Should Iran have Nuclear Power?

College Confidential Community
21

<p>On August 10, 1994, in the city of Arak, a woman was sentenced to death by stoning. According to the ruling of the religious judge, her husband and two children were forced to attend the execution. The woman urged her husband to take the children away, but to no avail. A truck full of stones was brought in to be used during the stoning. In the middle of the stoning, although her eyes had been gouged out, the victim was able to escape from the ditch and started running away, but the regime's guards recaptured her and shot her to death. </p>

<p>In October 1989 in the city of Qom, a woman who was being stoned managed to pull herself out of the hole, only to be forced back into it and stoned to death. In justifying the murder, Qom's Chief Religious Judge, Mullah Karimi, elaborated to Ressalat newspaper on October 30, 1989: "Generally speaking, legal and religious decrees on someone condemned to stoning call for her stoning if her guilt was proven on the basis of witnesses' testimonies. Even if she were to escape in the middle of the administration of the sentence, she must be returned and stoned to death." </p>

<p>On July 13, 1997, Kayhan reported that Changiz Rahimi was sentenced to death, stoning and payment of fine for committing murder and adultery. </p>

<p>On October 26, 1997, six individuals were stoned in Sari, the provincial capital of Mazandaran. This was reported by Salaam daily and international news agencies. The names of the victims were given as Fatemeh Danesh, Masoumeh Eini, Marzieh Fallah, Ali Mokhtarpour, Parviz Hasanzadeh and Kheirollah Javanmard. </p>

<p>AFP, December 7, 1994: </p>

<p>Hamshahri reported that a woman and a man were recently stoned to death in Ramhormouz on murder and adultery charges. </p>

<p>AFP, November 16, 1994 </p>

<p>Abrar reported on Wednesday that three Iranians including a woman were stoned in the city of Sari (northern Iran), after being found guilty of adultery and rape by the Islamic court. </p>

<p>AFP, 11 November 1995, quoting Jomhouri Islami reported that a man was stoned in the city of Hamedan. </p>

<p>AFP, June 8, 1996 </p>

<p>Hamshahri reported on Saturday that a man and a women were stoned in the city of Oroumieh on murder and adultery charges. Shahin Soltan-Moradi had murdered her husband with the help of her lover, Mohammad Ali Hemmati in November 1994. </p>

<p>On July 14, 1995, Amnesty International reported that two women by the names of Saba Abdali, 30, and Zeinab Heidary, 38, were faced with stoning in the city of Ilam Gharb. </p>

<p>On December 7, 1994, Reuters quoted a state-controlled newspaper report by Hamshahri, on a married woman who was stoned to death in the city of Ramhormouz, southwestern Iran. </p>

<p>Ressalat, March 1, 1994, read: "A woman was stoned to death in the city of Qom." </p>

<p>Kayhan of February 1, 1994, reported that a woman named Mina Kolvat was stoned to death in Tehran for having immoral relations with her cousin. </p>

<p>The U.N. Special Representative on the human rights situation in Iran reported to the U.N. General Assembly in 1993: "On November 1, 1992, a woman named Fatima Bani was stoned to death in Isfahan." </p>

<p>Abrar reported on November 5, 1991 that a woman charged with immoral relations was stoned in the city of Qom. </p>

<p>According to Kayhan, August 21, 1991, a woman charged with adultery by the name of Kobra was sentenced to 70 lashes and stoning. The verdict was carried out in the presence of local people and district officials. </p>

<p>Jomhouri Islami wrote on March 11, 1991, that in Rasht (northern Iran), "Bamani Fekri, child of Mohammad-Issa, guilty of complicity in first-degree murder, adultery and incineration of the victim's body; was sentenced to stoning, retribution, blinding of both eyes and payment of 100 gold dinars. After the announcement of the verdict, she committed suicide in prison." </p>

<p>Ressalat reported on January 16, 1990, that a woman was stoned to death in the city of Bandar Anzali (northern Iran). </p>

<p>Ettela'at reported on January 5, 1990: "Two women were stoned publicly on Wednesday in the northern city of Lahijan." </p>

<p>Jomhouri Islami, January 2, 1990: "Two women were stoned in the city of Langrood (northern Iran)." </p>

<p>Kayhan wrote on July 31, 1989: "Six women were stoned to death publicly in Kermanshah on charges of adultery and moral corruption." </p>

<p>Kayhan, April 17, 1989, quoted the Religious judge and head of the Fars and Bushehr Justice Department as sentencing 10 women to stoning to death on prostitution charges which were immediately carried out. </p>

<p>Tehran radio, reported on March 6, 1989 that a women was stoned in Karaj for committing adultery." </p>

<p>Kayhan, October 4, 1986, reported that a 25-year-old woman named Nosrat was stoned to death in the city of Qom. She died after an hour of continuos stoning. </p>

