Iran started its nuclear programme, because Iraq!

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Technically Iran started with development of civilian nuclear energy in 1970's under Shah with full US blessing with everything being pretty much stopped after the revolution.

The whole operation restarted again during 2006/7, to say that Iranians were not motivated by US treatment of their "axis of evil" buddy next doors, is an interesting interpretation of their motives.

[NICE MOBIUS]

Indeed, it's not too much of a stretch to imagine that had the US not failed so spectacularly with the occupation phase of Iraq, that they might have used it as a launch pad for invading Iran...

[grumbler]

If Iran did, indeed, have no nuclear program from the Revolution to 2006/7 (contrary to what the IAEA reported, but they could be wrong and Some Guy on Apolyton right) , then blaming the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 for the Iranian actions in 2006/7 seems absurd, barring direct evidence. Why would the Iranians wait three or four years before restarting their nuclear weapons program, if the US invasion of Iraq posed this existential threat to them (the only threat that justifies the expense of a nuclear weapons program). No, that's the "interesting" (read: non-credible) interpretation of their motives.

The Iranians had a uranium enrichment program before the Iraq war, and after it. There is zero (publicly released) evidence that the Iraq War changed their plans in any significant way.

[grumbler]

Indeed, it's not too much of a stretch to imagine that had the US not failed so spectacularly with the occupation phase of Iraq, that they might have used it as a launch pad for invading Iran...

It's no more stretch than to imagine an invasion by aliens, I suppose.

[Aeson]

Yes, post hoc ergo propter hoc is ridiculous.

Cheney: The sun rose and froze my heart, which is why Iran stopped their nuclear program after I sent thousands of Americans to their deaths, maimed thousands more, all to enrich my buddies.
Wallace: The sun rose this morning, and then the temperature increased. I think you are wrong ... the sunlight warms things and Iran didn't stop their nuclear program.
grumbler: OMG! OMG! LOGICAL FALLACY BY WALLACE! The sun rising couldn't possibly lead to the temperature increasing because I HAVE ITALICIZED SOME WORDS ONLY DOUCHEBAGS USE ... let me suck your dick cheney

[Kidlicious]

Iran just wants nuclear capability for civil purposes you stupid white people.

[grumbler]

Cheney: The sun rose and froze my heart, which is why Iran stopped their nuclear program after I sent thousands of Americans to their deaths, maimed thousands more, all to enrich my buddies.
Wallace: The sun rose this morning, and then the temperature increased. I think you are wrong ... the sunlight warms things and Iran didn't stop their nuclear program.
grumbler: OMG! OMG! LOGICAL FALLACY BY WALLACE! The sun rising couldn't possibly lead to the temperature increasing because I HAVE ITALICIZED SOME WORDS ONLY DOUCHEBAGS USE ... let me suck your dick cheney

I ran this through my gibberish-English dictionary, and it still came out gibberish. I think I get from this that you have a phobia about italicized words, and a penchant for lying about what people say, but other than that I have no idea what idea, if any, you are trying to convey. Maybe if you try again when you are sober?

[OneFootInTheGrave]

If Iran did, indeed, have no nuclear program from the Revolution to 2006/7 (contrary to what the IAEA reported, but they could be wrong and Some Guy on Apolyton right)

Ok... or the random guy on the internet


Axis of Evil threat was made in Jan 2002.

, then blaming the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 for the Iranian actions in 2006/7 seems absurd, barring direct evidence. Why would the Iranians wait three or four years before restarting their nuclear weapons program, if the US invasion of Iraq posed this existential threat to them (the only threat that justifies the expense of a nuclear weapons program). No, that's the "interesting" (read: non-credible) interpretation of their motives.

The Iranians had a uranium enrichment program before the Iraq war, and after it. There is zero (publicly released) evidence that the Iraq War changed their plans in any significant way.

Since Iran is due to release their plans to you dear reader of the internet?

Why would Iran would spend tons of money, risk sanctions overall costing ~500bn, equivalent to full annual GDP of the nation to do exactly what? Bomb US/UK/Israel?

