Kasz216 said:
Badassbab said:
Kasz216 said:
Badassbab said:
Kaz,I'm not supporting the the clerical fascists and it's likely Iran is probably trying to acquire the know how of developing nuclear weapons so the Mullahs can order one to be built if they feel the regime is under threat with it's very own survival from outside powers but saying Iran would be a lot more aggressive if it was a super power isn't a valid argument against the Mullahs. That argument can be applied to any country so not sure what point you're trying to make there.
|
Sure it is.
The point is... proportionally, Iran would be more agressive.
If a larger power Iran would be agressive... and it would be more agressive then most western countries are.
IE, make Iran the size of any western nation, and they will be more agressive then that nation would be.
Make Iran the size of France for example... and Iran will be more aggressive then the current france is.
|
In what way would it be more aggressive though? As in why would it want to be and are you guessing this or basing this on historical facts?
|
Iran has specific regional powers it has beefs with... pretty much most of the middle east, them not being "Arab". Way more nits to pick.
Secondly, they're not a democracy. Meaning that the leaders can't just go to war with whoever, they might sneak by a war here or there, but even if they do, public outcry could cost the elected leaders. The Iranians just wouldn't give a shit.
Thirdly, their leaders when being removed from power, face fear or daeth. You are much more likely to give it all up and nuke another country if your option is death, or death as that guy used the first nukes since WW2.
Then you are, first guy that used nukes since WW2 and Guy who gets paid a sweet pension, gets sweet healthcare and can charge seven figures for speaking events.
|
If you don't spend the rest of your life in jail via the ICC.
