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

reply to post by Zanti Misfit

What does Personal Firearm Ownership and Nuclear Weapons have in Common ? Nothing ................DUMB THREAD

Alleged self-protection.

The fact you can't see that there is at least some kind of shared principle speaks volumes.

Sure, but your average gun owner is not constantly spewing off about how his neighbor is an abomination and should be eradicated from the face of the earth and has no right to exist, which the Ayatollahs do on a regular basis. If a gun owner did that in America he would be arrested for intimidation at best, and probably assault (assault is words; battery is actions, so "assault and battery" is saying you are going to hurt someone, then doing it.) Such a person would also have his sanity questioned, another reason to deny him gun rights.

And, if convicted of said felonies, this person would be banned from owning guns for life. Not many second amendment adherents would quibble with that. Also, if you want to get right down to it, the US Constitution does not apply to foreign governments, and if we insisted it did we would be accused of ethnocentrism and "American bias." You can't have it both ways.

So if Iran simply said they want nukes to defend themselves and shut up about it, that would be fine. But they don't seem to get that threatening to obliterate Israel off the face of the Earth and push the Jews into the sea makes people question their motives.

reply to post by beezzer

Two men walk into a gun shop.

One man, want's the weapon for protection.

The other person, wants the weapon to kill a Jewish guy.

Do you sell the weapons to both men?

But Iran has stated that IF it were to develop nuclear weapons they would purely be for self-protection.

Ahmadinejad was quoted, either correctly or incorrectly depends on which biased news agency is doing the reporting, as saying he wanted to 'wipe Israel off the face of the earth'.
Not very nice at all.

Ahmadinejad became very much ostracised during his second term in office and was a lame duck President.
Both he and his supporters are as far removed from political power as anyone could possibly be.

When was the last time Iran actually attacked anyone?

This is a silly thread. However, I don't think any nation has the power or authority to tell another nation what technology they can possess. The idea of Iran or North Korea possessing a nuclear bomb does not make me worry to much to be honest. We have lived with the threat of the Soviet Union and the United States bombing each other for decades. Iran and North Korea know exactly what would happen if they actually used a nuclear weapon in anger and so did the Soviet Union and the Untied States during the cold war. No country on the planet wants to commit suicide by using a nuclear weapon on a population in my opinion. The leaders of Iran and North Korea may be tyrants and murderers of their own population but they know the repercussions of nuclear conflict on another nation.

The REAL issue here is whether Iran (or any nation) has the protocols in place to keep the technology we are discussing from falling into the hands of a crazy person. Iran as a country is not "crazy", the people do not all want to die after they bomb Israel, cause that is what would happen. Can Iran keep this technology from terrorists? I don't know the answer to that anymore than you do.

The Soviet Union had a "garage sale" when it fell apart and I have not seen or heard of any of those "suitcase" nukes being used anywhere, have you? Are there suitcase nukes for sale somewhere? Again, I don't know the answer to that question either.

Whether Iran obtains a nuclear bomb or not is not really a question to me at this point. I believe the ship has already sailed on preventing Iran from reaching what I think is its goal. The United Nations has a poor record in keeping nations from doing things the rest of the world does not approve of. North Korea is a prefect example, how many YEARS have been wasted trying to keep them from nuclear weapons? Can't be done! If a country wants to invest in building a nuclear weapon and has the resources available, it will happen no matter what other countries say.

beezzer
reply to post by Freeborn

 

Two men walk into a gun shop.

One man, want's the weapon for protection.

The other person, wants the weapon to kill a Jewish guy.

Do you sell the weapons to both men?

Two countries walk into a nuclear weapons factory.

One country, want's the weapons for "protection."

The other country, wants the weapons because of the crazy nuclear neighbor next door.

Do you sell the weapons to both countries?

Answer: Yes, they both want them for the same reason.

reply to post by Freeborn


Can Iran Defend itself with Conventional Weapons ? Of course it can , but having a Nuclear Capability would just make Iran a Bigger Target for all the other Nuclear Powers who feel threatened by them , especially Israel . So , to answer your question , No , Iran should not be allowed to Develope Nuclear Weapons for it's Own sake .

Bassago

beezzer
reply to post by Freeborn

 

Two men walk into a gun shop.

One man, want's the weapon for protection.

The other person, wants the weapon to kill a Jewish guy.

Do you sell the weapons to both men?

Two countries walk into a nuclear weapons factory.

One country, want's the weapons for "protection."

The other country, wants the weapons because of the crazy nuclear neighbor next door.

Do you sell the weapons to both countries?

Answer: Yes, they both want them for the same reason.

Good answer!

*waaaaa*

Freeborn


When was the last time Iran actually attacked anyone?

If that is the basis for your reasoning, then disarm America NOW!

Freeborn
reply to post by beezzer

 

Two men walk into a gun shop.

One man, want's the weapon for protection.

The other person, wants the weapon to kill a Jewish guy.

Do you sell the weapons to both men?

But Iran has stated that IF it were to develop nuclear weapons they would purely be for self-protection.

Ahmadinejad was quoted, either correctly or incorrectly depends on which biased news agency is doing the reporting, as saying he wanted to 'wipe Israel off the face of the earth'.
Not very nice at all.

Ahmadinejad became very much ostracised during his second term in office and was a lame duck President.
Both he and his supporters are as far removed from political power as anyone could possibly be.

When was the last time Iran actually attacked anyone?

