Why is an Iranian nuclear bomb supposed to be more dangerous than an American, Israeli or French?

Question

This question was asked at the Dropping Knowledge event on 9th September by Wolfgang Jost, 23, Berlin, Germany. To find out more about Dropping Knowledge check out our blog:

Dropping Knowledge in the UK: http://uk.blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-qT1KKPQoRKdVT4lowpJCljbFokkuIzI8?p=1048

Dropping Knowledge in the US: http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-d8pH0dcoRKeB12yOcnUQp.9VCFos?p=12745

To discuss this subject in more detail follow this link to the official Dropping Knowledge website: http://www.droppingknowledge.org/bin/posts/focus/8189.page

Answer 1

Its like a car it doesn't matter who made it, it's who is driving it you need to worry about.



Personally I am not happy aboout the amount if wreckless drivers on the road..........theres one to think about

Answer 2

A nuke is a nuke, dangerous in any hand, and in my opinion, the american hand most ... they're the only ones who used it till now, right?



I also think that if israel is allowed a certain level of nuclear technology, all the surrounding countries should be allowed the same level, or restrict nuclear development in the region equally.

I also think that it's perfectly okay that a country becomes a super power and regulates the political and military stuff between countries, because with power comes responsibility, but this super power must work for the good of everybody not for its own only as the US is now.



Bottom line:

Iran should have their own nuclear facilities whether they're gonna make a bomb or not, as long as other countries have nukes.

Answer 3

The only reason I can thnk of is that people have the perception that the Iranians are more likely to USE it than the Americans or the French. We all know that the French are better at surrendering (Franko Prussioan War, WWI WWII) and the Americans are just too afraid of what the rest of the world would think to even consider the idea. The Iraninas suffer from neither of these disabilities, so people assume that they will use use it simply for s's and g's.

Answer 4

The most dangerous nuclear bomb, of course, would have been a German nuclear bomb. At least, isn't that what Einstein warned President Roosevelt about back when Germans were the first creatures on this planet to conceive of such an abomination? In 1954, Einstein stated, "I made one great mistake in my life . . .when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made; but there was some justification - the danger that the Germans would make them." (Isn't Dropping Knowledge funded by an old Nazi collaborator?)

Answer 5

Iran has the right to develop peaceful uses of nuclear energy under the NPT (the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty which is a flawed treaty). According to this treaty only the US, UK, France, China and Russia (as successor to the Soviet Union) have the right to officially produce nuclear weapons. Many more countries have the capability to do so and some actually have nuclear bombs.

There is no "right" or "less dangerous" nuclear weapon. They are all dangerous and horrible. Even Robert McNamara admitted that at most the nuclear "haves" like the US would need only 10 nuclear bombs as deterrence.

Despite the propaganda flowing out there, I don't see Iran as one of the "crazies". I would be much more concerned about North Korea.

No bomb is a good bomb. No nuke is a good nuke. We must all work towards abolishing them all.

Answer 6

Because the belief in the west is that the Iranians are much more likely to use it. In miltiary confilcts the US does everything it can to prevent their troops for being killed. France tires not to get involved at all and even Israel does it's best to get it's captured troops back. Even most western based terrorist organisations do not conciously kill themselves in the process of attacking the enemy. However isalmic terrorists do send people who's aim is to kill themselves as well as the enemy. This willingness to die is what concerns people about Islamic states having the bomb. Mutually assured destruction is what prevented a war between the Soviet union and the US. If your enemy is not as scared of dying as you are then they could be consider to be a greater threat. Also Iran has publicly statted that it would like to see the destruction of Israel. Give them a Nuclear weapon and they might just try to realise that wish.

Answer 7

It is considered more dangerous by who? By Americans, Israeli, French etc, it is certainly considered more dangerous. If you asked the question to Iranians, they will say it is less dangerous. It's a matter of perspective.



