM
link   
If Iran, part of the non proliferation treaty, have the right to make nukes, Russia have all the rights to reclaim Alaska as bad treaties should not be uphold by the suckers that sign them.

Again they are part of the NPT and no one force them to forfeit their Desiree to attain nukes





top topics
 
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join