<p>On April 17, 1986 a woman was stoned to death in the city of Qom. Prior to being stoned, she was whipped in public. </p>

<p>In July 1980, four women were simultaneously stoned to death in the city of Kerman.</p>

22

<p>Iran must be stopped by any means possible. If we don't have the guts to do it, Israel will. They did when they destroyed the Osirak reactor in Iraq, because they knew those nukes were headed straight to Tel Aviv.</p>

23

<p>you dont think many of them want to leave iran?</p>

<p>
[QUOTE]
The citizens have spoken by electing Ahmedinejad, and we must respect that in the name of democracy. If the citizens feel oppressed, they are always free to leave Iran, which I dont see most doing

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>do a google search on "iranian refugees"... you'll be surprised...</p>

<p>and many want to speak out against the gov't... but they can't...</p>

<p>small uprisings have occurred in the past but never materialized and were squashed by the islamic gov't immediately...</p>

24

<p>
[QUOTE]
I whole-heatedly support Iran building up its nuclear program. And nutcases like you won't stop them!</p>

<p>What makes this world a sad place is that people like you talk about issues you have no idea about. Next time before you call Islam fanatical, please care to read the Koran or talk to a real Muslim. Assumptions simply reflects your ignorance. btw, where's Bin Laden? LOL...

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>I actually answered this question in the president thread...</p>

<p>I quote myself...</p>

<p>"and worst of all...the ummah as a whole will never speak out against these fanatical clerics who issue wild fatwas... it's against their religion...it is the reason why we have conditions for the spread of future fanatics...and moreover...this is the main reason why bin laden is still at large..."</p>

25

<p>
[QUOTE]
As far as nukes are concerned, I dont think Iran will really use them to nuke countries. Ahmedinejad's talks are all "child's play," that is whatever he says shouldnt be taken seriously.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>yeah... why would we ever take words like that seriously...</p>

<p>gee... maybe because Iran remains the world's biggest state sponsor of terrorism? </p>

<p>just a guess...</p>

26

<p>Maybe for the same reason that they take Bush serious when he points Iran out as part of the "Axis of Evil" and that the US will take action. Dare I say it, I think Iran is justified. Now they have leverage on the United States. Now there is that threat to the US that Iran would use their weapons on us if and invasion of Iran were to occur. Modern-day arms race? I think so</p>

27

<p>
[QUOTE]
The United States has absolutely no right to play ruler over the world. There are established organizations, such as the UN, that have been created to work with these countries for peace. Oh and last time I checked, it was the US that gave Iran weapons in the first place.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>yeah... and we've all seen how successful the UN has been in "working for peace" in the past...</p>

<p>don't forget... you may think the UN is this almighty global organization with a great cause that actually does something...</p>

<p>but the truth is... the US funds about a quarter... yes a QUARTER... that's 25% of everything that the UN has...</p>

<p>we ARE the UN...</p>

<p>and as to your illusion that the UN actually accomplishes anything in the way of world peace...well... just remember that just like any other bureaucracy...politics matter...and the UN is full of it...</p>

28

<p>that's very true...so what happens when the UN doesn't find weapons in Iraq?</p>

29

<p>let's leave that for another thread... we can talk about that separately... lets keep the iran discussion going on in here...</p>

30

<p>I fully support complete and utterly destructive war with Iran if that country refuses to end attempts at gaining nuclear capability. It bothers me that Iran wants nuclear power, but it bothers me even more that they want to go to war with Israel, our key ally in the middle east.</p>

<p>ANY country's credibility and morality that is even partially governed by a religion that justifies Sept. 11th-style attacks should be acknowledged as at least "fanatic" if not problematic. My only regret is that the war with Iraq has taken so much money and soldiers that we cannot conveniently take Iran to war.(blame that on bush)</p>

<p>No, the US does not have the power to play police of the world, UNLESS a threat is proposed of the magnitude with which the iranian president has issued: He has made it clear that iran will "wipe israel off the map" given the chance.</p>

<p>Israel is a key ally of the U.S. If israel is threatened, the US should engage in attempts at diplomatic resolution. If Iran will not end attempts at gaining nuclear capabilities - if Iran dares to take Israel to war- they should be taken to war, exactly like Saddam's Regime. I believe that Iran is being very naive: the US could wipe that country off the map. Iran simply doesn't have the money, guns, and nukes to mess with Israel when its backed by the US.</p>

<p>Whatever happened to that deadline the UN set for Iran?..lol</p>

<p>we invented nuclear weapons AND dealt with Nikita Kruschev. we invented the H-Bomb like...50 years ago. We've got a 60 year headstart on this nuclear thing.</p>

31

<p>I am going to stay out of this one. I hope the majority of Americans do not think the US has a right to attack a country simply because it does not follow orders.</p>

32

<p>Im not going to stay out of this..</p>

<p>To Scom and all the other who think America should invade Iran.. Youve posted enough articles about human rights violations etc which you think is justification for invading Iran.. So what about America in vietnam and iraq just to name two places.. Wasnt killing innocent civilians and violating international law enough to prove that america cant handle nukes?</p>