Unfortunately throughout modern human history, white people have gone on plundering, pillaging, raping, ravishing, enslaving and destroying other civilizations. And the means that they have used have often come from other sources than their own brains. Gunpowder was invented in China, but used extensively by Europe against many civilzations. No other race, not a single one, has caused as much destruction in the world as have people of the white European stock.



Yes they have contributed to human progress as well, but their contribution depended entirely on the knowledge they took from many other civilizations. Where would Europe be without paper and gunpowder from China, with the Arabic number system, the decimal system and the number zero from India.



This current standoff is just another example of arrogant, airheaded greed and lust for dominance of this race. Narrow-minded, short-sighted idiots.



In the spirit of the answer below why is a Harry S. Truman armed with a nuclear weapon more dangerous than a Kim Jong Il. Truman used it, right? On defenceless concentrations of civilians. Kim hasn't.



So shove it.

Answer 8

A nuclear bomb is a nuclear bomb. In this case they are worried about the government behind the bomb. They also worry about Korea.



An American, Israeli, or French bomb is probably more powerful, but a lot less likely to be used. An Iranian bomb or a Korean bomb is more likely to be used because the government behind the bomb is unstable and the citizens are not informed about the deadliness of a nuclear explosion.



There is also the possibility that Iran will give a nuclear device to terrorists so their hands are clean, but we still get the explosion. If THAT happens, you can expect very fast military action against Iran. It won't be nuclear because the US isn't that stupid, but it will completely remove every Iranian government figure.



If the US is smart, they will start broadcasting footage of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to both countries and educate the citizens on how deadly a nuclear explosion can be.

Answer 9

The answer is rather simple, Iran is America's enemy. Israel, UK, France, et. al. are not. America feels its enemy having a nuclear bomb is a threat.



Also as a signing member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that at the time did not have a nuclear weapon, Iran is not allowed to have nuclear weapons, it would be a violation of international law.



This all being said, there is no conclusive evidence to suggest that Iran is building a nuclear weapon or nuclear-grade uranium enrichment. There are different grades of uranium, you need a higher grade of it to use in a nuclear bomb. Because of how high grade it is, it puts off an extraordinarily large amount of radiation. Therefore, it is virtually impossible to develop a nuclear bomb in secret. If Iran is or will be building a nuclear weapon, it will not be a secret.



This is something the Western media doesn't report, because it doesn't sell many papers.

Answer 10

It's only more dangerous in the eyes of the U.S. and it's allies that are enemies with Iran. And because the Middle east has a reputation of war since the beginning of time and are constantly fighting to have more power than their neighboring countries, it really wouldn't be a good idea to allow one of those countries to possess a nuclear bomb which could take out one of their neighbors with the push of a button.

Answer 11

This one is very simple. An American bomb is not made to use on me. I can only hope the same is true of the Israeli bomb. The French bomb, well, the French are pretty nasty people toward the Americans but I don't think they will blow us up...yet. But just listen to the words,"Iranian nuclear bomb". Iran wishes to build a bomb for one reason. They plan to use it to attack their enemies. Last time I checked, we are their enemies. It makes more since and is safer to put a small child in a cage full of mad hungry Rottweilers.

Answer 12

Neither the US,France or Israel have had their President make statements that country,countries should be wiped off the face of the earth as has the Iranian President and in all the countries except Iran religion, Faith does not rule the country as it does all of Iran. Considering the often volatile nature of Islam why would the non-Muslim countries of the world be at ease with Iran having nuclear bomb.

Answer 13

I think it's important to remember that the first bomb(s) Iran would have is likely only to be a fission (atomic) bomb, not a boosted fission or fusion (hydrogen) bomb.



However, it is the mentality of the people who control Iran that is more dangerous than the other nuclear nations.



Only USA, Britain, France, Russia, and China have thermonuclear (hydrogen) bombs. Israel has boosted fission bombs. India and Pakistan have fission (atomic) bombs.



Iran does not have the technology, nor anywhere near enough HEU to completely destroy Israel. They are far more likely to use a bomb similar to the one used by USA in Hiroshima which, compared to a thermonuclear bomb, is pretty feeble.



