Should Iran be stopped?

Should Iran be stopped?

Although a signatory of the Non-nuclear Proliferation Treaty, according to Israel, Iran is enriching uranium to be used in a weapon which could potentially reach Israel. There is also a question as to whether Israel also has nuclear weapons, although not a signatory of the Non-nuclear Proliferation Treaty. The IAEA has also in its latest report released information that there is “credible evidence” Iran is working on nuclear weapons.

However very recently the Prime Minister of Israel announced support for military strikes against Iran’s civil nuclear programme. I read this in an article by The Telegraph:

Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, is seeking cabinet support for a military strike on Iran, Haaretz newspaper has reported after days of speculation on plans for such an attack. – The Telegraph

Now while I won’t dispute that it maybe a threat to the defence of Israel, I think the west, especially my own country the United Kingdom, should stay out of this altogether. We should not be in the business of telling countries whether they can have nuclear weapons or not especially when Iran has countries  in the same region whom they consider enemies; who also may have nuclear weapons. Not only that, Iran is surrounded on two sides on the borders of Afghanistan which has roughly 100,000 US troops and on the other hand you have Iraq which roughly has around 50,000 US troops in that theatre. While also mentioning the fact that the US has bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and possibly other countries in the middle-east. If I were the Iranian leadership right now, the goal would be to pursue nuclear weapons just for self-protection, sovereignty and a voice equal to that of larger countries on the world stage.

Although we may see Iran as a backward country with laws which may confuse or people may see those laws as totally out of touch in 2011, lets not forget the west also supports countries which have similar laws like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Two countries which are militarily supplied by the United States for defensive purposes. Mentioning these two countries they are also run in dictatorship like fashion, similar to Iran, however the religious aspect is much deeper when making a comparison. Although I do not like the laws in Iran, that is the way they run things, who am I to intervene?

My main point or conclusion: If Israel chooses to attack Iran, let them go alone. We have no business in supporting yet, another war in the middle east, which could potentially put countries like the US and the UK in harms way if we participate in any military action against Iran.

Now I know it may seem like I have a double standard, considering the fact that I would support intervention in Syria for example. However Syria is a totally different issue. The government there are killing their own people and are attacking civilian populated areas with tanks, live ammunition with what appears to be no regard for human life; whether that be innocent or not. – Through the many YouTube videos and news reports I’ve seen on that.

My actual meaning is that there are so many reasons why Iran would want a nuclear weapon, purely for its own protection and a voice to be heard, why can’t they have it; albeit them having signed the NPT? I mean you have a country like Israel who is threatening them, who apparently have nuclear weapons and you have countries like the US who are not exactly friendly with Iran who have troops in countries which border Iran; while the US also possesses nuclear weapons. I would feel surrounded, so why shouldn’t they from their perspective?

Is there any evidence the world can see, that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons?

From my perspective I don’t think there is any evidence to conclude they are building nuclear weapons. If there were evidence we would have seen it by now. What worries me is that we will see a repeat of Iraq 2003 – except on a smaller scale. Perhaps to the scale of Operation Babylon and the destruction of the Iraqi nuclear reactor in June 7, 1981. However Iraq didn’t have an advanced military which could strike back. In this case Iran does have missiles which are within range of Israel and they had a decently sized army which is considerably more modern than for example Iraq’s 2003 army.

Credible evidence?

Although the IAEA claim there is “credible evidence” that Iran is indeed pursuing nuclear weapons, where is that evidence? The organisation has claimed that “Iran has failed to meet its reporting obligations”, to what is considered a serious violation to the Non-nuclear Proliferation Treaty. The IAEA has also come out with a lot of claims and one importantly stating that Iran was possibly designing a nuclear warhead.  Although Iran can be considered suspicious in its claims of not needing a nuclear weapon, yet not being totally open about its nuclear program, is Iran’s right to civil nuclear power being violated under the pretenses of foreign spy agencies feeding the IAEA this information? I would like to see where the IAEA got their information from, otherwise I cannot find their report credible.

One Response to “Should Iran be stopped?”

  1. iro says:

    of course they should have nuclear weapons. the same way taiwan should be able to have nuclear weapons to protect its defense. why does israel get nuclear weapons and not iran? seems unfair when they are both enemies. it levels the playing field (no pun intended)


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers: