For discussion:
What do you guys think about the United Nations placing a sanction on Iran? Do they have the right to develop a nuclear weapon? If not, what should we do to stop it?
I don’t think anyone has the right to develop a nuclear weapon: http://www.walterblock.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/theory_gun_control.pdf
Having said that, it’s a bit hypocritical for nations with nuclear weapons (which they too shouldn’t have) to tell other nations whether or not they can have them. Whatever happened to leading by example?
I see where you’re coming from about nations with nuclear capabilities being hypocritical, but I find it a lot different for countries that don’t believe Israel (or any nation for that matter) has the right to exist.
I do not agree that sanctions are either workable nor are they to be sanctioned by international law(not in the literal term but in the abstract term). Sanction do not hurt the dictator or powerful as they can merely buy there products either through a black market or by leaving the country, two options which are restricted to the general population at large. Furthermore, sanctions which has the sole purpose of preventing trade also prevents the capability of peace that is derived from social cooperation through the division of labour that can occur internationally. Sanctions also can only be enforced through the act of force by the UN and therefor is not justifiable as it prevents the Iranian people from choosing to buy products from other countries. If anyone truly believes in spreading democracy (eventhough I am no democrat- small d) then the freedom of choice is essential to promote the values of life, liberty and property.
The last thing I would like to mention about sanctions is that they only further strengthen the hand of the dicatator since the number of factions (due to economic poverty and stagnation) decreases within their state. In a capitalist society, factions are created by the decisions of individuals and it is only when those decisions are strictly limited by do we see a move from freedom to oppression.
As for nuclear missles, I must admit I am unsure as how to answer this. As someone who is trying to learn about pascifism, such discussions as whether or not nuclear weapons should be permmitted is of no concern really. Wars and sanctions harm countries with or without nuclear force, if you can prevent war, then nuclear weapons become obsolete. Of course I still have lots to learn
Does Iran or any other nation have the right to develop nuclear weapons? Sure. If the USA and some other coutries have them then they will need them to protect themselves. It not like they have ever actually used nuclear weapons to blow up a city or something?
Does the United Nations have the right to impose sanctions on Iran? No. The United Nations has no rights, it is not a person. Does it have the power to impose the sanctions? Sure because of its members who have ganged up to violently aggress against the people of Iran. The UN is not a legitimate organization as it is a body created by, for and through organizations using force to steal money. It is not legitimate as it is not the product of market interractions.
Does any nation have the right to impose sanctions on Iran: No, nations are not legitimate organizations either because just like the UN they are the product of theft. If a group of individuals refused to do business in Iran or buy their products then that would be a legitimate and moral response to the behavior of the Iranian Government.
"Does Iran or any other nation have the right to develop nuclear weapons? Sure. If the USA and some other coutries have them then they will need them to protect themselves. It not like they have ever actually used nuclear weapons to blow up a city or something?
Does the United Nations have the right to impose sanctions on Iran? No. The United Nations has no rights, it is not a person. Does it have the power to impose the sanctions? Sure because of its members who have ganged up to violently aggress against the people of Iran. The UN is not a legitimate organization as it is a body created by, for and through organizations using force to steal money. It is not legitimate as it is not the product of market interractions.
Does any nation have the right to impose sanctions on Iran: No, nations are not legitimate organizations either because just like the UN they are the product of theft. If a group of individuals refused to do business in Iran or buy their products then that would be a legitimate and moral response to the behavior of the Iranian Government."
How can you say that it is illegitimate for any nation to impose sanctions but at the same time say it’s legitimate for any nation to build nuclear weapons?
In the first case, the government is forcibly barring private citizens from conducting transactions with eachother. In the second, it is coercively extracting wealth from private individuals and spending it on weapons whose sole function is to kill large numbers of people. How can either of these actions be legitimate?!?
Easy, the Iranian Government is stealing their peoples money, not my money. Do I wish they did not pursue the construction of nucelar or any other weapons for that matter, sure. But I do not agree that the UN, or US Government, or any other government has the right to sanction or more accurately stated "prevent peaceful exchanges between citizens outside the borders of Iran with those inside the borders of Iran.
As for the legitimacy of building nuclear weapons, who is the government of the USA to tell anyone not to build nuclear weapons when the government of the USA is unique in the history of mankind in that it was the ONLY organization to ever use them to blow up several cities. If you were a citizen of Iran looking at nuclear weapons in the hands of your worst enemies: the USA and Israel, you might want to have your government build them as well. Add in the knowledge that no country possessing nuclear weapons has ever been invaded or defeated on their home soil (Except for the extremely successful and continuing invasion of the USA by Mexicans, Chinese and Central Americans) and you have an easy decision.
