[MustangJay]

Does anyone else here share my theory that Iran already has a nuclear weapon (of undeterminable size or strength) as is inviting an attack on their soil so they can use that as justification to nuke Israel or other nearby states? I believe they've stalled long enough to either build a bomb (as N. Korea did) or they've just bought one from China or Russia. Everybody seems to have forgotten about the countless weapons and materials that "disappeared" after the collapse of the Soviet Union and to this day remain unaccounted for. It would all go a long way in explaining the President of Iran's cocky and overly confident demenour. If this is the case, a U.S. attack on Iran may turn out to be a grave mistake in judgement, far worse then what's currently unfolding in Iraq.

[xerxes]

I doubt it. Considering Bush and Cheney's constant hard-ons for war, death, and destruction, if they had even remotely credible evidence that Iran had, or was about to complete a nuclear weapon, they would probably have attacked already and there would be a Götterdämmerung underway in the Middle East.

Nothing suggests, at least from information that's publicly available, that Iran has or is even close to completing a nuclear weapon. Even the NK's supply is debatable.

Even the fear that Iran acquired an old Soviet era weapon is unlikely. But considering that for years the great fear was that an unsecured Russian would come into the hands of terrorists proved (at up until now) unfounded. Bin Laden supposedly has millions of dollars at his disposal, but ultimately used hijacked passenger jets as weapons as opposed to nuclear weapons.

[BartSimpson]

If Iran had a bomb they'd have already used it on Tel Aviv.

[sasquatch2]

BartSimpson

$1:

If Iran had a bomb they'd have already used it on Tel Aviv.

No doubt. Neither judgement, patience nor wisdom are strong virtues of the Iranian theocracy.

[neopundit]

MustangJay MustangJay:

Does anyone else here share my theory that Iran already has a nuclear weapon (of undeterminable size or strength)

Second world countries want nuclear weapons to increase political capital and deter potential invaders. Developing a nuke then keeping it secret is pointless.

[BartSimpson]

neopundit neopundit:

MustangJay MustangJay:

Does anyone else here share my theory that Iran already has a nuclear weapon (of undeterminable size or strength)

Second world countries want nuclear weapons to increase political capital and deter potential invaders. Developing a nuke then keeping it secret is pointless.

Israel went to extensive lenghts to keep their nuclear programme secret and for a very long time.

[sandorski]

neopundit neopundit:

MustangJay MustangJay:

Does anyone else here share my theory that Iran already has a nuclear weapon (of undeterminable size or strength)

Second world countries want nuclear weapons to increase political capital and deter potential invaders. Developing a nuke then keeping it secret is pointless.

Yup.

[neopundit]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Israel went to extensive lenghts to keep their nuclear programme secret and for a very long time.

Probably because they are supposed to be the "good" guys, yet they were violating the NNPT.

[BartSimpson]

neopundit neopundit:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Israel went to extensive lenghts to keep their nuclear programme secret and for a very long time.

Probably because they are supposed to be the "good" guys, yet they were violating the NNPT.

They are not violating what they did not ratify. Israel is not a signatory to that treaty.

Iraq, North Korea*, and Iran are signatories to it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_No ... the_treaty

*correction: NK withdrew in 2003.

[Scape]

They already have chem/bio weapons anyway.

[neopundit]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

They are not violating what they did not ratify. Israel is not a signatory to that treaty.

Iraq, North Korea*, and Iran are signatories to it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_No ... the_treaty

*correction: NK withdrew in 2003.

I think this has been discussed before; while there is a legal difference between being and not being party to the NPT, politically there is no difference. But you are correct.

Regardless, my argument stands. Israel is just another case of a country developing weapons as a deterrent.

[WBenson]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

If Iran had a bomb they'd have already used it on Tel Aviv.

I don't know... There has to be some point at which self-preservation comes into play.

[sasquatch2]

WBenson

$1:

I don't know... There has to be some point at which self-preservation comes into play.

A theory but not as proven as MAD.

The question is what is that point?

My suspicion is that is iran has a weapon they are sufficient astute to keep it secret until they develope it sufficiently reliable/compact enough to deliver and build up a stock-pile.

My suspicion is the even the obtuse mullocracy wants more than one shot.

[sasquatch2]

An aspect overlooked:

The object of an attack by these whachos is to "make a statement".

Nuking Isreal has huge hazards for the Mullahs......the impossibility of eliminating ANY chance they hit Jerusalem, the second holiest muslim site after Mecca.......

This would require a highly accururate, highly reliable sophistocated delivery system with advanced safe-guards. A crude early genration weapon in an airliner is just too risky as is a Scud-like rocket.

Nuking Rome has no such constraints.

[neopundit]

sasquatch2 sasquatch2:

An aspect overlooked:

The object of an attack by these whachos is to "make a statement".

Nuking Isreal has huge hazards for the Mullahs......the impossibility of eliminating ANY chance they hit Jerusalem, the second holiest muslim site after Mecca.......

This would require a highly accururate, highly reliable sophistocated delivery system with advanced safe-guards. A crude early genration weapon in an airliner is just too risky as is a Scud-like rocket.

Nuking Rome has no such constraints.

Regardless, using a nuke would spell the end of Iran. I know you'd like to think differently, but Iran actually does care about how the world views it.

I can't say that they wouldn't try to use a nuke to leverage something undeserved, but randomly nuking some country will not happen.