Should Iran have a nuclear bomb?

[scan]

Bear with me on this one for a moment. It will seem unrelated, but this thread reminds me of how confusing it is sharing a planet with each other -

Here is what I've observed - and I don't quite understand it myself - so maybe someone will have insight. I've met a lot of people in my life, and very few have been total jerks. I have met some jerks, but basically cool people or very cool people out-weigh the jerks, at least so it seems to me. But I may be living a rare life - but I doubt that's true. I've met many people from the Middle East, and I can say I've never met one that seemed like a jerk - as a matter of fact they seem like they have a much more clear focus on their families and are much less selfish. I do know some American families focused on family, but not so many.

So - I've also observed that people (people in general) drive like jerks in cars, are rude and careless many times. I've also seen people ignore each other in mass gathering places - like a mall or a grocery store. People rarely smile at each other, or say hello. Everyone is in there own world, and are jarred to anger almost when that shield of personal space, or attention is poked or prodded. I had a lady at a store almost jump out of her skin when she and I were both reaching for butter in the grocery store. She had trouble reacting to me and even speaking. It is not the only time I've seen this scared behavior in interacting with fellow white people (I mention white to make clear there was little else for her to pre-judge).

I also hear people say they wish people were friendlier. I have also heard some people who like to be left alone, and don't want to chit chat with strangers, but they are actually in the minority of those I've met. So I take this to mean that most people want to be friendly with each other, but do not do so. I've seen many times where someone who looks to be angry, grumpy, or sad will perk up and be quite friendly if you say hello - in the right environment. Like I said, there are times when people are alarmed by conversations or interaction.

Here at TMW I've seen behavior that is unique too. A lack of fear in blasting out opinions which are sometimes hurtful, angry, and with little concern for individuals - other than for themselves, or the group they belong to (helmet wearers, US citizens, squids, and the like). This is typical to being behind a keyboard and having little concern for how you make someone else feel. At least here we have a handful of people who are mindful of this and are at least willing to back off enough to understand differences.

So this brings me to group behavior, which is generally not very representative of individuals. Often chaos is controlled by a ruling group of some sort. The government of the US does not represent the opinions of everyone here. When I've been abroad and met people from other countries I often hear them state "They love Americans, but hate their government", or something to that effect. If they say they hate America or Americans, I've found they are not talking about the individuals, and seem to understand the distinction. That is to the point of what I'm talking about here. We have a great free land, and you can express yourself, but ultimately there is a ruling class that does not do what the "people" wish often and actually operate in self-interest. "The system" does what it can get away with through the clucky process that is government.

What cracks me up is the people who think we should stand behind the president, just because he was voted in by a majority. First, he was voted in by more than half the Electoral College (a weak old concept in my estimation) in reality, and the popular vote was not over-whelmingly in his favor - but it was in his favor. He won fair and square by the rules, so not a complaint from me on that point. But I saw an avatar here, which said it well - it had a picture of Bush and under it said "Next time you'll vote, hippie". This gets to the point that many who objected felt the system didn't work and didn't vote. Their fault really, but it does illustrate that the population of this country is not truly represented by its government. If media can motivate people (through inaccurate information, or otherwise) the swing of democracy can be changed - simply by persuasion without facts.

Then we come to the "if you don't like it, you can change it" mentality. Humorous really. If you don't agree with the policies of this president it most certainly does not mean that if you fight that policy you will make a difference. In reality everyone is allowed to voice their opinion, but to exact change is not so easy. And under those terms the winners of a vote issue have the right to say "shut up" to the losers. You lose, so your population's opinion is invalid.

Not to mention that we have different religions in the mix and each person has their own version of faith and belief. Two Catholics do not always agree, and they are in a very rigid Christian faith. We have been perceived in two ways in the country and the do not relate well to each other. On one hand we are a place where any religion can exist and be practiced. On the other hand we are Christian heavy and they view this as the foundation of the country, and beyond putting up with other religion being here, there is no need keep that personal. We have days off for Christian holidays, have Christian icons mixed in with our government and laws, and a president that proudly states his faith as guiding him. There truly is little separation of church and state anymore.