However, it is common knowledge that by casing the bomb in certain metals (for example, gold) it can greatly intensify the neutron radiation, which would probably end up killing far more people than the flash or the blast wave.



Also, Iran does not have the tactical knowledge of atomic warfare. It is unlikely that they will have the technology or knowledge to explode a bomb in such a way to make a precursor shock wave (which would obliterate nearly everything in its path).



In fact, in reality, they are far more likely to blow themselves up than anyone else.

Answer 14

Any nuclear bomb is dangerous, it's who's handling it that makes the big difference. The Iranians, like a lot of middle east countries, are a bit unstable at the moment with the whole Iraq thing going on. My personal view is I'd find it a whole lot more comfortable without them having it but then I'd ban nuclear bombs full stop. Besides, I think the biggest concern at the moment is North Korea and I can honestly see war breaking out there, which begs the question what will happen with Iraq? Will we just pull out and leave them to it to go off and fight another war?

Answer 15

that is not the issue the issue is we are the rule makers we have the biggest nuclear arsenal and no one else can and that is that and we also have the most military bases and the biggest most powerful navy and military that outnumbers the combined military forces of the world, might is right so when we say jump the international community better jump while asking how high or find themselves on the waiting list to be destroyed with iran, korea and mr chavez from velenzuela

Answer 16

There is a lack of trust by previous behavior of the Iranian regime. Ever since Iran captured 50 hostages and held them for a years time back around 1980. And the open support of suicide bombers by Iran makes that country untrustworthy. Therefore, it leaves the US little other options than to fight back. The worst scenario would that Iran gets nuclear bombs and some how manufactures them so that suicide bombers use them. or is able to make dirty bombs... Imagine nightmare. It's not far fetched given Iran's recent behavior.

Answer 17

Because Colored people now have a bomb LOL (other then East Asians)... oh and it probebly has something to do with the regions resources like "OIL"



White people only like for white rich people to have bombs, they feel they are more responsible with them...



YEAH right!



:-p



I say all the major powers of the world (or everyone for that matter LOL) should disarm themselves of anything having to do with nuclear stuff



This mean the USA should give up there's too, no exceptions!!!



Hmmm, my Q would be...

"Why can we take all the nuke stuff and send it on a rocket to the sun? I mean will it really effect the sun that much? Don't it already have explosions from the same stuff going on? Can't we just permanetly get rid of it by flying it all into the sun LOL which is OFF this planet?"

Not sure how to phrase all of that LOL...

But really, can't we just do that? And the vow not to make NO more?



Cya!

::: Peace :::

Answer 18

The bomb itself is not the danger... just like a gun itself is not the danger... but the person holding the gun, or in control of the bomb is what is the problem.



The Americans, French, and Israelis don't have aspirations to wipe out a race of people or a religion like the Iranians do. Similarly, America, France, and Israel are countries in which people of many different creeds, races, or religions can all live together and are sort of free to live how they wish (France less so than the others)... but Iran is not a free country where people can live how they wish. You think anyone is free to practice Judaism there... anyone is free to even write a book and not risk being beheaded (like Salman Rushdie). I think that the free world wants to defend its freedoms and the freedoms of others, while Iran wishes to impose their rule and take away the free world's freedoms... and/or lives. Again, it's not the bombs that are dangerous, it is the people and their philosophies behind the trigger than are the real threat.

Answer 19

This is because Iran is an Islamic republic controlled by Muslim terrorists. Only the capitalists and white people can control methods of destruction and Iran has not derived the right to possess nuclear bombs from a proper source of authority.

Answer 20

Iran is socially unale to detonate a thermonuclear device that demonstrates the potentials that are inherant to a free and loveing independantly active state that shows it has a true love for all of the worlds wildlife.

Peace is not an option.