<p>Lets go back to human right - guantamano bay? Need i expand on that? Its all very well to say that the US upholds human rights and think that your country is responsible, but the fact remains that it is anything but..</p>

<p>For those who thought that september 11 was enough justification to do what america did, it isnt.. The number of innocent civilians (yeah exactly the same kind of people who died on 9/11) that america killed is Iraq was 3 times the number that died on 9/11.. Are you going to say that sending tomahawk missiles into someones home in iraq is not equivalent to a terrorist attack?</p>

<p>And after all this, if you think that america is justified in keeping their nukes, they really have no right to stop iran from building their own..</p>

33

<p>oh please. Guantanamo Bay is a PRISON.FOR TERRORISTS. terrorists bent on carrying out "islamic law" should have no rights. I'm amazed that the American people show sympathy for these animals after the havoc wraught on September 11th. We have nothing and noone to answer to. The guantanamo Bay prisoners should be tortured until we discover the inner workings of Al-Quaeda and all associated groups.</p>

<p>If Iran wants to appear mature before the world, maybe they should build a real government, based on a HUMANE constitution. If Iran can't even treat its women right, who knows what craziness it might inflict with Nuclear capabilities?</p>

<p>Russia and China are also to blame - if Iran wants nukes, they'd have to get a lot of the resources from Russia and China, in which case they'd be the ones making money! Russia stil sufferes from a depressed economy, so they'd love the heap of cash Iran's willing to hand out. And China? they're pretty insolent too.</p>

<p>Quoted from a BBC blog on Guantanamo:</p>

<p>"Most of these are not you're average person. They are hate filled brain washed individuals who only want to kill and maim western people (not only Western people it now appears) - many of these who are freely writing to this newsgroup from their cosy armchair. Of all the people in the world to be sympathising with and fighting for their rights - these people come way down my list. I think this comes with the territory for the life they have chosen."</p>

<p>^^pretty well said.</p>

<p>Besides, as was said earlier, if we don't destroy Iran, ISRAEL WILL. With OUR nukes.</p>

34

<p>For one, no one really knows if the people in Guantanamo are terrorists or not because the US has denied amnesty international and the UN access to the people there.. I doubt you really know whose in there, when no one else in the world does..</p>

<p>Also, even if they are terorists, what gives the US the right to violate international laws and the geneva convention? What gives the US the right to violate their basic human rights by torturing them..</p>

<p>The actions of the US in Iraq are no less terrorist like then the bombings on 9/11.. Should innocent US civilians be tortured for the invasion of Iraq? Of course not..</p>

<p>Basically, the US is guilty of almost everything you have blamed Iran for.. If the US thinks it should be allowed to keep its nukes, torture people at Guantanamo without trial and invade countries on a whim, they really have no right to criticise Iran about anything..</p>

35

<p>
[quote]
We have nothing and noone to answer to.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hopefully more Americans arent like this. After 9/11, everyone in the world sympathised with America. It is this attitude that has caused the anti America sentiment in the aftermath of this.</p>

36

<p>I think Iran should have nuclear energy, in fact the US should even give it to them.</p>

<p>In the form of a 10 megaton nuclear missile detonated over Tehran.</p>

<p>In Iranian society, if you're found out to be a homosexual, you will be charged with invented homosexual acts, and then executed. A society as intolerant as that should be annihiliated.</p>

37

<p>Who are you, or anybody, to judge the Islamic religion? Think of where we would be if people attacked us just because of our neo-Christian government.</p>

38

<p>
[quote]
In Iranian society, if you're found out to be a homosexual, you will be charged with invented homosexual acts, and then executed. A society as intolerant as that should be annihiliated.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Numerous states in the US have laws against sodomy and Texas' was only struck down 3 years ago. That's just as bad. Gays aren't even allowed to marry here, isn't that equally intolerant?</p>

39

<p>I agree, we are intolerant here. So, according to you Strykur shouldn't we be annihilated?</p>

40

<p>The choices are simple: let Iran create nuclear weapons knowing that it has expressed a desire to wipe Israel off the map, or prevent them from doing so. </p>

<p>It's not intolerant to stop a renegade theocracy--whom we know FOR SURE is developing WMDs and has articulated what it intends to do with said weapons--from building nukes. </p>

<p>Please don't call the U.S. intolerant because of gay marriage being illegal; it's a horrible analogy. Almost all countries in the world have a ban on gay marriage, and many of those countries have harsh punishments for simply being homosexual. The U.S. should be judged against the rest of the world, not some utopian ideal that will probably be achieved within the next 50 years anyways. However, Iran is the only country in the world building nukes with the sole purpose being to bully and possibly attack a neighbouring, non-threatening nation. I think it's fair to say that is intolerant.</p>