Prior to 2002 there was little activity as it was inconvenient and no real reason, while post US treats and Iraq involvement, understandably Iran's leadership had good reasons to pursue nukes. Took a few years for Iran to get up to speed, but by 06/07 they had a serious program going.

Check North Korea. While nuclear weapons are not the only reason for it's continued existence without US invasion, it is likely a very strong factor. You could also easily argue that NK is much more unstable than Iran, yet both South Korea and Japan are still standing there without too many issues, without a solution on a horizon, but also without war, almost a decade after their first test.

You talk as if nuclear armament and self-defense are not related. It is poor form.

In my view it is much more likely that Iran's leadership sees it as essential to develop nuclear weapons as a deterrent for US invasion. That is about their only real option, as dependable on popular US opinion and warhawk propaganda success, the invasion is in principle just a matter of time. Could come easily if Trump is elected.

[Kidlicious]

What if they stopped sponsoring terrorists and threatening to destroy Israel?

[Sava]

can you even find Iran on a map?

[grumbler]

Ok... or the random guy on the internet

Thanks. That makes it clear that there were Iranian nuclear program activities between the revolution and 2006

Since Iran is due to release their plans to you dear reader of the internet?

Why would Iran would spend tons of money, risk sanctions overall costing ~500bn, equivalent to full annual GDP of the nation to do exactly what? Bomb US/UK/Israel?

[QUOTE] You are noting that Iran is not "due to release their plans to you dear reader of the internet" and then you ask why Iran is taking the action they took? We don't need to ask why to note what. And the "what" is an active Iranian nuclear development program before 2003.

Prior to 2002 there was little activity as it was inconvenient and no real reason, while post US treats and Iraq involvement, understandably Iran's leadership had good reasons to pursue nukes. Took a few years for Iran to get up to speed, but by 06/07 they had a serious program going.

Correct. Iran couldn't do much in the way of the development program until they'd completed some research. They were conducting that research in 2003. It took them years to get up to speed, so it wasn't until 2006/7 that they had a serious program going. The timing of the serious program was based on the need for research, not the US invasion of Iraq.

Check North Korea. While nuclear weapons are not the only reason for it's continued existence without US invasion, it is likely a very strong factor. You could also easily argue that NK is much more unstable than Iran, yet both South Korea and Japan are still standing there without too many issues, without a solution on a horizon, but also without war, almost a decade after their first test.

North Korea existed for many decades before they had a nuke. It doesn't seem likely that their continued existance is due, therefor, to their possession of nuclear weapons 9if they even possess them).

You talk as if nuclear armament and self-defense are not related. It is poor form.

What is poor form is to tell someone what they are arguing, particularly when you get it wrong. The argument that "nuclear armament and self-defense are not related" is one you have made up, not me.

In my view it is much more likely that Iran's leadership sees it as essential to develop nuclear weapons as a deterrent for US invasion. That is about their only real option, as dependable on popular US opinion and warhawk propaganda success, the invasion is in principle just a matter of time. Could come easily if Trump is elected.

In my view, Iran is developing nuclear weapons for domestic political reasons; the revolutionary regime has failed to deliver economic prosperity, and is using the nuclear program as a sop to nationalist pride, to distract the people from their living conditions. The regime no doubt thinks that there will be a defense benefit as well, but I don't think that they would undertake such a program for defense reasons only, given that they face no existential threats. The boogeyman of a US invasion of Iran is not only not "just a matter of time," as you assert, but does not even make any sense objectively. The US has zero reason to invade Iran, and lacks the means even if it had a motive.

[Sava]

given that they face no existential threats

have you been living under a rock for.... the last 35-40 years?

The US has zero reason to invade Iran

There are reasons to invade everyone. Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean they don't exist.

[giblets]

The US had zero reason to invade Iraq, which is why it never happened.

[Sava]

This ****ing guy... sitting here going "the Iranian regime doesn't face any existential threats"


LOLWUT


grumbler is serious idiot

[Sava]

Iran wants a deterrent just like the US

that's the simplest way to put it

and the US has not given Iran any incentive to not develop nuclear weapons

in fact, it has done the opposite and made Iran feel as it needs such a thing

this isn't rocket science, geopolitics 101