should Iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons?

[Charlotte]

Why shouldn't Iran be allowed to have Nuclear weapons. In a world where at least Israel and the US are threatening to invade, and the US still includes the use of tactical nuclear weapons in it's battle plan, shouldn't a nation have the right to defend itself in anyway possible. In a world where the US is giving nuclear material to India (who refuses to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation treaty) why shouldn't Iran be allowed to have them? In a world where the US saber rattles at non-nuclear Iran while staying close friends with Pakistan who sold nuclear material and technology to other nations (like North Korea) and treating North Korea with kid gloves, it seems like having the ability to unleash massive destruction is the only way to prevent invasion.
I understand, and am concerned with the concept that a nation run by a radical theocracy is very likely to misuse these weapons. But how can the US condemn Iran for having them while at the same time making more itself?

[kolte]

no nation should legally be able to have nuclear weapons.
there is no right of anyone to have things capable of killing every man woman and child on the earth.
thats not humane.
thats not defenseve.
Iran is a crazy dicatorship.
the us and isrial are democrcies.
Iran can kiss the fattest part of my ass.;

[Charlotte]

If you read my argument, I never said that Iran should be allowed to have nuclear weapons. Please note that the comment is not a series of statements, it is a series of questions. The purpose of the questions is to demonstrate the hypocrisy of the US in how it implements its strategies in regards to the NPT (non-proliferation treaty.) If you really think about it, the US's stance is really doing nothing more than proving that the only way that Iran can be safe from the threat of invasion is to have Nukes. Further, I would argue that the US would have much better luck in preventing the spread of these weapons if it would 1) Reduce it's own stockpiles, 2) Stop invading other countries who do not have nuclear weapons 3) Support the terms of the NPT for everyone regardless of diplomatic status.

[kolte]

and I wasnt arguing against you since you said nothing to argue about.
I stated my opionion on the matter.
its the difference between a democrocy and a theocrocy, or dictatorship, or communist nation.
do the people choose the act of war.
or does a bias minority dictate the nation.
we went to Iraq because everyone wanted to invade iraq.
(exaggeration)
I thought it was awful.
but the reps obviously thought that there constit's wanted to go to war.
they say yay, and our current state is the effect of our own actions as a democrocy.
nuclear weapons will and can go away.
if the people get involved and protest the idea.
if we say no more.
but untill we do.
nobody knows we don't want them.
so do sombody about it.
don't just say somethings wrong.

[Whisper]

I think the middle east is unstable and fanatic enough as is
thankfuly
America
UK
China
and
Germany
now all agree Iran should NOT have the ability to produce nukes
just Russia's being a lil bitch as usual

[Nexdeus]

i think a iran that has shown to have an agressive past should not have nuclear weapons. to me it seem a country unstable as it is to grasp a weapon of mass destruction could be taken by the wrong hands and kill large amounts of a populace and even if they do they should b put on constant wach and have counter measures made against the possibilitys of an attack

[serial-thrilla]

i dont think any country should have any nukes at all.

[rEpReSsIoN.?]

Iran will not be able to develop yhem for 7 years (I think). Also they will not really be able to use them because other countries will nuke them back.
No country should be abole to have weapons of mass distruction but now they are created we can't get ride of them.