One more thing - supporting the troops having anything to do with supporting a war or the president. Why are those thing locked together. I do not support the guy I didn't vote for, and I didn't ever think the war was valid from day one. So, I respect the men and women who signed to do duty defending this country and the constitution. I also despise deserters - those who are in the military that turn their back on what they swore to due. I have a brother-in-law who has been in Iraq. I still think what our policy has done with these honorable men is sickening. Sorry if all that can't align in some people brains. I support the troops, not their leader or plan. I never took the oath that they did.

So why can't we all just get along? Pfffttt. I don't know how any of us can get along at all. The fact that someone gets these collections of monkeys (I'm referring to humans in general) in any form of orders is amazing. The idea of "no rules" is not realistic. Someone will always take charge - if you start with anarchy someone is bound to start organizing something - that is where anarchy would thus end.

Iraq had a ruling class that was unfair, but how many of those governments are there in the world? We had other places we needed to do this job sooner, but Iraq was an easy scapegoat. You have to see Bush had this in mind before 911 even - he was documented as trying to figure out how to address this issue of controlling Iraq. They were a weak country with no "real" military. Now it is a terrorist state - which is our fault. It certainly was a low terrorist area - due to a powerful evil leader and monarchy. Truthfully, even with the deaths and evil behavior previously seen there, there were far less innocent people killed before we showed up to smash the government. For more are being negatively effected by these actions then before the war, and there is not end in sight. And we still have no better control on terrorism. We have people who now have a world class training center for terrorist with our solders as living decoys. And we are so scared to death ourselves that we drag people from their homes to try to find the "evil doers". Sheesh.

I don't know. I had a point when I started, but though the mental athletics required by these topics, it wore me out. Should Iran have nukes? I don't know how anyone can even imagine these questions. Frame of reference makes all the difference. That goes for this board, for the US, for helmet use, and terrorism. I know why Iran thinks they should be able to have them, and I don't see how we can complain since we allow ourselves this luxury. Yes, they do some crazy stuff that doesn't respect life like we do, but we still are not free from sin ourselves. I would never attempt to compare Iran to the US as an equal comparison, but I do know we are not in the position to tell anyone else what to do.

Utopia was mentioned earlier. No such place could exist. No matter what things make your Utopia, you're probably peeing in someone else's sandbox. Many people hate the words politically correct, and tolerance, but sometimes there is no substitute for understanding someone you don't agree with's point of view.

[Jamers!]

Many people hate the words politically correct, and tolerance, but sometimes there is no substitute for understanding someone you don't agree with's point of view.

i hate political correctness, but i dont think that it makes me intollerant or not understanding, i just think its stupid to suger coat things and try to please everyone with what things are named and called and taht its just a dumb idea designed to please everyone which will never happen.



JWF

[Jamers!]

i dont care, blow it all to hell, the middle east is screwed. There will never be true peace there. The people of isreal will not back down and will not be "messed" with, the surronding arab people hate the irealies, so there is conflict, its a deab seated conflict with religious bits intangled, i say we step back, let then deal with it, and mind the problems in our own country before we fiddle with them, as for iran having a nuke, if they do, we arnt gonna find it, and if they do, theyd probably strike isreal before us.




JWF

I wonder if radioactive oil gives better mileage

ive heard it does, and it shorts your life span so you drive less and waste less money on gas



JWF

[Nalian]

Many people hate the words politically correct, and tolerance, but sometimes there is no substitute for understanding someone you don't agree with's point of view.

i hate political correctness, but i dont think that it makes me intollerant or not understanding, i just think its stupid to suger coat things and try to please everyone with what things are named and called and taht its just a dumb idea designed to please everyone which will never happen.

JWF

There are really two forms of this - one which is ridiculous and one which does need to be there so that we aren't running around insulting people because we can't be bothered to use "PC" terms. There has been a crazy push to be as careful as possible and not let people/individuals be themselves and that isn't right. But many people also like to hide behind "calling it like it is" and being un-pc to be a jerk. I'm not saying this is you JWF - I'm speaking more in a generality.

