Quote:Why do so many people just assume that this deal is going to lead to war? If Iran really wants war, then that's the road they would have taken regardless. I don't think Iran is stupid enough to assume that building a warhead or two is going to give them the power to take on the United States, or even to take out Israel. Just remember the disparity here: Israel has somewhere between 40 and 400 warheads, with the most accepted estimate being 80: 50 missile-based, 30 aircraft-based. No one is going to nuke Jerusalem because it's a holy city for all parties involved. Even if Iran does strike first, Israel could turn that entire nation into a wasteland that makes Chernobyl look like quality real estate in a matter of hours (and without burning through much of its stash), and it's that threat that will keep Iran from trying anything whether they build a couple warheads in secret or not.

 

I don't think Iran wants a nuke so that they can start a war with Israel. I think they want a nuke to make the standoff with Israel more of a fair fight. The United States is not and never would be Iran's target. It's one thing to stand in front of an ICBM and talk about blasting the infidels--it's another entirely to convince Russia to go to war in Iran's defense against the United States and start World War III. If Iran does get a nuclear warhead, I think it would be a defensive move on their part. Consider this from the point of view of the Arab world: Israel is allowed to have 80 nuclear warheads. 80. That's enough to turn most of the Arab nations in the Middle East into a parking lot. From the point of view of their governments, why shouldn't they be allowed access to nuclear weapons as well to defend themselves from that threat? Entering into an international agreement that provides for consequences if they continue that research is a pretty big show of good will on their part. Cracking the door a little more open for trade with the west is a good sign as well.

 

I'm not justifying Iran's nuclear program, and I don't really want Iran to get a nuclear weapon because it would further destabilize the Middle East, but any argument that Iran would completely disregard an agreement the way North Korea did is completely ignoring the lack of China and presence of Israel right next door.

Because the alternative most assuredly war at some point in the future. They assume this deal changes nothing at best or at worst Iran cheats the deal and gets a bomb also leading to war. 

 

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but their line of thinking is that either way there is likely to be war but with this deal they get their 200 billion back. Am I wrong here anti-deal folks?

---