Iran has attacked people all through the current era with their Shia proxies. Don't baffle yourself with bull$hit that they are do gooders that would never cause anyone any harm. They are as evil as the day is long. I am starting to question your thought process.

r ya some kind a idiot.....to set a thread title like that....

reply to post by schuyler

Sure, but your average gun owner is not constantly spewing off about how his neighbor is an abomination and should be eradicated from the face of the earth and has no right to exist, which the Ayatollahs do on a regular basis.

How many White Supremacists / Black Supremacist types continue to spout their bile whilst still retaining their Right To Bear Arms?

Also, if you want to get right down to it, the US Constitution does not apply to foreign governments, and if we insisted it did we would be accused of ethnocentrism and "American bias." You can't have it both ways.

Of course it's actually got nothing to do with the US Constitution and its Second Amendment, that only applies in the US - as is only right - but it's about applying the same basic underlying principle.

I just think there's a certain level of hypocrisy and double standards when people use self-protection as a justification for The Second Amendment and then passionately oppose according a similar right to an independent nation state.

So if Iran simply said they want nukes to defend themselves and shut up about it, that would be fine. But they don't seem to get that threatening to obliterate Israel off the face of the Earth and push the Jews into the sea makes people question their motives.

I understand and agree whole heartedly. I have serious misgivings about allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons but who appointed any of us to either allow or disallow them, what gives US the right?

As I said previously, possession of such fearsome weaponry brings with it a heightened level of responsibility and there should be systems and protocols put in place to safeguard against any misuse, by anyone.

reply to post by Freeborn


But then you still missed the boat in your analogy. US citizens don't actually have the right to keep and bear nuclear arms although they do have the right to keep and bear arms to defend themselves.

I think you'll find that most everyone here says that Iran has the right to defend themselves although we divide on whether or not that extends to nukes.

reply to post by Zanti Misfit


So I live in a house and I don't get on with most people in my street. Some feel threatened by me to varying degrees and in turn I feel threatened by them. We all have knives to protect ourselves, but one or two of them have handguns.
In the neighbourhood at large there live many other people who we share a mutual dislike and mistrust of each other. Quite a few of these also have handguns, semi-automatics etc.
But I'm denied the right to own a handgun for my own safety?

Christian Voice
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.

And this is why the world hates Americans

Krazysh0t
reply to post by Zeppp

 

Irrelevant. I never claimed to want to live over there or that people get treated fairly there either. All I said is that Iran hasn't done anything to demonstrate that they'd be irresponsible with nuclear weapons. There already exist countries that do severe human rights violations and haven't thrown any nukes against another country or even against their own countrymen (barring testing the weapons, but that is done in remote barren regions). Seriously, why are responses like yours ALWAYS one of the go to ones when you run out of ammo to support your argument?

Are you serious? They may not act like men and start a war with you country to country because they know they will get the sand pounded out of them, but they sure as hell fight proxy wars from Lebanon to Iraq with their punk Shia fighters. Pick up a book sometime and learn a little you will be surprised.

IkNOwSTuff

Christian Voice
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.

And this is why the world hates Americans

If Iran were governed by something like the US COTUS, I'd likely feel a lot better about them getting the bomb.

IkNOwSTuff

Christian Voice
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.

And this is why the world hates Americans

Who gives a $hit what this corrupt world thinks?

reply to post by beezzer

If that is the basis for your reasoning, then disarm America NOW!

beezzer, we've had this discussion on many an occasion - I have absolutely no desire to disarm America.
The US will do as the US see's fit - as is right.

And I'm certainly not pro-Iranian or an apologist.

I'm merely trying to point out that there is a certain amount of double standards here.

That so many can't, or won't, see that is really quite worrying.

reply to post by Freeborn


I see what you're trying to say.

You are trying to say fair is fair. If you have them, then why shouldn't everyone else be allowed to?

I'm saying that we also need to consider responsible behavior. Should we also allow Ethiopia and North and South Sudan to have nukes, too? North Korea has them and is that making our world a better and safer place now that it's ruled by someone who murders his subordinates by dog because that guy said no more nuke tests?

Maybe we ought to just evenly distribute our nukes to every country all over the globe. I'm sure Japan and Taiwan and China would all be cool with that right now with their little tiff over the islands.

Let's do it and I'm sure the world would be a safer place.

And then, there is the problem of what happens if we find out that some of those places just weren't responsible enough to have nukes. The lesson would likely be learned with several large fiery nuclear fireballs. If Iran, for example, is serious about their threats to Israel, just one bomb wipes out half of the nation. What do you say then? Oops! Sorry, man, we thought they would be responsible. Our bad ...

Hello....

to the poorly educated,ill informed IRAN HATERS that are posting on this thread.....your yanky ignorance knows no bounds....you really are bottom feeders.....

in 2010 my wife and I travelled to IRAN.....AND WE HAD FANTASTIC TIME....treated like kings and queens..
we saw quite a few western tourists during our travels around Iran.....I can remember at least 2 bus loads of American tourists...enjoying themselves ....having their eyes opened up to a different world...
I'm 100% sure that they left Iran alive and well....

now.... you brain dead ....untraveled morons that are probably flat-out reading a comic book.......
HOW MANY TOURIST ARE KILLED IN America EACH YEAR???????????????....

in my opinion...ATS stands for Americans Talking S#&t and after reading replies to the op's posts I'm more convinced that this is true......you people are your own worst enemy....

the more I read of Americans' opinions of the world and other nations the more I understand the dislike and loathing that the rest of the world has for the usa....

How can we deny ignorance on this website?????....when a lot of posters are ignorant of the world????