Answer 21

No. identity somewhat have it Vice versa, yet i do no longer think of thats occurring! The Israelis have oppressed the Palestinians for too long and could pay for all of the babies, women people, and harmless adult males they intentionally ethnically cleansed hundreds of thousands over the final 60 years. And them "protests". those are the foo foo iranians. in case you particularly flow to Iran (it is an extremely vast u . s .) maximum of her voters are for Ahmedinejad, no longer the oppostion. Teran is one city out of hundreds of thousands!. the explanation why the protests seem so "vast" is with the help of the fact all of us is protesting different issues (no longer having to do with the competition) and the few opositionists make it appear like they're in touch approximately them. nicely I say to them make stronger up because of the fact Ahmedinejad gained, give up throwing a tantrum and attempting to create yet another revolution and burning homes and causin all kinds of chaos. It won't paintings with the government the persons elected.

Answer 22

You are 16 for 34 with the stupid questions.



That is not good considering your stated goals of educating the world via the internet.



In other words you aren't "doing" anything.



My biggest problem with you (and I assume you is singular not plural despite your dot org website) is your utopian to the point of fantasy outlook.



You are Marxist to the point of delerium and your disconnection from reality betrays your less idealized questions with an utter lack of pragmatism.



Are you so isolated within an ivory tower or are you just foolish?



At least you seem harmless.

Answer 23

Because, as a Christian, I believe that the filthy, stinkin Towelheads are the source of the world's problems. Islam is a religion based on violence, killing, and torture. Their "holy" book tells them to kill anyone who's not muslim. And now they want nukes? Hell, no we won't let them have them! I believe that, if anything, the muslims must be wiped off the face of the earth in a massive holy war. Muslims vs. Jews and Christians. We have them outnumbered, outmatched, plus, we have a REAL God. Their's is fake.

Answer 24

A bomb, like any other weapon, is dangerous or not depending on who wields it. If you trust that country's leaders (relatively speaking), then you figure it will only be aimed at your own country as a defensive weapon, and as long as we don't bug them, they won't bug us.



But if you do not trust the leadership of a country, then that bomb becomes much more dangerous in two ways. First, the people who control it -- whether politicians or military -- may be people you can't trust not to want to do something crazy, with or without an excuse. Secondly, if you don't trust their grip on their own power, you might worry that fanatics within the country could take over and use the weapon against who knows who?



In the case of Iran, I'm not sure we have trust of either type. And we do know there are people there who shout "Kill the infidel," and mean US!!!

Answer 25

Now there's a good question. Is it a simply a matter of 'do as I say, not as I do'?.

Iran is surrounded by other countries. Dropping a nuclear bomb on Israel isn't an option. The wind could change.

The USA, on the other hand, is relatively remote from the fall-out danger.

Personally, I'm far more worried about the USA having the 'bomb' than I am of Iran continuing with their nuclear power technology. Historically speaking, which country is more likely to go off at half-a male hen?

Answer 26

Well, on the surface of it there is no difference and quite frankly they're all as bad as each other. However, essentially the differences come down to accountability, democracy and the checks and balances in place before different nations could use these weapons.



But its more complicated still than that. Islamic nations are being singled out because of the so-called 'war on terror' yet as someone else here rightly pointed out, Korea is arming itself too and that isn't an Islamic state. Israel has proved itself to be selective in its adherence to UN resolutions in the past too so the more you break it down the more apparent it is that its just not as clear cut as knee jerk reactionaries first think.



If I were to rank the countries cited I would say that theoretically you could argue that the French were the safest pair of hands there - they adhere to the UN, members of the G8 and UN Security Council, have not had as many disputed elections and are not embroiled in conflict over their borders.



We already have more than enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world several times over and its tragic to think that nations that are not wealthy are siphoning off funds that would be better spent investing to realise the full potential of their people (i.e. education, health etc) rather than to develop nuclear weaponry.



There have been terrorists for years - centuries - but we are in a new era where believers will lay down their life for their cause. Yet we focus on muslims and their homelands to the Middle East. Nuclear waste is transported around the developed world every day - if I were a terrorist I'd target this as it's just not moved securely enough. Therefore, the most dangerous nuclear products are actually on our own doorsteps and we're all contributing to the risk every day.

