Does Any Country Have The Right To Tell Another Country What They Can Or Can't Do?
Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Friday he will not set "red lines" for military action against Iran, insisting he wanted to preserve the Jewish state's freedom to maneuver.
"I have not set down red lines to the United States and will not set down red lines," he said. "I want to reserve Israel's freedom to maneuver in light of threats, every country would demand that."
Netanyahu
arrived in Canada on Friday ahead of White House talks next week
expected to focus on halting Iran's controversial nuclear drive.
Shortly after his arrival in Ottawa, Netanyahu met privately with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a keen backer of Israel. He was to travel on to Washington on Sunday.
At a news conference with Harper,
Netanyahu laid out Israel's demands for Iran: to dismantle its
underground nuclear facility in Qom, stop uranium enrichment and get rid
of all enriched material in Iran beyond what would allow it to make
medical isotopes or generate nuclear power.
Harper said he wants to see a "peaceful resolution" to the Iran nuclear threat.
Netanyahu and Obama are to meet
Monday and are expected to discuss further measures to slow or halt
Iran's nuclear program, which Israel views as its greatest strategic
threat.
Western nations have stepped up
sanctions on Iran, accusing it of pursuing nuclear weapons in the guise
of a peaceful program, charges denied by Tehran.
Would we let other Countries tell us what we could or couldn't develop in our Country?
Top Opinion
-
krayzrick 2012/03/03 17:42:44
We told Saddam to to kill his own people. Can we not tell another country that they cannot conduct another Holocaust? Countries cannot develop WMD's. Countries cannot develop chemical warfare.
A confederation of countries like the UN. NATO, AU, or the OAS can.
Well lets look a little closer. If we told the world that we were going to kill everyone that wasn't willing to bow to our demands, then I suspect we should logically expect to be attacked. That's what Iran is doing, starting with Israel, so let's keep the question in context. The accurate question would be:
"Would we let other Countries tell us what we could or couldn't develop in our Country if we were threatening the safety of the world?"
And what if there should be a 'civil' type war here, would obama allow Iran to come over and help put us down?
If Israel is concerned that Iran could go nuclear and believe the a nuclear Iran with threaten the lives of its citizens then of course they should do everything in their power to try and stop it. And if Iran is just developing nuclear technology for energy production then they should keep on trying to do that while trying to honestly be transparent and relieve any fears neighbors may have.
If these two self interests run against each other then we have conflict. Thats how the world works on a micro and macro level.
Lets say Iran is working toward nuclear weapons and Israel just sits back and does nothing and in 6 years we see a mushroom cloud and hundreds of thousands of dead Israelis? Whats the response to that given the discussion we're having now? Oops?
Going back to WWII you have the Japanese view of Americas role in trade before we entered the war and they decided to fight back for what they viewed as harmful to them. Pearl Harbor. So then we fought back.
In the age we live in even internal national affairs are no longer just internal in effect. US builds weapons then nation x or y is going to be uncomfortable about it. France does x to affect its economy, even...
If Israel is concerned that Iran could go nuclear and believe the a nuclear Iran with threaten the lives of its citizens then of course they should do everything in their power to try and stop it. And if Iran is just developing nuclear technology for energy production then they should keep on trying to do that while trying to honestly be transparent and relieve any fears neighbors may have.
If these two self interests run against each other then we have conflict. Thats how the world works on a micro and macro level.
Lets say Iran is working toward nuclear weapons and Israel just sits back and does nothing and in 6 years we see a mushroom cloud and hundreds of thousands of dead Israelis? Whats the response to that given the discussion we're having now? Oops?
Going back to WWII you have the Japanese view of Americas role in trade before we entered the war and they decided to fight back for what they viewed as harmful to them. Pearl Harbor. So then we fought back.
In the age we live in even internal national affairs are no longer just internal in effect. US builds weapons then nation x or y is going to be uncomfortable about it. France does x to affect its economy, eventually it will have an effect on other nations. And a mixture of diplomacy and conflict is how situations between nations is handled.
So while Iran can try and do whatever it wants to do within its own borders to think that other nations shouldn't care or shouldn't try to do something about it is naive.
I thought one of the biggest issues for some people was "how the world views us" right? What we do internall and externally made other nations "hate" us? Why should Iran be held to any different a standard?
The US on the other hand loves to tell other countries what to do.
or tortured and when countries are being threatened.We have to stop the bullies of this world.
That way when the time comes for action against another country it will not need to be debated, we will all be in agreement.
This form of laziness could have led to the Iraqi Kurdish population being completely wiped out and could have meant Milosevic got his own waynd many other fascist dictators got their own way.