Nukes are not really for actual use but for deterrence so likely no lives would have been lost. Israel has nukes and they don't use them unless somebody attacks them with nukes. Same with other countries. Ideally both Israel and Iran as well as North Korea, maybe also Pakistan and India should not have nukes. And even more ideal it would be if nobody had them but the cat's out of the bag already.

▲

brightball 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Iran has repeatedly stated their intent to use them.

	▲	platinumrad 6 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		They've also stated at various times that they believe first use or any use to be against Islamic law. I don't find any of these statements to be particularly credible, but I also don't think they're going to strap the first bomb they make to the closest missile they find and immediately send it at Tel Aviv when it surely means the total destruction of the Iranian state.
	▲	freefrog1234aa 6 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Iran has repeatedly stated they will not develop nuclear weapons.
	▲	vincnetas 6 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		do you remember what usa president stated just couple of days ago? to destroy whole country. didnt it sounded credible enough?

▲

throwafffff 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

India, The biggest democratic country should not have nukes but its ok for a bunch of colonizers and authoritarian state like china to have.

▲

annexrichmond 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

tartoran 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No, I'm not saying that, how do you extrapolate my position from there. It would good if Iran continue not to have nukes but also it would be a great example for the region if Israel didn't have them either. If we allow Israel to have them we're applying a double standard. Any unhinged country should not have them.

	▲	annexrichmond 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		There's not much precedent to get a powerful, vulnerable country to willingly disarm their nukes. It's fair to say Israel shouldn't have them but I'd be far more uncomfortable with Iran All their leaders have repeatedly called for the elimination of Israel and t that must be "wiped off the map" or "erased from the page of time" They have a much more abhorrent track record of domestic repression, state-sponsored terrorism, and explicit elimination-ist rhetoric toward Israel makes an Iranian nuclear capability far more destabilizing. A nuclear Iran would likely embolden its proxies and heighten the risk of catastrophic escalation in a region where they have actively worked through proxies to encircle and attack Israel for decades

▲

platinumrad 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I have it on good authority that Hitler didn't want Iran to have nukes. Are you siding with Hitler??

▲

annexrichmond 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Sure. Hitler was also a vegetarian. Is that really your best argument?

▲

albedoa 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Is that really your best argument?

(That is your argument.)

▲

platinumrad 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Is "something something Hitler" your best argument?

▲

annexrichmond 6 hours ago | parent [-]

OP basically said every country is the same, has the same motive, so therefore it's ok for them to have nukes if others have them. That couldn't be more naive, and the Nazi regime is a prime example.

	▲	platinumrad 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Ideally both Israel and Iran as well as North Korea, maybe also Pakistan and India should not have nukes. I assume this applies to the big H as well! Their follow up was in the context of a very different world than that of WWII.