what you think about Iranian nuclear power???
459575
You must have posted this just as I put my answer to a similar question! Anyhow, here's what I wrote:\nIran. 200 years and they have never attacked another foreign state. They are members of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (Just like about 170 other countries). They are NOT Iraq, as in, they are well advanced industrially and sanctions won't mean much to them as they are also fairly self sufficient. \nThey HAVE NOT breached ANY of their responsibilities as sigintories of the NPT. They have cooperated with the IAEA and allowed UN inspectors to their facilities.\nHmmmm, The United States is also a member of the NPT and has breached its responsibilities under the treaty several times. The USA has USED the UN to go to war ineffectively no less than SIX times since WWII! That does not include political insurgencies and and the like... Oh, wait, I remember The US has been there and done that. Look at the last time the US messed around with Iran! \nIsrael is not even a signitor of the NPT! Yes folks, Israel is not even a member of the NPT and REFUSES to allow UN Weapons inspectors to monitor their nuclear capabilities. HUH? Yep, it's true... We bomb Iraq back to the stone-age for "Developing WMD without UN Monitoring" (WMD that never even existed) and all the while Israel has a KNOWN Stockpile of WMD and constantly refuses to co-operate with the UN and the IAEA!! Israel is a rogue state! But hey, Pakistan also has WMD and is also not party to the NPT. Weird... They are always wanting to kick their neighbours **** (India) and why aren't USA World Police F*** Yeah wading in there to "Create stability, in the Indian Sub-continent?" Me thinks someone is puppeteering with The USA!
234972
A long, fantastic history...mucked up by the British when they took over the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire (after WW1, I think?) and installed a regency called the Shah.  Shia Islam predominates and the country is (effectively) run on religious grounds by a council of Ayatollahs.  It has a President who is insensitive to the outside world's viewpoint (to put it mildly) and it is currently awaiting the outcome of the UN Security Council's deliberation on its reluctance to allow the Atomic Energy Authority full and free access to its nuclear program, ostensibly for power.  Those who are mistrustful of it reckon that Iran is trying to make nuclear weapons which, given it's current President's comments on Israel, is understandable if (possibly) incorrect.\n\nDo I get Best Answer?
549897
Iran only has the capability (at the moment) to make a dirty bomb rather than a full nuclear device.\n\nWhy wont use one if they get it is that pretty much the rest of the world will turn Iran into a crater - the nuclear taboo would galvanise the world against them to immense proportions. Anyone they are likely to launch against is also likely to be a nuclear power.\n\nThe leaders in Iran are on to a good thing and are unlikely to risk losing this.  Aggressive rhetoric has been part of Arab/Islamic culture for decades - the very definition of sabre rattling.\n\nPeace out
132477
Interesting question.  \n\nOn the one hand, the US and other nations rightly perceive Iran as a threat, and don't want Iran to have the power to build nuclear power plants, as this could lead to nuclear weapons.\n\nOn the other hand, Iran rightly perceives the US as a threat, and the Iranian leadership is responding to that with tough talk, and refusal to back down.  Which then feeds into other countries perceiving Iran as a threat, and it's a vicious circle.\n\nPersonally, I'm not sure what to say.  I don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons, and it would be hard for them to have nuclear power plants without getting access to nuclear weapons technology.  The proposal that Russia refine the uranium that is used in Iranian power plants completely misses the point of the issue, which is independenc/autonomy.  \n\nUnfortunately, I think the short-term answer is a lot of behind-the-scenes diplomacy, ending in face-saving measures for all sides, and a lot of backing down.  Perhaps something like Iran stops trying to develop nuclear power, and other nations help them develop sustainable, clean energy from other sources.  Bet solar panels would be very effective over there.  In private, meanwhile, Western nations would perhaps agree to stop developing new nuclear power plants or nuclear weapons, and claim publically some other reason.  It sounds like we're giving up a lot there, but really we're only giving up things that put us at danger anyway, because it's impossible to make a nuclear plant _completely_ safe from terrorist attack, and the development of new nuclear weapons just leads to proliferation.
209187
Iran has NOT allowed the IAEA inspectors to do their jobs. If Iran's intentions were as they say, they should have no problem with the Russian offer to have the enrichment facilities in Russia.\n\nGiven the Iranian government's statements regarding Israel and "causing harm and pain" to the US because they got referred to the UN Security Council, how can we think for one minute that their efforts are peaceful. Their rhetoric sounds like it could have very easily come from Bin Laden or another Islamo-fascist zealot bent on murdering anyone whose views differ from their own.\n\nThe asker asks why Iran cannot use nuclear energy. The world has no issue with this. Iran is welcome to use nuclear energy to bring electricity to its people. You can be damn sure, however, that the world isn't going to turn a blind eye while a fundamentalist state enriches uranium against UN and IAEA requests.
