Quantcast
Help me write my college paper. - Iran

Forums - Politics Discussion - Help me write my college paper. - Iran

Will you help me?

no, write your own damn paper 17 85.00%
 
yes, I like to help and cookies 3 15.00%
 
Total:20

So I am writing my paper and I thought I would let the intelligent people of vgchartz to help me with it.

 - Please use sources when making arguments if possible.  I can only really use your points if you can give me credible sources to back it up

 

Topic:  Stopping/reversing all proliferation problems from Iran.

Some talking points you can think about.

- Is a nuclear Iran really a threat?

- Why does iran want nuclear weapons?

- Are economic sanctions effective?

- Would military actions be effective?

- What other options are there for stopping Iran nuclear ambitions?

 

Any good really good points backed up by sources will be given a cookie.  You will get 2 cookies if you can provide a pro stopping Iran argument.

 




 

My Real Redneck friends


Around the Network

damn, no one. I didn't have high hopes for this time of day/night or even at all.



 

My Real Redneck friends


bestessay google it lol



 

 

- Is a nuclear Iran really a threat?

Probably not in the sense that they would actually nuke anyone. Even North Korea hasn't, and North Korea isn't a republic that has to worry about popular demand. The Iranian people are already fed up with being pariahs and have voted in the most moderate person the government would allow. The bigger trouble would be that nuclear Iran would inspire Saudi Arabia and possibly others to go nuclear in a regional arms race

- Why does iran want nuclear weapons?

Because while there's little danger of them actually using the nukes, doing so changes the bargaining position, because a nuclear-armed country, even if they don't have the strength to win wars otherwise, can do terrible damage such that you don't want to go to war with them, ensuring that Iran won't be messed with militarily outside of some total war scenario

- Are economic sanctions effective?

It seems to be the case, given the election of Hassan Rouhani on a platform of detente with the West (not a major turnaround, mind, but one who is willing to engage unlike Ahmadinejad, whereby some of the sanctions can be eased)

- Would military actions be effective?

Highly counterproductive, in my mind. While sanctioning has worked, actually striking would create a "rally around the flag" effect that would throw the more fanatical elements of the Iranian state back into power. It would be short-term gains for long-term headaches

- What other options are there for stopping Iran nuclear ambitions?

Beyond punishing them, there is an effort to effectively outmaneuver them. They claim that their program is purely for the purposes of peace, so offers have been made to have the Russians sell them fuel and build them reactors without Iran having to do any fuel enrichment.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Mr Khan said:
- Is a nuclear Iran really a threat?

Probably not in the sense that they would actually nuke anyone. Even North Korea hasn't, and North Korea isn't a republic that has to worry about popular demand. The Iranian people are already fed up with being pariahs and have voted in the most moderate person the government would allow. The bigger trouble would be that nuclear Iran would inspire Saudi Arabia and possibly others to go nuclear in a regional arms race

- Why does iran want nuclear weapons?

Because while there's little danger of them actually using the nukes, doing so changes the bargaining position, because a nuclear-armed country, even if they don't have the strength to win wars otherwise, can do terrible damage such that you don't want to go to war with them, ensuring that Iran won't be messed with militarily outside of some total war scenario

- Are economic sanctions effective?

It seems to be the case, given the election of Hassan Rouhani on a platform of detente with the West (not a major turnaround, mind, but one who is willing to engage unlike Ahmadinejad, whereby some of the sanctions can be eased)

- Would military actions be effective?

Highly counterproductive, in my mind. While sanctioning has worked, actually striking would create a "rally around the flag" effect that would throw the more fanatical elements of the Iranian state back into power. It would be short-term gains for long-term headaches

- What other options are there for stopping Iran nuclear ambitions?

Beyond punishing them, there is an effort to effectively outmaneuver them. They claim that their program is purely for the purposes of peace, so offers have been made to have the Russians sell them fuel and build them reactors without Iran having to do any fuel enrichment.


I don't want to be "that guy", Khan, but OP is asking for a source.



Around the Network
Wright said:
Mr Khan said:
- Is a nuclear Iran really a threat?

Probably not in the sense that they would actually nuke anyone. Even North Korea hasn't, and North Korea isn't a republic that has to worry about popular demand. The Iranian people are already fed up with being pariahs and have voted in the most moderate person the government would allow. The bigger trouble would be that nuclear Iran would inspire Saudi Arabia and possibly others to go nuclear in a regional arms race

- Why does iran want nuclear weapons?

Because while there's little danger of them actually using the nukes, doing so changes the bargaining position, because a nuclear-armed country, even if they don't have the strength to win wars otherwise, can do terrible damage such that you don't want to go to war with them, ensuring that Iran won't be messed with militarily outside of some total war scenario

- Are economic sanctions effective?

It seems to be the case, given the election of Hassan Rouhani on a platform of detente with the West (not a major turnaround, mind, but one who is willing to engage unlike Ahmadinejad, whereby some of the sanctions can be eased)

- Would military actions be effective?

Highly counterproductive, in my mind. While sanctioning has worked, actually striking would create a "rally around the flag" effect that would throw the more fanatical elements of the Iranian state back into power. It would be short-term gains for long-term headaches

- What other options are there for stopping Iran nuclear ambitions?