Answer 27

because they are concidered to be more open to the idea of just "handing off" a bomb in secret, not realizing the responsibility of having a nuclear bomb..



In other words, they are concidered to not "guard" their bombs, if they were to develope them, as hard...and thus, proliferation of such bomb would be easier than in a country like france...



It is easier to imagine Iran having nukes all around with no supervision, than france...you get? also the fact they are against America and bent on "obliterating Israel"'...its not so far-fetched, that such a country, concidered "immature" for such remarks, would give the bomb away to a terrorist, and cause global economic meltdown.



Only when Iran assures everybody that they would keep the nukes well guarded, and under strict national supervision...only to be used by IRAN in defense by another country...would they allow it...But Iran would first have to show its maturity...and remakrs like "obliterating Israel from the face of the Earth" do not help.



I know, I would make a great arguementative guy, except I fukin hate foreign policy in the US, so I would probably never be a spokesman for the US unless there would be major reform in the way foreign policy is conducted.

Answer 28

Because Isreal and France are our allies, Iran is not and I don't exactly think that the US or France or Isreal wants a nuclear bomb dropped on thier country.

Answer 29

The issue is not how dangerous the Bomb is. It is WHO controls the bomb. With the long history of warfare and the constant religious fighting between groups the fear is that reason will not rule over emotion.

Answer 30

All though this is a great question, I'm still gonna call you a communist. Giving Iran nukes is like asking Andrea Yates to babysit your kids. Sure it might be o.k., but would you feel good about it?

Answer 31

Because, they were able to obtain high technology know-how to manufacture such bomb from west and eastern countries with nuclear capabilities, including North korea. After completing their projects, it will be sold to terrorist network and to be used to attacks their target of interest, including the US, UK and Israel.

Answer 32

Because their nuclear bomb could kill Americans and their allies. American life is more important than any others, didn't you know that? When the news in the U.S. reports of some world disaster, the American death/injury toll is always more important than the rest of the facts. It's like we're imperialists or something! Weird!

Answer 33

I don't think it's the fact that it's more dangerous...Nuclear bombs are all dangerous, it's just who's behind the threat...and how well the rest of the world can trust them.

Answer 34

here we go again on the complex situations and the limitless links to promote sites. the simple answer to the nuclear holocaust -- it is always a possibility or a probability with people whose antecedents run -- in the sacrifice of thousands of children specially during the irak/Iran conflict. hope you follow me. the current president of Iran is the outcome of that generation i.e. he was a teacher --in their medrese, muallem in their word. thus his personal history does not give us/the west much confidence that his actions will be within the norm of civilization. again this is a very long and complex subject and bringing it up on the surface for a quick answer does not justify its seriousness. unfortunately case is not closed on this one.

Answer 35

They're not. The propoganda says it is because we are at war with Iranians and this is the only real way Bush can justify it. However; a bomb is a bomb and realistically-- we are the only 1s who have eer dropped a nuke.

Answer 36

Because the mad men in charge of Iran have already, publicly said they are going to use them. First, on Israel, then the rest of the world. This, in their beliefs, will bring about the coming of the Mahdi (their messiah) and cause the whole world to become Islamic. THAT is the difference.

Answer 37

well Americans generally have to use for nuclear bombs and never thought to make such weapons of mass destuction. Iran on the other hand has been fighting with many various states for land and felt the need to create such a thing. Long story short if you put your mind to it you can do it, and thats just whats they did.

Answer 38

I'm going to invent an ICBM warhead that puts out Ignorance Neutralizing Waves.

Then I will sell them to both sides.

Of course no one would use them due to Mutually Assured Destruction.

Answer 39

Because Iran has extremist, terrorist funding Muslims at the head of their government who would like nothing more than to destroy Israel and America. The mad-man Ahmedinajad, thinks he's the one who will usher in Islam's version of the anti-Christ who will kill all non-believers (Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists, and Jews). Also, if they get a hold of a nuclear bomb they could quite possibly be able to make smaller nuclear weapons that are easy to transport by Islamic terrorists groups who would attempt to annihilate Israel and/or America. That is also the difference between them and us, they want to kill people who won't convert to their religion, we want to coexist peacefully no matter what someone else believes.

