Should Iran be "allowed" to enrich uranium?

[wtmusic]

Poll question: Should Iran be "allowed" to enrich uranium?

[bryant69]

1. Another question

Can diplomacy succeed, if it doesn't have the club of Military enforcement behind it?

Although my fears surrounding the Iran situation are at least 2/3rds focused on that cementhead President Bush and his advisor's desire for further war.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[SteppingRazor]

2. I voted yes, but only for energy...

As a signee of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Iran has given up any right they may have had to create nuclear weapons.

[wtmusic]

3. Because we haven't honored that treaty

it makes enforcement difficult, no?

[SteppingRazor]

4. If I were Bush, I'd agree that it's hypocritical of me to say this...

but since I'm just a typical American citizen, whoo's as disappointed in us bowing out of the treaty as I am in Iran for attempts to create nuclear weapons, I reiterate -- they have no right to create them. Just because we pulled out of the treaty doesn't give them the right. Two wrongs, and all that. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who says, "Why, yes, of course the Iranians should have The Bomb" is totally out of their minds. I don't care what America may or may not have done. It's irrelevant. Another country getting the most destructive manmade force on the planet is never a good thing. Period.

[wtmusic]

6. Point well taken

I am truly torn on this issue. IMO a lot of these people who have no qualms about admitting more nukes into the world don't appreciate the immediate and long-term effects of these horrible weapons.

A good first step would be for the US to resume compliance.

[SteppingRazor]

7. Agreed. An even better first step...

would be for us to begin dismantling our own arsenal. We could at least get rid of all our land-based, short-range warheads -- I don't see us ever having to nuke Canada or Mexico. But, I'm a realist, and I know we're not about to seriously reduce our nuclear capability -- though I'm really at a loss to explain why. With enough nukes to turn the entire world into a parking lot several times over, why can't we afford to get rid of a few?

[sandnsea]

5. No, they should buy it

We should have some sort of global IAEA uranium production and all uranium should be produced and sold under tight supervision.

Really, we shouldn't have nuclear anything at all, it's just a disaster waiting to happen.

[bowens43]

8. As long as any nation has nuclear weapons

all nations have a right to have nuclear weapons.

[wtmusic]

9. Of course by international law, you're right

but we can easily carry this line of thought to an extreme.

I can imagine a world where small nations with despotic rulers use them rashly, and kill millions of others with fallout. Where entire landscapes of the earth are rendered uninhabitable (like in the Ukraine) for thousands of years by lax standards on processing.

I can imagine an interpretation of the Second Amendment which would allow private citizens to build them. The destructiveness of nuclear weapons deserves special consideration.

[SPKrazy]

10. I Can't Imagine It Would Ever Be A Good Thing To Have A Nuclear Iran

but as to whether they are actually building weapons, I don't trust te * administration to answer that question.

We need to know if they are

But who can we trust to find out?