x404.co.uk
http://www.x404.co.uk/forum/

Hague fears Iran could start 'new Cold War'
http://www.x404.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=15884		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  pcernie [ Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Hague fears Iran could start 'new Cold War'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17082433

The Israelis will ensure it's kept hot...
Author:  belchingmatt [ Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Hague fears Iran could start 'new Cold War'
Iran may be huffing and puffing but Israel will blow the house down.

Things could get out of hand quite quickly.
Author:  l3v1ck [ Mon Feb 20, 2012 3:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Hague fears Iran could start 'new Cold War'
pcernie wrote:
The Israelis will ensure it's kept hot...
Just what I was thinking. The second Iran announces it has nukes, I'd be expecting Israel to do something preemptive.
Not that I think Iran would be dumb enough to anounce it. They'd just pack the warheads into crates at give them to terrorists to target Israel. Why suffer the wrath of the world by admitting you have them?
Author:  ShockWaffle [ Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Hague fears Iran could start 'new Cold War'
Try to remember that the people you are talking about are just as human as you are. The Iranians aren't going to give Hezbollah nukes, nor are they going to launch a nuclear attack, because they are not a nation of suicide bombers. They have homes and families, and are no more anxious to see these incinerated than you are to see your children die that way.

The problem with a state like that having a bomb like that is the cost and disruption required to return the region to a status quo where nobody can actually invade anyone. Israel will have to guarantee a second strike capability, which in turn means either keeping nuclear armed bombers in the air 24x7 or else having nuclear armed subs sitting in the Indian Ocean. Both of these options are politically sensitive and hugely expensive. The Saudis, the UAE and probably Qatar and Bahrain will also want some kind of guaranteed protection or retaliation too. The Russians will of course grandstand in their usual petulant manner when missile protection measures are proposed.

That's a lot of inconvenience for everyone, it would be cheaper and better for them - and more importantly for us - if a deal can be struck. But that probably requires a lot of posturing, and near stevenrogers levels of tragic hyperbole, which is what's on offer at the moment.
Author:  l3v1ck [ Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Hague fears Iran could start 'new Cold War'
You do know their president has publicly said that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth don't you?
Author:  jonbwfc [ Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Hague fears Iran could start 'new Cold War'
ShockWaffle wrote:
Try to remember that the people you are talking about are just as human as you are. The Iranians aren't going to give Hezbollah nukes, nor are they going to launch a nuclear attack, because they are not a nation of suicide bombers.

However every extra nation that has a working nuclear arsenal increases the chances that a nuke will fall into the hands of people who are a bunch of suicide bombers. That's as much why we have the non-proliferation treaty as just to stop the USA/Russia/China turning the planet into a cinder. Because just one nuke getting into the hands of someone who is mad enough to use it is something almost beyond contemplation. Iran may not be mad enough to use one itself, but could you be 100% sure they could keep hold of every single one they make? The risks of that are already bad enough as it is. Even if they never actually use them, an awful lot of quite rational people would much rather then didn't even make them. As it stands, as far as we know, no terrorist organisation has ever obtained a nuclear device. They've certainly never managed to use one. Every extra nuke that exists puts that state of things in slightly more jeopardy.

Quote:
They have homes and families, and are no more anxious to see these incinerated than you are to see your children die that way.

Actual suicide bombers usually have homes and families too. In fact, they often use them as a justification for their actions. Not that I don't recognise the difference between strapping on some C5 and deciding to detonate a nuke is perhaps... well it's psychologically different, I suspect but I don't think that on its own is enough justification to allow the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

Quote:
That's a lot of inconvenience for everyone, it would be cheaper and better for them - and more importantly for us - if a deal can be struck. But that probably requires a lot of posturing, and near stevenrogers levels of tragic hyperbole, which is what's on offer at the moment.

Small point, but I think any government which is happy to order troops to open fire on it's own citizens simply for protesting can't always be relied upon to be entirely rational.

Jon
Author:  rustybucket [ Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Hague fears Iran could start 'new Cold War'
l3v1ck wrote:
You do know their president has publicly said that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth don't you?

No he didn't.

He actually said:

Quote:
Our dear Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time and this was a very wise statement

He said nothing about killing anybody.
Author:  pcernie [ Wed Feb 22, 2012 12:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hague fears Iran could start 'new Cold War'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/oct/27/israel.iran

:|
Author:  rustybucket [ Wed Feb 22, 2012 1:00 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hague fears Iran could start 'new Cold War'
pcernie wrote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/oct/27/israel.iran

That article is based on a mis-translation of the original Farsi

From Wikipedia:

Quote:
Iranian government sources denied that Ahmadinejad issued any sort of threat. On 20 February 2006, Iran's foreign minister Manouchehr Mottaki told a news conference: "How is it possible to remove a country from the map? He is talking about the regime. We do not recognize legally this regime."

Shiraz Dossa, a professor of Political Science at St. Francis Xavier University in Nova Scotia, Canada, also believes the text is a mistranslation.

Quote:
Ahmadinejad was quoting the Ayatollah Khomeini in the specific speech under discussion: what he said was that "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time." No state action is envisaged in this lament; it denotes a spiritual wish, whereas the erroneous translation – "wipe Israel off the map" – suggests a military threat. There is a huge chasm between the correct and the incorrect translations. The notion that Iran can "wipe out" U.S.-backed, nuclear-armed Israel is ludicrous.

The Guardian columnist and foreign correspondent Jonathan Steele published an article based on this line of reasoning.

[emphasis mine]

And from the Guardian's own Corrections column:

Quote:
Giving background to this week's controversy over remarks by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, a story mentioned his previous call for Israel to be "wiped off the pages of history" (Britain walks out of conference as Ahmadinejad calls Israel 'racist', 20 April, guardian.co.uk). The translation of the statement he made in 2005, at The World without Zionism conference in Tehran, has been the subject of dispute. A more literal translation is: "the regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time", and this is the translation we should have used (as noted in Corrections and clarifications, 28 July 2007).
Author:  pcernie [ Wed Feb 22, 2012 2:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hague fears Iran could start 'new Cold War'
I know, it took me ages to find it ;)
Author:  jonbwfc [ Wed Feb 22, 2012 7:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hague fears Iran could start 'new Cold War'
what I find interesting is a member of a religious organisation that has no historical claim over Jerusalem and was instantiated in, what, 1500AD or so?, describes a religious which has existed for a couple of thousand years longer and has perhaps the most profound connection to Jerusalem as 'an occupation regime'. That doesn't suggest a very diplomatic approach to me to be honest with you. And given the history of the last 100 years, you'd be naive to believe the Israelis aren't inclined to be... over-defenseive.

It would be better for everyone if nobody had nuclear weapons. But it would be certainly better for everyone if nobody else got them. There is absolutely no likelihood of Israel throwing a nuke at Tehran unless something on the scale of a general invasion of Israel happened first. No chance at all. The Tehran government wants nukes as political willy waving. Which is somewhat equivalent to having a pet alligator to impress the neighbours. It's great and then it rips your leg off. There is no valid purpose to anyone having them. It helps nobody and it improves the lives of nobody. It is a waste to time and money and it makes the world a scarier place.

I've yet to see a single worthwhile argument as to why Iran should have nuclear weapons. The default position with nukes is not to have them. If anyone can come up with a reason that they should that is better than 'because someone else in the world does', I'd be interested to hear it.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/