I figure if it takes no extra effort by me to call a sub-set of our culture by a term they prefer that allows them some dignity, what's the harm in using it? I know thats not the full scope/breadth of political correctness, but it's definitely a tip of the iceberg sort of deal.

I have worked in a predominantly male career for quite a few years now, and while PC stuff can definitely get in the way, a lot of times I am grateful for it as well. I won't go into specifics because it'd be pages long, but if you want some I'd be happy to share. I think its easy to not realize how uncomfortable, or even downright hostile, a place can feel when you aren't "one of the *insert majority group here*" unless you've been in that spot.

While it is pretty unfortunate that political correctness has been turned into the huge debaucle it currently is - the basic idea under it is treating everyone with respect no matter what their background is. Unfortunately once things that should be social common sense start to get regulated by office policies or the government, they often get twisted way out of their original intent.

Scan - I think a lot of your observations are right on. These days, especially when you're living in a city - it seems like the goal of a lot of folks is to isolate themselves as much as they can from their surroundings in so many ways. I'm certainly plenty guilty of it (hello iPod + no eye contact when on public transportation) when it comes to certain situations. I think that a lot of compassion/respect for others is lost the more we allow ourselves to do this.

[sv-wolf]

Hi Swatter

Richard, you are profoundly optimistic. I am afraid that I cannot that share that. Man is all to willing, with little pretext, to exterminate each other. The savagery that I have studied that occured last century extends far beyond idealogy or indoctrination in a certain view. It seems not all that difficult to strip away the facade of cooperation and show what really is in the hearts of man. I would have been more accurate if I would have said that violence is the cornerstone of human civilization; past, present, and the near future. There can be great kindness in the individual I would agree. Its alot like classical physics and quantum physics. Classical physics does a great job explaining the physics of the large while quantum mechanics does a great job of explaining the physics of the small. Unfortunately, the cannot exist together and seem contradictory.

I wouldn't say I was optimistic because I can see no clear way out of the situation we have got ourselves into. Sad to say.

Our differences are too entrenched for us to agree on these issues. But I'll just give you my view.

Armies are just collections of individuals - until they are institutionally manipulated.

To make sure soldiers perform as their commanders instruct they have to be trained and drilled and drilled and trained till they are depersonalised and respond to orders like robots. They have to swear allegiences. They are endlessly taught vague idological things about duty, and obedience to all kinds of abstractions in school and outside them, and this teaching is paid for by the power groups who want them to perform in battle. They are put under intense peer pressure to perform, they are threatened with severe consequences from authority if they desert. Religious ideologies are brought to bear. There is a material hieracy of dependence: the state pays their wages. So they fight.

These are all institutional, economic and ideological pressures, not natural ones. Nothing to do with 'human nature'

If I were given a gun and sent out to the battle front, without any of these pressures on me, I know what I would do - I'd run like dodo.

Large scale violence is not a consequence of 'human nature.' It is a constructed act.

[scan]

i hate political correctness, but i dont think that it makes me intollerant or not understanding, i just think its stupid to suger coat things and try to please everyone with what things are named and called and taht its just a dumb idea designed to please everyone which will never happen.

JWF

I'm happy to see that is the only point you have issue with then.

[grymlocke]

need I point out that the US is the ONLY country to ever use nukes against a population (japan) and only as a last resort to force an end to WWII, the fire bombings of tokyo actually killed more people...but thats besides the point...

question is, iran with a nuke, run by fanatics...do you want bagdad to go away?

or
Tel Aviv?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and ... estruction

Isreal will retaliate...and NOTHING WE CAN DO WILL STOP THEM.....

tyhink about that....

[scan]

need I point out that the US is the ONLY country to ever use nukes against a population (japan)

So that makes us the biggest jacka$$es on the planet.

and only as a last resort to force an end to WWII, the fire bombings of tokyo actually killed more people...but thats besides the point...

