The Nuclear Paradox

The Nuclear Problem

Most of the major nations are trying to convince Iran that it is not a good idea for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. I judge this effort to be reasonable and it is very important for humanity that they succeed.

Apparently Iran is determined to develop a nuclear weapon. I judge this decision to be reasonable and it is very important for Iran that they succeed.

Both efforts seem to me to be perfectly rational and justifiable.

I suspect that our future will see many more of such actions all with the same rational characteristics.

Can humanity survive this logic?

yes, humanity survives that logic quite well…

might makes right.

we think iran shouldn’t have nukes.

we will flex our might and make sure they do not.

they think they should have nukes.

they will flex their might to make sure they can build nukes.

we will piss and moan about diplomacy and peaceful solutions and sanctions.

iran will cut oil flow to the west.

$5 a gallon gas very soon.

candidate gore (and the democRATS) will promise to raise gas taxes even higher as highlighted in his stalinist masterpiece “earth in the (lurch) balance”.

republicans retain power in the 06 elections causing the democRATS to splinter into even more extreme left wing totalitarian factions.

we will invade iran before the 08 election.

ww3 escalates even more.

VIVA LA REVOLUTION!!!

-Imp

The human race is not long for survival, because logic is the least of our concerns.

Iran cutting off oil supply to the west is technically inconsequential, they don’t supply enough for it to matter. That being said, Impenitent is still correct in asserting that this will be used as a manuever to raise domestic prices through the roof.

All the while, the impotent Amerikan public, will sit back and piss and moan, mostly on the internets and cell phones, and do what we always do … piss and moan about party affiliations while corporate whores and politicians prison rape us out of our savings and investment potential.

The logic of Iran having nukes in light of logic, because as a fundamentalist regime of Islam, their entire desire for nuclear power is driven by hate for the West and Israel, and hate is illogical, more so based upon fundamentalism.

The fact that any nation uses nuclear power for weaponry, cannot be considered sound logic, as it is the human mind that controls that power, and humans are totalitarian, abject failures in the arena of logic.

Impenitent is also correct, that this promotes the likelihood of a war that will absorb all nations, once again.

Any outcome that resorts in detriment, not benefit, for humanity, smacks more of emotional distortion, than logic.

I believe your premise fails here.

Impenitent: might makes right.

K: No proof of the one.

IMP: we think Iran shouldn’t have nukes.

K: and yet bush willy-nilly gave India nukes without
anything resembling a treaty or guarantees not to use them
on pakistan.

IMP: we will flex our might and make sure they do not.

K:And as usual, the only piece on the board is power.
Power is a very weak piece to base your entire strategy on.

IMP: they think they should have nukes.

K: and you know differently how?

IMP: they will flex their might to make sure they can build nukes.

K: pride plays a very important function in the ways of a country.

IMP: we will piss and moan about diplomacy and peaceful solutions and sanctions.

K: I am sure the village idiot will not even try the diplomacy or
peaceful solution anyway.

IMP: iran will cut oil flow to the west.
$5 a gallon very soon.

K: finally something we agree on, except $5 will be
on the cheap end.

IMP: candidate gore (and the democRATS) will promise to raise gas taxes even higher as highlighted in his stalinist masterpiece “earth in the (lurch) balance”.

K: And the GOPers will offer tax cuts as a solution for
everything.

IMP: republicans retain power in the 06 elections causing the Democrats to splinter into even more extreme left wing totalitarian factions.

K: hardly likely as of right now, but what for tomorrow cal district 50.
If a democrat wins there, it is over for the GOPers.

IMP: we will invade Iran before the 08 election.
ww3 escalates even more.

K: And this is good news for america how?
war is never a good solution for anything and with
the military in total shambles from Iraq, we can hardly
invade Iran. No this is one war we will lose and lose badly.

Kropotkin

-Imp

The logic of the UK/US having nukes in light of logic, because as an imperialist regime of Capital, their entire desire for nuclear power is driven by hate for the non-capitalist and fear of losing the economic upper hand, and hate and fear are illogical, more so based on imperialism.

:wink:

If you are expecting me to disagree, let us await the hands of time …

And when we have both passed into antiquity, and are remembered not, still we will wait … and still nothing will have changed.

Or we could go all out Pythonesque and the “contradiction is not an argumentative proposition, just boorish opposition” retort …

Which do you prefer?

There is no reason for any country to have nukes. Nukes are potentially destructive to all mankind, not just to one’s neighbors.
The other problem is the division between the decision making Caligulas and their own people who suffer the consequences of such leadership. The ayatollah wants to nuke the nonbelievers. Is that in the interest of the Iranian people? I doubt that there is reason to believe so.

