To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
. This was after the massive protests in Iran over the legitimicy of the election of Ahmajinedad. He kinda felt that they could only happen with Western help. Oh, Iranians risk arrest, punishment, or death for criticizing the religious regime. The grand ayatollah has been using the state to kill critics since his election to the presidency in the 80s. He was part of the push to invade Iraq after the Iran-Iraq war. He issued a fatwa against nukes, but he supports Ahmanjinedad who is pro nuke and pro nuking of Israel. Khamenei supports militant groups against Israel. The list goes on and on. He goes as far as to say he will aid anyone in the harming of israel. Just read a wiki or go look up militant khamenei as a search parameter.
While I am no fan of Israel. I am hardly a fan of Iran either. Neither of them should have nukes because they are so militant. While the whole idea of nuke weapons is just horrible giving anyone in that area the ability to even research into making weapons or having the raw materials, i.e. through nuclear reactor programs, is crazy. I don't the argument that they would only be defending themselves against Israel is valid either. A) because they have said they will actually attack israel with said nukes. B) It will just lead into a stand off similar to the cold war. The major difference is that it would be liable to get hotter much quicker. Christ, the Israelis probably would nuke us if we tried to take away their weapons. It's a messed up situation that Khamenei doesn't help. He proactively hinders the situation. That is his militancy.
As for a comparison to nato countries, it's about the same or maybe a bit more. Now potential to do something, that is what is considerably less.