Beyond punishing them, there is an effort to effectively outmaneuver them. They claim that their program is purely for the purposes of peace, so offers have been made to have the Russians sell them fuel and build them reactors without Iran having to do any fuel enrichment.


I don't want to be "that guy", Khan, but OP is asking for a source.

oops <_>

Well, at least he can look stuff up based on what i said?



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

- Is a nuclear Iran really a threat?

Not really, but for some reason Israel see it as a massive threat and often lobby congress through AIPAC. I think it's got nothing to do with us though and it's in Iran's sovereignty what they do in there own country

- Why does iran want nuclear weapons?

it's in their sovereignty to have nukes if they want, and it will like help them if they negotiate with Israel. Also, countries with nukes have not fought another state with nukes yet, so it could be a position of strength for Iran since Israel already has some. 

~http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/02/iran-nukes-deterrence

- Are economic sanctions effective?

All they have done is hurt ordinary Iranians, it has done little to the government who carry on as normal. Also, all sanctions have done is prevent the west from trading with Iran. Trade still carries on between Iran, China and it's neighbours. 

~http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/05/2013515121958344336.html

- Would military actions be effective?

No, when was military intervention by the US in the past 100 years ever effective? (except ww2 obviously) 

- What other options are there for stopping Iran nuclear ambitions?

Why should we when the USA has 1000's of nukes? It's like one rule for Iran and another for the USA.

~http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2103492/Iran-nuclear-weapons-Why-bomb.html

Sorry that i can't give you an answer for intervening on Iran or stopping them from having nuclear weapons but i just don't believe it would achieve anything, we have intervened in Iran enough as it is in the 20th century. I think you should look into a little history of Iran to help understand why Iran is at this point. There are key events like the CIA backed coup of 1953 and the 1979 revolution which help explain why they hate us.  



Xbox One, PS4 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)

'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin

Prediction: Switch will sell better than Wii U Lifetime Sales by Jan 1st 2018

I could hop in on the discussion but I guess you're looking for actual scientific studies and papers as sources. I'm currently writing a paper on the EU's success in international organizations and I feel your pain! Don't give up



I have enough problems doing my own homework.



Sigs are dumb. And so are you!

Mr Khan said:
- Is a nuclear Iran really a threat?

Probably not in the sense that they would actually nuke anyone. Even North Korea hasn't, and North Korea isn't a republic that has to worry about popular demand. The Iranian people are already fed up with being pariahs and have voted in the most moderate person the government would allow. The bigger trouble would be that nuclear Iran would inspire Saudi Arabia and possibly others to go nuclear in a regional arms race
 

 * Iran using the weapon is highly unlikely but the best counter argument to that is organizational theory on a state level.  There are domestic factors that do infact cause States to act irrational.  

* Nuclear proliferation in the middle east is likely is the stance I took.  Heres a counter argument to it.  http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/02/don_t_fear_a_nuclear_arms_race?wp_login_redirect=0                                                 (argues Egypt, Saudia Arabia, are incapable and Turkey is in NATO therefore uner USA nuclear emberalla)

  * Coming from a US point of view, does a nuclear Iran effect US interest  in the region enough it could be considered a threat to national security?

- Why does iran want nuclear weapons?

Because while there's little danger of them actually using the nukes, doing so changes the bargaining position, because a nuclear-armed country, even if they don't have the strength to win wars otherwise, can do terrible damage such that you don't want to go to war with them, ensuring that Iran won't be messed with militarily outside of some total war scenario

* Does nuclear weapons bolster Iran ability to fight proxy war against US and US allies? and is this a big enough threat that Iran should be stopped at all cost?

- Are economic sanctions effective?

It seems to be the case, given the election of Hassan Rouhani on a platform of detente with the West (not a major turnaround, mind, but one who is willing to engage unlike Ahmadinejad, whereby some of the sanctions can be eased)

* I make the same the point.  

Though so far economic sanctions have not stopped Iran and they did not stop North Korea.  An argument is made that sanctions hurt US chances at stopping them.  The sanctions only further encourage Iran to seek Nuclear weapons in order to gain bargaining leverage.  It also turns future generations of Iranians against the US.  The chance at diplomacy is now with the new president and the US shouldn't play hardball because its been proven ineffective.

 
- Would military actions be effective?

Highly counterproductive, in my mind. While sanctioning has worked, actually striking would create a "rally around the flag" effect that would throw the more fanatical elements of the Iranian state back into power. It would be short-term gains for long-term headaches

* Attacks on Syria by Israel worked to thwart their nuclear ambitions, and after the first Gulf War Iraq did not restart their program either. 

 
- What other options are there for stopping Iran nuclear ambitions?

Beyond punishing them, there is an effort to effectively outmaneuver them. They claim that their program is purely for the purposes of peace, so offers have been made to have the Russians sell them fuel and build them reactors without Iran having to do any fuel enrichment.

* Forgot about the Russian thing,  That actually really helps.

 


I've already used most of your points in my paper but going back and fourth helps me work out kinks in the arguments.



 

My Real Redneck friends