Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (183566)	3/15/2006 4:15:46 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

I don't see why Iran couldn't have a nuclear power reactor and a small tactical nuclear bomb. Nuclear reactor for the peaceful use of providing power? Sure.. No problem. But a Tactical or Strategic Nuclear weapon? Not a chance... I'm not keen in unleashing a nuclear arms race amongst the Arab states as they face this significant threat to their security. Even the Arab governments, though they would never publicly say so, would rather have the Israelis possessing Nukes, than Iran.. At least they know the Israelis would never use them except in defense of their nation. You want to see instability in the Mid-East.. Let Iran obtain Nuclear weapons. You want to see the US FOREVER required to maintain large forces in the Mid-East? Let Iran obtain nuclear weapons.. It would require either their own nuclear weapons, or the promise of the US nuclear umbrella, to maintain stability. However, Arab nations don't like the prospect of having American soldiers quartered on their territory. It would mean too much interference in their internal affairs and a backlash by their people that could topple their governments. That's my take on it. Hawk