Sunday, October 14, 2012
Nuclear Technology in Iran
I do think Iran has the right to pursue nuclear energy. I think every country does. However I think this right should only be there if they comply to the regulations such as allowing random inspections. Iran has not been doing that and therefore there should be some kind of consequence for that. I believe that's where the diplomatic talks, sanctions, and sabotage come in. I feel like there should be some kind of set consequence for breaking the rules because otherwise it is just an empty promise. I don't think any country should have the right to create nuclear weapons. They are just too dangerous that no one should actually use them. Ideally no one would have that but that's only in an unrealistic world. If I was the President, (which will never happen ever) firstly I would already have set consequences for breaking the treaty. So I guess breaking the treaty would be one red line. My red line for further action would be concrete knowledge that Iran has nuclear weapons. Until then I would use the techniques we are using right now.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I totally agree that there should be consequences for not abiding by the regulations of the treaty. I do think, however, that Iran should be allowed nuclear weapons. Even though they are powerful and very, very dangerous, other countries do have them, one of them is Israel. With the feud going on between Israel and Iran, Israel currently has the advantage of nuclear weapons. What would happen if Israel were to attempt to attack Iran? Iran would have no real means of defense. I know that nuclear weapons are dangerous, but I feel like Iran possessing those capabilities, as well as Israel, would help to prevent and disarm the situation. I do agree with your red line though, if Iran doesn't follow the rules of the treaty and allow full inspections, I think there is reason for concern and actions should be taken!
ReplyDeleteI also agree that Iran has the right to nuclear energy but i don't think that they should be able to have nuclear weapons. It would be too much of a danger if they had them. Even though other countries have them i don't think anyone should. Countries say they wont use their nuclear weapons but then why would you have them? I agree that Iran should have a consequence for not signing the treaty because that is pretty much saying that they are doing something dangerous with the nuclear energy.
ReplyDeleteI agree that no countries should have nuclear weapons. That way we don't tell other countries they can't have them when we have our own stockpile. It is too risky to let countries have nuclear weapons which they would use on anyone and everyone they would want to. There would be no possible way to keep things like that in check. Unstable countries should really not have nuclear weapons because when something goes wrong that awful power could fall into Antibes hands and that my friends is extremely scary. Also there should be punishment for breaking the treaty other wise why have it?
ReplyDeleteI also agree that no country should have nuclear weapons. Essentially what happens is that one country get these weapons and then all the other countries want them to protect themselves. All it takes is one bad decision to start a nuclear war.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Iran shouldn't have nuclear weapons. I stated in my blog that their government isn't mature enough to have nuclear weapons. They're too unpredictable and have too close of ties with radical groups that could threaten the world.
ReplyDelete