zang
Senior Member
You may be cool with the Ayatollahs having nukes. A lot of us aren't.
Frankly, no one should have nukes.
And most importantly, most of Iran's neighbours are really not comfortable with the idea.
I wonder how those neighbours feel about Israel having nukes, too?
When one of your neighbours has nukes and an agenda, and when it needs weapons and help it regularly calls it's bigger buddy who's also got nukes, I think I too would want nukes.
Superpower privilege.
It's always cute when Canadians having won the geographical lottery complain about this. Ask the Poles or Latvians or Koreans or Japanese how they feel about their local hegemon. Heck, "elbows up" didn't even last long enough to actually build anything concrete.
It's even more cute when Canadians act like we're an extension of the US, and without question act like Canada should somehow feel threatened when another country dislikes the US.
The US has spent the last 100+ years stirring up shit around the world that ends up later as egg on their face, and the only thing they ever seem to see as a solution to cleaning up their own mess is overthrowing yet another regime.
At construction. Then we wouldn't be in this mess. It's too bad they were allowed decades of toeing the line. If you're building a peaceful nuclear power program, you don't need to bury it under a granite mountain.
Who's "we"? Is Iran threatening Canada?
60% is enough to make a weapon. It's just not enough to make a weapon you can put in a warhead on a missile. That doesn't make it any less dangerous. And that's setting aside other weaponization pathways like radiological bombs. By the way, you only need 4% enrichment for nuclear power.
So by your own admission and logic, Iran already has nuclear weapons. Stick a couple of pounds of uranium in a warhead and who cares if it can't hit critical mass, amiright?
I guess "we" should deny them from having nuclear reactors then, too? Unless they plan on running them on hopes and wishes, they'll always be a threat.