779771
Nice ideal, but absolutely impossible. If I was an Iranian Leader, I wouldn't even think about it until I saw several American leaders convicted & successfully impeached. He is well aware our leaders speak with forked tongues.\n\nBy the way, what about this alleged nuclear weapons development? Is it any more real than what was in Iraq? It's the same people saying it, folks. Think. They were never found in Iraq because they never existed. You can hide a bomb, or several bombs, where they are difficult to find. Not true for the facilities that make them. Iran has a facility to enrich uranium for power plants.But nothing has been found suggesting bomb grade uranium, or the facilities to make it. And they are under constant inspection. think.
385099
We do not consider the proliferation of nuclear technology for WMD's progress.  When Iran is sitting on one of the largest known oil reserves on Earth the idea she would spend enormous resources to build nuclear power plants is not credible.  \n\nYour President's threats to destroy Israel don't reassure us that your intentions are peaceful. For me your comment that God only shines in Iran suggests your religion and/or culture is superior to mine.  Persons who believe their God only shines on them can use that to justify bad things.    \n\nProgress can take place in many areas that don't threaten the existence of life on our planet. Americans and the world would rejoice if an Iranian found a cure for cancer,  or even the common cold, and we would all hold you in our hearts forever. \n\nIt is not Iranian progress we are concerned about, it is survival
611542
difficult question, because although i agree with the sentiment that America has them, and has used them.. they have also bore witness to them. they know the nuclear power, have been humbled by it and its power and there are people in the government that wont let it be used to whimsically again.\n\nIran on the other hand, feel oppressed, hard done by even internationally. they are angry and you know what they say in cartoons about deadly weapons being in the wrong hands?!\n\ni just think we have seen in the past (Vietnam) and present - examples of countries that the USA would've used this destructive power against, but haven't. Would Iran be so self controlling when vying for 'respect'? would they use it as a tool of persuasion?\n\nI personally feel alittle uncomfortable that a country that has so many people baying for western blood could posses such a weapon (i mean, isn't it technically our governments that are at war?)\n\nSo even though I'm not happy that America See's its self as the worlds police force (shouldn't that be the UN?), i think it is a case of 'Better the Devil you Know'.
63166
We have been obsessed with it since 1979 when the Shah of Iran lost power to new politcal forces. That is when  Ayatollah Ruholla Khomeini took power.\n\nAfter Khomeini's death, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has taken power and has taken a very strong stance against Isreal and peace in general by buying $9 billion worth of surface to air missles from Russia and restarting the Nuclear energy program. Iran had been watched closely by the UN International Atomic Energy Agency for a number of years now but recently Iran has taken UN seals of nuclear material which they claim to be using for nuclear energy but could be used in warheads and other bombs.\n\nThe problem is that we don't know what could happen next because Mahmoud Ahmadinejad does not have a track record and is more extreme than the former leaders of Iran. This is a situation which could become worse very quickly.
248178
A nuclear power station in Iran is not bad. However the 'fuel' (enriched uranium or plutonium) can be used for composing an atomic bomb. The politicians are afraid for that. So do I.
656776
I say that you are crazy.  Iran cannot have nukes, no if's, and's, or but's about it.  They have vowed to wipe Israel off the map, and a nuke would give them the means to do it, and permanently.  A weapon that deadly in the hands of insanity is just that- insanity.
427986
Why should we tell Iran what to do.\nWe should just leave them alone.\nIt's there choice to decide what to use nuclear power for.
595842
AA my good friend, I think we may AGREE on this one. Iran's primary motivation is to construct nuclear weapons, nuclear power would be a secondary benefit and of course like any good sociopath, Iran is playing the "energy end up" while minimizing (to the outside world) the thought of developing nuclear weapons.
532696
It should not be allowed nuclear capabilities, and we should all endever to prevent this occurance, because it is not within the intrests of the Western world. I recognise the arguement that Iran is as unstable or backward as the Western press portray it to be, however a neuclear Iranian would enable it to dictate policy in the region to a much larger degree, look at North Korea for example. The West needs a weaker Iran to exploit its natural resources, we should not be apologetic about this fact, we should however be careful how we go about it. As previous events have shown, badly planned interferance is far worse than isolationism.
347515
Now that is one big question lol. I would say this to you, what do you want from iran?\nOk so Iran gets nukes so what?\nSo they give them to some bad guys so what?\nSo bad guys give them to us like say 3 of our biggest cities. May four cities. Now what do we need to do to Iran?\nHow many got to die before we make a decision?\nIt is coming and soon!!!!!!!!!!
145148
I think so. Iran is wanting nuclear weapons. They should live under the same rules as everyone else.
35783
No, Iran should NOT have a nuclear weapon. They are dangerous actually VERY dangerous and people in Iran are stupid.