As for sanctions, they are the second least effective policy next to foreign aid that will turn the will of govenrments more in line with the will of the government of the USA. Sanctions are also second worst behind foreign aid in making lives worse for the citizens of these countries as the only way for citizens to improve their lives is to improve themselves ecnomically and then demand political changes.
The only thing I really have to say about this is “If goods don’t cross borders, armies will.” If we truly want peace with Iran, we need to bring them into the world market.
Regarding the building of nuclear weapons, I don’t think ANY state should have that power. Sanctions, however, are not only immoral (by using force to keep people from peacefully exchanging goods and services) but incredibly ineffective and give the dictators a scapegoat for their failed rule.
Sanctions only hurt the workers and average citizens, they do nothing against the government. (look at Cuba?)
As for the Nuclear weapons, it depends on what they want them for. If they want them for defense, I see no reason why they shouldn’t have them. If they have a more malicious reason for them, then I believe that they should have them removed.
There is a much more effective solution to stop Iran from building nuclear weapons than any sanction. That is to pay the Iranians not to do it. It will be much cheaper in both the short run as the USA and rest of will not have to expend huge amounts of resources on the sanctions or blockade, and in the long run where the USA and others will have the people of Iran as part of the international division of labor and all that oil will remain on the international markets keeping prices low. There are 40 million people in Iran. If the USA paid each $250 per year for full inspections then that would be $10billion which is how much compared to the running cost of a carrier group (Even better if compared to shutting down the carrier group.) AND IS ABSOLUTELY INCONSEQUENTIAL COMPARED TO THE COST OF AN INVASION!!!
Of course Iran has a right to build and use nuclear weapons. Furthermore, all americans who think that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the right thing to do, should be nuked. The american people and other westerners have been supporters of mass murder for thousands of years - they deserve the same treatment.
Iran deserves the same treatment as America, or America deserves to be nuclear bombed?
I can’t think of any time that sanctions have actually accomplished the stated goal. Feel free to correct me, but Cuba, North Korea, and Iran all come to mind, and we still have Castro, KJI, and Ahmedenijad still in power.
I will say, though, that if I personally lived in Israel I would be arming myself to the teeth. As such, if Israel does strike Iran, I won’t condemn them.
That’s what I always say. If any foreign country even mentioned something about the United States not having a right to exist, we would blow them away within seconds. I don’t think a lot of people realize how much in the center of a death hurricane Israel is located. If I were surrounded by Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and the West Bank, I’d hold three nuclear bombs in each of my pockets when I went out to get lunch.
“Of course Iran has a right to build and use nuclear weapons. Furthermore, all americans who think that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the right thing to do, should be nuked. The american people and other westerners have been supporters of mass murder for thousands of years - they deserve the same treatment.”
I am not a suppoter, nor am I an actor of mass murder in anyway. Besides, Japan was committing autrocities way before America entered the war so by your logic they deserved the nuke. As a so called “westerner” I believe in individual responsibility and not to be judged by my country nor even my familyline. Also how could America support mass murder for thousands of years (its only 250+ years old). Don’t worry, I know what you mean by your statement but as a so called American, I find it offensive that you say we deserve to be killed on a mass scale because that may include me as well who has not participated nor supports mass murder in any way. Furthermore, you tell me any group of people that have not committed autrocities that live within a civilization or country and I will tell you they too have committed murder on a mass scale.
I get surprised all the time on here how less informed and radical people are on here than on the ronpaul forums, concerning foreign affairs.
Where can I get a pro-Iran shirt?
Here: http://www.zazzle.com/vintage_i_love_iran_tshirt-235604170423170429.
They might also sell them at www.iwanttonuclearbombisrael.com as well.
I can understand Israel’s fear of Iran, in that Israel is scared of everything.
I don’t get the American fear of Iran. It’s the only country outside of Israel that fears it. I suppose some people actually believe the stuff they hear coming from CNBC and they buy the nonsense that’s being sold on The Daily Show. 
I don’t think America is scared of Iran. I mean, the people in Iran are smart. If I recall correctly, I think they even created the first stem cell line. They’re rational people and not primitive in any kind of way.
Ahmadinejad, on the other hand, not so rational. The fact that he actually doesn’t view a country’s right to exist scares most people because, if he says that idea out loud, we don’t know what else is running through his head. But it was most likely foreign meddling that placed Ahmadinejad in power in the first place.