I think it is to the point really. We used nukes to show them off in a real application. No one dare cross the big guns of the sherriff of the world, the mighty US. We more effective against Japan before the use of the nuke then anyone ever will admit. Hurts to say we did the most evil thing on the planet. Wipe out civilians with full knowledge.

question is, iran with a nuke, run by fanatics...do you want bagdad to go away?

or
Tel Aviv?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and ... estruction

Isreal will retaliate...and NOTHING WE CAN DO WILL STOP THEM.....

tyhink about that....

Iran is not run by fanatics. Iran is run by a government tied to a religion which we don't understand well. Fanatic is a point-of-view statement. We are democracy fanatic here.

Scary? Yes. Avoidable? No. We run this country and envolve ourselves in this world the way corperation run companies. Quater by quarter, what is the fastest answer. Instant gratification and short attention span. Solutions take a long time and show little results at the start of the process, but people get impatient fast and we blow them up. With no proof and only fear to guide us we went to Iraq. Now we can't work on other world problems because we were so short sighted. The chance to work anything out with any hostile country has likely been destroyed by short attention spans.

[Shorts]

need I point out that the US is the ONLY country to ever use nukes against a population (japan)

So that makes us the biggest jacka$$es on the planet.

and only as a last resort to force an end to WWII, the fire bombings of tokyo actually killed more people...but thats besides the point...

I think it is to the point really. We used nukes to show them off in a real application. No one dare cross the big guns of the sherriff of the world, the mighty US. We more effective against Japan before the use of the nuke then anyone ever will admit. Hurts to say we did the most evil thing on the planet. Wipe out civilians with full knowledge.

On that JPN note, now we are here, guests in their country. Unless one comes here and spends an adequate amount of time, you won't fully understand the culture, the people or the history.

Sometimes that history is uncomfortable (believe me!), but its hard to ignore the way things are today because of it.

[swatter555]

Hi Swatter

Richard, you are profoundly optimistic. I am afraid that I cannot that share that. Man is all to willing, with little pretext, to exterminate each other. The savagery that I have studied that occured last century extends far beyond idealogy or indoctrination in a certain view. It seems not all that difficult to strip away the facade of cooperation and show what really is in the hearts of man. I would have been more accurate if I would have said that violence is the cornerstone of human civilization; past, present, and the near future. There can be great kindness in the individual I would agree. Its alot like classical physics and quantum physics. Classical physics does a great job explaining the physics of the large while quantum mechanics does a great job of explaining the physics of the small. Unfortunately, the cannot exist together and seem contradictory.

I wouldn't say I was optimistic because I can see no clear way out of the situation we have got ourselves into. Sad to say.

Our differences are too entrenched for us to agree on these issues. But I'll just give you my view.

Armies are just collections of individuals - until they are institutionally manipulated.

To make sure soldiers perform as their commanders instruct they have to be trained and drilled and drilled and trained till they are depersonalised and respond to orders like robots. They have to swear allegiences. They are endlessly taught vague idological things about duty, and obedience to all kinds of abstractions in school and outside them, and this teaching is paid for by the power groups who want them to perform in battle. They are put under intense peer pressure to perform, they are threatened with severe consequences from authority if they desert. Religious ideologies are brought to bear. There is a material hieracy of dependence: the state pays their wages. So they fight.

These are all institutional, economic and ideological pressures, not natural ones. Nothing to do with 'human nature'

If I were given a gun and sent out to the battle front, without any of these pressures on me, I know what I would do - I'd run like dodo.

Large scale violence is not a consequence of 'human nature.' It is a constructed act.

I think we can meet halfway if you can accept the evidence to the contrary. I am not denying that there is truth in what you say, that would be overlooking evidence for your argument. At the same time, men have been killing each other long before the inventention of centralized govt or political idealogy. You would be suprised at the size of ancient battles, especially relative to population. Whether it is clubs or cruise missiles, men love to kill each other, so it would seem.

scan-
I share in your puzzlement about people. It doesnt seem to make sense. Also, I am fine with political descent, even if its spirited. What I don't like is the disrespect and downright hatred that is ruining political discourse in this country and indeed around the world. If a person has something to say, IMO, make your point without insulting people or showing contempt or hatred.

Thats exactly what you did, and I respect that.