This week government officials disclosed a secret nuclear plant in Iran capable of producing working warheads within the next several years, resulting in a plethora of international condemnation. However, the discussion of the threat from Iran seems to be misdirected towards the concept of an actual nuclear detonation. To be sure, the use of these weapons is a frightful idea, but far more dangerous to international security is the arms race that would inevitable result from Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weaponry.
The Middle-East is a region where relations between states are already incredibly tense. With one state wielding such a powerful weapon, the incentive for other nations to build up defenses becomes almost unbearable. States like Israel, Syria, and Iraq that are in close proximately to Iran will inevitably have to increase the size of their militaries to serve as deterrence. Such a scenario almost certainly leads to violence. So, perhaps the United States should be more concerned about the saber-rattling itself and less about constructing timetables for when a weapon could be used.
The Real Threat |
|
| By: paul918 Thursday October 1, 2009 7:02 am | |



10 Comments







No doubt! It spirals out of control. A multi-lateral Cold War.
Are you kidding me? Isreal already has hundreds of nuclear warheads. They won’t have to increase anything to have a deterrent.
I mean thats not necessarily verified…
double posting alert! Paul 918 copy pasted this exact same juvenile, oblivious nonsense from his identical posting on September 29, 2009 6:39 pm.
mods, hello?!? do you want to turn this into a spammers haven?
wow you need to relax. first of all, the post is not juvenile or nonsense – you may disagree but don’t insult me. Second, I wasn’t able to locate the previous post and this is homework for a class. If i could delete the previous post I would.
sorry, ok?
your previous post is at:
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/8563
my tone was elevated because a long discussion ensued on that thread, in which the tone got elevated, and you were not there offering any responses.
my reasons for disagreement are elaborated upon there, and I did not repeat them here.
btw, your reply here at #5 was very well handled. thats how you do it.
Is there anything that commenters can do that will help to meet your class requirements?
(The existence of Israeli nuclear weapons may not be verified to the satisfaction of some people but is taken as a matter of fact by the government of the United States.)
On the very slimmest possibility that you aren’t actually only pretending to be oblivious to reality of Israel’s nukes..avail yourself of knowledge found in government documents.
*******
” * On February 23, 1970 Ambassador Rabin informed Kissinger that, in light of President Nixon’s conversation with Meir in September 1969, Israel “has no intention to sign the NPT.”
* Subsequently, the White House decided to end the secret annual U.S. visits to the Israeli nuclear facility at Dimona. Lower-level officials were not told of the decision and as late as May 1970 they were under the impression that the visits could be revived.
* By 1975, in keeping with the understanding with Israel, the State Department refused to tell Congress that it was certain that Israel had the bomb, even though U.S. intelligence was convinced that it did. “
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/N…../index.htm
Which one did you pick…CBI, IB, or RAW?
Get real:
Prime Minster of Israel Ehud Olmert admitted Israel has nuclear weapons: