So after all this talk about bombing Iran what happens when they do get some nukes?

[NNN0LHI]

Well if some country kept threatening to bomb the US I would want my government to nuke the piss out of them first chance we get to prevent them from attacking us.

Especially if that country had already Shocked and Awed the countries surrounding the US into the Stone Age.

Has anyone else thought about this?

Don

[IDemo]

1. to repeat a post of mine from yesterday

Even if they do wind up with a nuclear weapon in five to ten years, they represent no bigger threat than Pakistan or the former Soviet Union, neither of whom we attacked preemptively. Nor do they have any particularly attractive targets, even assuming they also achieve a working missile to deliver the goods. We have already done them a great favor by removing their greatest enemy in the region, Saddam. They know that an attack on Israel would bring them complete annihilation from the US.

The "MAD" doctrine (mutually assured destruction) in place during the cold war would be replaced by the "SAD" doctrine: singularly assured destruction.

[NNN0LHI]

4. I don't remember any US politicians promising to bomb the USSR or Pakistan though

No harm no foul there.

See the difference?

Don

[IDemo]

9. The threat was implicit during the Cold War

But even with satellite photos of Russian missiles in Cuba, we used negotiation, not preemptive attack.

Iran knows full well, as mad as Ahmadinejad may be, that any use of a nuke would assure their complete destruction.

[Amonester]

2. BushCheneyExxonHelliburton will "mini-nuke" a false-flag op. long before

any Iranian power-plant will produce the first mega-Watt.

[cali]

3. You would?

I wouldn't. I'm against pre-emptive wars. In any case, that's shallow analysis- either that or you think Iran is run by suicidal maniacs, who can't wait to destroy their own country completely. You don't seem to realize that if Iran nuked us, we'd respond. They do realize that.

[NNN0LHI]

7. How do you know what you would do?

Do you ever remember hearing any politicians from another country talking about bombing the US like it was just another day at the office?

I don't.

Don

[cali]

8. Oh, I can pretty well tell what my response would be.

Anyway, my point is that your OP was either not well written or making a poor point.

[NNN0LHI]

11. Is what I am saying is if someone was constantly threatening to bomb our country...

...I would want my government to act. And act harshly.

Sorry if I wrote it so poorly.

Don

[cali]

14. OK, but that's absurd when it comes to Iran. They're not going

to nuke us, as they're not suicidal idiots, and they realize that the U.S. would retaliate if they nuked us, so harshly, that Iran would be deccimated.

[Pavulon]

5. I would assume SIOP

has been updated to include a nuclear action by any of the smaller nations that have nuclear weapons.

Iran becoming a nuclear power will just start a regional arms race.

Shock and awe is a press term, and the ramifications of a nuclear attack on the US or NATO nations would have a swift and horrible outcome.

[Hersheygirl]

6. Now where is that ignore button?

[devilgrrl]

10. Let's kill them all now before they have a chance to make any!!!!!!!!!

BUGGA BUGGA BUGGA!!!!!!

[NNN0LHI]

12. Better yet lets just quit threatening them

Wouldn't that make more sense?

Don

[Mountainman]

13. military weapons arms races get us nowhere as do wars.

Military intervention only kills people, costs us lots of money and less opportunity at home and we end up right were we started. The Vietnam and Korean wars are a good example.

It is far better to learn to exist peaceably on this planet than to bomb each other. By the way, just what Iran gain by bombing us?

[KG]

15. how about the next US govt to needs fully engage Iran instead of using it as a propaganda tool.

the US overthrow of the democratically elected Mosadeq govt started Iran down the path to its present state. it's long past time to make right that mistake.

Nixon went to China - and brought about a sea change in the USs relationship with a country long seen as a mortal enemy.

the dem pres. candidates ought to have the guts to offer to do the same if elected.

[Beelzebud]

16. This is how the neo-cons get Democrats to vote with them. Iran isn't close to having nukes!

Get that through your head.

Iran. Is. Not. Close. To. Having. Nukes.

This is another bullshit smokescreen just like Iraq's WMD>

Wake the fuck up!

[Warren Stupidity]

17. Nukes are nearly useless as offensive weapons due to MAD.

And in Iran's case, as it would be rather remarkable if they had the capacity to develop a survivable nuclear force with sufficient capacity to demolish our cities, they just have AD without the M. So Iran is not going to be launching any nukes at us or at Israel (which also has a survivable nuclear force of unknown size generally assumed to be sufficient to destroy any adversary's cities.) Certainly not now, when they have no nukes, and not ten years from now when they might or might not have a few weapons.

Nukes are useful for defensive purposes: they establish your nation as a truly sovereign nation in a nuclear armed world. Even if you can't assure the destruction of your adversary, the potential to use your own weapons if attacked means that any attack would have to be an atrocity that consisted of a first strike nuclear attack that wipes out your retaliatory capacity. Currently that is a line that has not been crossed. As has become obvious, if you are a target of American Imperialism, nuclear weapons are the only option that will force our government to negotiate rather than bully.

The Non Proliferation Treaty was supposed to resolve the problem of real sovereignty in a nuclear armed world by disarmament of the nuclear super powers concurrent with a prohibition on new entrants into the nuclear club. Implicit in that international agreement was that the nuclear club nations would respect the sovereignty of the non-nuclear nations, thus removing the primary valid motivation for joining the club. The PNAC doctrine abolished the implicit foundations of the NPT, the invasion of Iraq made it official that we no longer respected sovereignty.

This is now a different world than the one in which the NPT was ratified. 9-11 didn't change everything, our invasion of Iraq did. Nations that view themselves as competitors of or threatened by US Imperial interests are going to join the nuclear club if they can do so, as that is the only way they can protect themselves from our conventional military threat.