No reason to have nukes? Haven’t you morons seen Armageddon? :wink:

Why is it that Iran can say they want nuclear power for “peacefull” civilian power, North Korea say they already have a nuke/ballistic missle capable of delivering them and Europe and the US are up in arms against Iran?

aren’t nukes good for making shadows? what could possibly be bad about a bomb that can vaporize anything? the fallout?

you are missing the point here and you see everything from the US perspective. what this really is is a question of good vs. evil, from our (west, capitalist swine) perspective Iran is a country that cannot be trusted because of their views on life (religion, whatever), therefore they are EVIL. we on the other hand because we are mechanisms in our own society see ourselves as GOOD. but from the middle eastern (arab towel heads) perspective Iran has all the right in the world (as much right as the rest of us) to advance in technology. (the foremost striving of the human race)

not necessarly that we would do much more good with our nukes, or have for that matter, than Iran would, most likely the same thing that we did. we are scared of what they might do and try to increase our chances of SURVIVAL by denying them powerful weapons. they on the other hand feel humilated and scared because we are denying them a fair fight, thus they try to increase their chances of SURVIVAL by gaining this technology. world war three indeed

Nukes are Bad ummmK

the states had it right with the “mutually assured distruction”

If we have enough nukes to kill everyone, whos dumb enough?

I contend that Wal-Mart is ‘the logic of capitalism’. I mean that if one follows the principles of capitalism the result would be Wal-Mart. To me this means that in a capitalistic society Wal-Mart is acting logically.

When I say that most nations in the world are trying to stop Iran from making a bomb and that this is a rational action I mean that they are following the logic of their principles. Likewise Iran is following the logic of the principles of a sovereign nation.

So, when both entities are doing what they are doing we have a situation that if we follow the logic of the matter we will in short order have a world wherein almost all nations will have the bomb or we have a war between the two entities, the group and the one, ad infinitum.

The logic of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) was all we could depend upon during the cold war. It appears to me that today we still only have the logic of MAD. When the world is filled with nations with the bomb will not the logic of human action, as we perceive that logic to be from past history, dictate that the bomb will be used?

It seems to me that the nations together must find a way to create a goal that all or most nations can accept.

The means to reach a goal cannot be determined before the goal is determined. The end drives the means. What goal can all nations agree upon? Is the goal a nuclear free future? Perhaps the means is some sort of police body capable of forcing obedience to a goal. But again the ultimate goal suitable to many or most nations seems to be necessary.

I would say that sovereignty is self determination. A political entity, a person or a nation, seeks self determination—sovereignty. Individuals give to the state certain aspects of their sovereignty for the sake of security.

A state without some control of the sovereignty of its citizens cannot function. Perhaps the world could afford the luxury of a state of anarchy between nation states in the past when one or a few people did not have the ability to destroy all humanity. Today a few willful people can destroy humanity.

Perhaps today’s technology requires us to eliminate sovereign nation states. Perhaps the goal we must establish is the goal of world government wherein all citizens give up more of their sovereignty for the sake of security.

but MAD doesn’t work with iran… they will strike first… and how wise do you have to be to give them the chance not to strike?

oh yes american, we just want to build the nuke to be safe… we would never use it on you or israel… we just want to be able to wipe your infidel asses off the planet in one easy strike for the greater glory of Allah… trust us… vote democRAT, negociate, make peace treaties, bargain with us, give us your food, your money, your medicine, your technology, we just want to be your friend…

the pathetic thing is that a bunch of people believe that shit.

VIVA LA REVOLUTION!!!

-Imp

nobody believes what you just said but they cannot say what they feel of their beliefs, you fear islam faith as they fear rationnal rules of western superior invaders

the superior must make the right move first because He can with all the threats they defeat, did america shows a geniune will to accept islam or muslims as good pets at least? it is obvious to me that they are not confident in their believes they want to attack for no reason to deny any word you just never think…why nobody wants to judge himself? especially when they have it all, why is it so difficult to let live another with different goal to his thoughts? Bush seems to know some of God, don’t you for instance impenitent knows that God likes to say the same in differnt ways of shapes? why americans thinks they are the world alone? is is an expression of hidden hate to God? if it was why do they declare wars? don’t they must feel ashamed knowing God?

Why should America care what Iran is doing. Iran is a sovereign country.

do americans in depth think that only power give happiness and peace?
if this is true than iranians are of the same blood like jews, why do they love jews as their brothers and not iran? ideology of leadership but in pleasures it can give and not of faith to serve God, this is how they love arabians spending on sex and malls, how are they planning to proove their superiority of being when all they care about in truth is to be what blinds can see

No iman, this is not a simplistically defined “American” value, this is the self-serving perceived right of all humanity. The ego of the mind, to assert one person, one society, one nation, one faith, one Creator, one empiricism, one philosophy, as superior; is the catalyst for all in human engineered creation.

No one is different, and that is truly sad. We just find different cultural modes, to hide it from sight.

We will be our own undoing, all in the name of peace and technological advancement, which never existed, and never will.

strange how God is giving some benefits of thinking your world by abstract analogy for souls suffering from power abused they can’t use it to free of not even a single move