Israel/Iran - which is most likely to do something catastrophically stupid?

The invasion cost Iran a million lives, something like three-quarters of their pre-war GDP and I have no idea how much infrastructure. I think they would’ve been much happier just waving some nukes around to scare Saddam off. And just because they won once hardly means that Iran will automatically win everytime they’re invaded (and history hasn’t exactly shown Saddam as the worlds greatest military genius, even when he had a large expensive army, the next guy might be competant).

I don’t think there’s a strong chance, but I don’t think its zero. One of Iran’s big neighbors hates it (Saudi Arabia), two of them are in such a state of flux that I think its too hard to say anything confidently about what Iraq or Afghanistan will do five or ten years down the road. For all we know, in twenty years the state of Kurdistan might have used its oil wealth to have gone from non-existence to the major regional power. And the ex-soviet states aren’t exactly pillars of stability either. And while I don’t think the US will invade, I said the same thing in 2000 when my more liberal friends tried to convince me the new President Bush would come up with some pre-text to invade Iraq. Predictions about the future are hard, and if I were an Iranian general, I’d be worried about the possibility of future invasions as well.

I guess, but I’m usually pretty skeptical of claims that foreign states are so irrational that its worthless to predict how they see the world. We spent most of the Cold War with commentators trying to convince us that the Soviets were so crazy they’d invade Europe despite the fact that it would mean mutual destruction, just to be contradictory. Foreign gov’ts are occasionally stupid, but I don’t think they’re usually out and out irrational, and I get pretty suspicious when foreign policy is presented whose sole justification is “hey, you never know, the other guy could be crazy”.

In the last 30 years amongst Iran and its immediate neighbors, Afghanistan has been invaded twice, Iraq twice, Kuwait once, Iran once and Azerbaijan once. Getting invaded isn’t so unusual, and its not like it needs to happen every other day to be devastating, even if you manage to fight off the invaders.

They also share a border with Pakistan and Russia, both of whom are larger and arguably more powerful then they are (and both armed with nukes). Granted neither state is likely to invade in the near future, but Russia isn’t exactly above invading countries in what it sees as its “back yard” and who knows what Pakistan will do in the future.

And I think its important to realize the Iranians aren’t building nukes all of a sudden because of recent events. Its been an ongoing project since the 80’s, they aren’t building them to ward off a specific gov’t or regime, or because of Ahmadinajad or Katami, or because of Bush or Obama. Its a long term strategy, because while there may be few immediate threats of invasion, in ten years Sunni monarchies will still hate them, Russia will still be a bully, the US will still be playing world policeman and no one knows what Iraq, Pakistan or the ex-Soviets will look like.

I disagree, but the efficacy of nukes in preventing invasions generally probably deserves its own thread and this post is already longer then anyones likely to actually read. Suffice to say, plenty of rational people disagree with you, and as US taxpayer I pay a lot of money sustaining a nuclear arsenal thats supposed to provide a deterant against invasion to us and our allies, so I’d be pretty pissed if the idea is totally crazy.

So while the idea may be wrong, I don’t think you can say the Iranians are irrational for believing it. Plenty of other countries believe it to.

Nukes are pretty limited tools to exert power or intimidation, for much the same reason that my owning a handgun is a pretty limited tool in negotiating the price of a used car. No one really believes your going to use it over anything other then an existential issue.

I don’t necessarily disagree with any of this (other then their being the most powerful military nation in the region, their like, fourth maybe, see above). But I’m arguing against their developing nukes being “catastrophically stupid”. I think they have rational reasons for doing so, and one of those reasons isn’t “lets nuke Israel just because we’re crazy”.

From their perspective, I think its a move that makes sense. From my perspective, I certainly still wish they wouldn’t do it, for all the reasons you mention in your last paragraph.

It’s not so much that Iran would nuke Israel right off the bat, unprovoked, just because it could. But the idea that Iran could have nukes is troublesome, becuse it is already a pariah state and no one wants to see it have acess to such power. Israel isn’t the only one who doesn’t want to see this happen - Russia, the US, the EU and the greater Arab world don’t want Iran to have nukes either. Not sure why this has to be an “Israel v. Iran” thing when in reality, it’s “Iran v. Most of the World”.

Are they a pariah state? They’ve had some (relatively light) sanctions put on them by the UN and EU countries (mainly just forbidding arms or duel use trade), and some heavy sanctions put on them by the US (but most of those pre-date their nuclear program). But they still do a lot of trade with the rest of the world, so far as I know their citizens can still travel to most countries (I met an Iranian student a few months ago that was starting a PhD nuclear physics program in the States, so apparently they can even come here and study nuclear physics) and have diplomatic relations with most non-US countries.

I guess there’s no formal Pariah state definition, but I usually think of something more like modern N. Korea or Iraq under Saddam. I think Iran has a ways to go before they hit that point.

But I agree that plenty of countries don’t want to see Iran get nukes. Pretty much the whole world (including Iran) are, at least on paper, supposed to be committed to nuclear non-proliferation, for good reasons.

Perhaps ‘rogue state’ is a better descriptor? I agree that at the moment, ‘pariah’ could be harsh. But look at the countries who have good relations with Iran: Syria, China, Russia. They aren’t exactly BFFs with the Western world.

