Would the DUN allow Iran Nuclear weapons

originally posted by: penroc3
id be more worried about India and Pakistan or may be even China might get into a nuclear attack

Pakistan is a problem waiting to happen, particularly as Afghanistan looks like returning to a late 1990s situation.

originally posted by: M5xaz
a reply to: Forensick

1. Would the useless UN allow it ?
- a virtual certainty, the UN has failed in a similar manner with North Korea as it has failed in every major conflict or event for at least the past 60 years, including Covid-19

The UN's job is defend the weak against the strong, not back up the strong against the weak.

originally posted by: M5xaz

2. What should/could be done about it ?
- to begin with, giving Iran money, Billions, a la Obama or Kerry "Iran deal" is beyond idiotic, it is treason. This very approach of dollars for peace was tried with North Korea, and failed. Appeasement NEVER works.

- military action: probably too late for a "surgical strike", waited far too long, likely that Iran by now has probably at least a few atomic bombs, which also preclude Irak-style invasion, for those so inclined (I am not)

- only option: slow, long-term containment, cold-war style, with ongoing sanctions, leading to the eventual collapse of the Iranian regime. (There was an opportunity to support a "green" student revolt early in Obama's term, but he did not, clashing as it did with Obama's objective of supporting extremist Islamist forces in Libya, Egypt, and Syria. Kudos to the Egyptian mass demonstrators, they had the good sense and courage to overthrow the Morsi extremist regime installed by Obama.)

Regrettably, it is unlikely that the incoming Biden administration is interested in anything but supporting Iran and other extremist regimes

It's a matter of perspective.

It was Iran's money. Returning something that was theirs in exchange for compliance with an arms treaty is a win-win normally.

You know what didn't work in the 1930s in Europe or the Middle East in the 1990s and won't work this time? Backing your enemy's enemy and hoping they won't turn around and bite you. Like the latest Middle East "peace deal."

Maybe Trump should have sat down with Ayatollah Whoever as an equal, with all the priceless national and international prestige that brings, in exchange for absolutely nothing. Worked with Fat Boy Kim.

But Obama...

a reply to: Whodathunkdatcheese

A. The UN has NOT defended the weak from the strong since after Korea.
The UN kept supporting the Khmer after they had been pushed out of power, after it was known the Khmer that genocided millions in Cambodia

B. If you knew anything about the 1930s, you would know appeasement did not work then; it did not work in the 1990s with North Korea and will not work with Iran either.

C. A historic Peace deal between Israel and its' neighbors should be celebrated. Nations such UAE and Bahrain are exactly that, independent nations, and thus do not require the approval of any Ayatollah in Iran, or anyone else for that matter.


Your ignorance of history and geopolitics is astounding

ATS - Deny ignorance.

Iran is still pissed America walked away from the deal and the EU bitched out helping them. Considering 20% is tiny as you need around 90% + To make weapons.
Iran may think they need protection from it's neighbours. Israel armed to the teeth with nukes, Who knows how many as nobody has inspected their stockpile. Now America is going to transfer Nuclear tech to Saudi Arabia. The one country on the planet who should not have nuclear weapons because of their love of terrorists.

a reply to: Forensick
President-elect JOE BIDEN says the U.S. will rejoin the Iran Nuclear Deal, if Iran behaves itself.

He'll probably re-join, and Iran will continue building their military might to more deadly levels.

Iran was Testing new Missiles and Drones today: www.reuters.com...