It’s not so much that Iran wants nukes (who doesn’t?) - it is what kind of political power Iran could have with nukes. Do you want Iran to be the major power player in the Middle East? Or a bigger one? I don’t. Aside from some religious and ideological similarities, there isn’t much reason for Arab-Iranian (How the hell do I say that?) alliances that aren’t seeped in arms deals and funding.

Say what? Israel went beyond “exploring” building nuclear weapons and actually went ahead and built them almost 50 years ago. If anyone’s pushing envelopes it’s not Ahmadinejad.

Or does Israel get a pass because it’s, y’know, America’s best buddy? :rolleyes:

:rolleyes: Of course there are. For instance, such could be based on regional economic interests and historic cultural ties.

Er, no. Israel isn’t threatening to nuke someone out of existence, isn’t funding terrorist groups around the world and isn’t pushing an anti-American agenda. Israel is an actual ally of the US. Iran is not.

Explain?

You can’t deny that the Obama-Jewish relationship isn’t a little awkward. If it weren’t, the DNC & Co would’t be spending so much money and time trying to convince us of Obama’s ‘pro-Israel’ stance.

There’s a shitty joke about people voting for Obama to prove they weren’t racist.** But honestly, I wondered in 2008 if the campaign for the Jewish vote by the NJDC wasn’t a challenge for us to prove we weren’t Islamophobes.***

** A charge I think is racist and bullshit.
***What with that “Obama is a secret Muslim” bs.

Sometimes I think people are the victims of unfair assualts in PR wars. Othertimes I wonder why Jewish Dems have to try so hard.

Iran and its Arab neighbors have been exchanging cultural influences, constantly, ever since the Islamic conquest/conversion. Dar al-Islam once was one big empire/civilization. It always included Persia culturally, sometimes included it politically. And Persia at various times has included Iraq.

Frankly, I fail to see how it is stupid. Given its current situation and recent history of Iran and the Middle East, it seems an extremely sensible and logical move to me, at the contrary.

And I don’t believe Iran will “fly apart”. The current regime might collapse (it is to be hoped will soon) but the country isn’t going to devolve into a collection of warring factions/tribes like some others did anytime soon.

Why not? I mean, there are a lot of factions – and a lot of ethnic nationalities – aren’t there?

I think of a rouge or pariah state as being alienated from the rest of the world, except maybe for one or two patrons (like N. Korea with China), not just a country that doesn’t have good relations with the US and its closer allies. (plus, nukes aside, you’d sort of expect Iran to have close relations with places like Russia and China just based on geography).

FWIW, Iran’s top trading partners according to wikipedia are:

China 16.3%, India 13.1%, Japan 11.5%, South Korea 7.1%, Turkey 4.2%
So its not all “villain states” like China or Russia.

I’m not really sure how many times I need to stress in this thread that I don’t, in fact, want Iran to develop nukes. But again, my argument is that it makes sense from an Iranian perspective to get nukes (its not “catostrophically stupid”), from my perspective as an American I certainly don’t want them to succeed.

Well…They have been invaded in recent history, in fact, and with the support of many nations. And they’ve been the target of many threats by the USA, whose troops are still sitting at their doors. Iran’s history and current situation would make a lot of countries rather paranoïd too.

And it costed them an untold number of deaths. I guess I wouldn’t want a repeat if I were them

In this post, you’re arguing repeatedly that Iran doesn’t really needs nukes. China, the USA, Russia, France, the UK are vastly less likely than Iran of being invaded, haven’t been invaded in a long while (if ever) and as result needs nukes even less. Except in some extremely bad and unlikely situation where they could point at their nuclear arsenal in last resort. They haven’t irrational rulers, either. And still they think it makes sense to keep those nukes. It certainly makes more sense for Iran to have them.

What would make you think that in case of great turmoil in the Middle East, Iran couldn’t be attacked or directly threatened? Plus any number of unpredictable scenarios (say, relations with Russia turning extremely bad for some reason, Iran being somehow engulfed in a major India/Pakistan war, etc…) Without counting the possibility that the irrational leader making a stupid move might be on the other side of the fence (that includes the USA), which is probably a possibility that Iran’s top brass are considering.

See alsoi North Korea for an example showing how having maybe a couple nukes that could possibly work makes diplomacy easier, too.
And national pride (something Iranians definitely aren’t lacking, regardless of their political views) and power, that you both mention, are things that motivate many nations.

There are a significant number of minorities. But contrarily to for instance Iraq, Iran isn’t a recent and arbitrary construction. It has its own distinctive culture, considers itself as the heir of a millenias-old civilization, and is fiercely nationalist. It’s probably the most “real” nation in the area, by far. So, I guess there could be a civil war in case of mass uprising (like in those “Arab spring” countries) or even a minority revolting, but nothing in the range of the country “flying apart”.

Whoops! This is TOTALLY in the wrong thread.

:smack:

That ship sailed in May of 1948.

Because Jews having their own homeland is just batshit crazy.

I apologize for the presumption. Was that question in response to my comment?

What did you mean by that?

Do you think that the Jews creating Israel was “catastrophically stupid”?

If so, why?

Not challenging, just asking.