Answer 40

Daw! Because the subhuman terrorists that control Iran will use such weapons to complete their insane agenda of exterminating the Jews and all those that support the Jews.

Answer 41

they could manufacture and trade on to all and sundry and the very fact i would not trust them for a minute >> the whole world would never be safe again so I say strike them before they are able to strike back and then free all the people who now are living a life of an animal>>.But let it be the countries most affected that take action and let us sit back this time

Answer 42

It's not. America doesn't like Iran that's why theres a fuss about them having it

Answer 43

Because GW Bush said so. That ought to be enough reason for anyone. Coming from the man who is defending the world from terror through greater terror, and forcing democracy on people who dont want it, it HAS to be true!

You all are stupid not to believe him and possibly terrorist sympathisers.

Answer 44

A nuke device in the ownership of the nuke club of ten is considered safe. A nuke device held by a rogue state, Iran, Korea North, et al, is not safe. We cannot trust these people not to use their weapons against us.

Answer 45

Bombs are the same, like kids being born. It all depends on who is in control of them. Ron Couch, Riverside, California

Answer 46

Why is a Charles Manson armed with a firearm more dangerous then a Jimmy Carter?

Answer 47

It's not the bomb that's dangerous, it's the people in control of it. Groups that sanction genocide of Jews and non-believers shouldn't be given the means to do so.

Answer 48

A brick can be used to build a home , or it can be thrown through a window. It's not up to the brick, only the hand which holds it.

Answer 49

Maybe because the president of Iran wants to bring on the end of the world.

Answer 50

We're allegedly allies with the others, not with Iran. Besides if you look into middle Eastern laws etc, they haven't been developed for centuries and are barbaric i.e stoning etc.

The days when we had behind closed door allegiances with countries such as Syria (after WWII) are well and truly over.

Answer 51

What is nationalism and is the destruction of the sovereign Nation of Israel acceptable at any level including this dialogue.



Secondly, democracy is the out-come of devout Judaism, therefore at all cost Israel is to be protected and fought for, period.

Answer 52

A nuke in the hands of fanatics that have shown a tendency to blow themselves up as long as they can take others with them is not my idea of feeling secure in this day and age.

Answer 53

Because Iran and now North Korea are mental enough to use it with no thought for the consequences.

Answer 54

My Japanese granny from Hiroshima disagrees!



The only country to drop a nuclear is the USA.....Who has invaded more countries...???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

Answer 55

Its dangerous in as much as Iran maintains strong, supportive ties with terrorists.

As a theocracy with a fundamental lack of accountability, Iran's nuclear program brings the free world's great nightmare ― WMDs falling into the hands of Islamic terrorists ― closer to reality.

Israel......is a democratic country, would be their first port of call. The Iranian Mullahs have been clamouring for Israel's demise since the day they seized power in 1979. Witness the Iranians' more recent calls for the extermination of 'the Zionist Entity'. Can you imagine what would happen to the whole Middle East region????....................

Answer 56

It's supposed to be more dangerous because it is supposed it would be more likely to be used or sold irresponsibly. That supposition is based on statements made by the Iranian president.

Answer 57

because If Iran gets a Bomb they will not be under total threat

by Israel or other nations with Nukes. It is all about control and the

ability to control another country. These tyrants think all the peoples

wealth is theirs and cannot except that sometime in the future they

will not own every hotel on the monopoly board. Enough is not enough for them. They must own the world and all its people. If even

the smallest voice rises againist them they fear it. These are really

big smart bullies that always beat up people on the school yard.

Of course not one on one but ten on one. "Cowards"

Answer 58

Because the Republican want win the Election. They should advertise themselves by their Hired Wagers like Wolfgang and his

cooperators by making political RUMORS



You are not an independent organization but the US government WAGERS!



T.H.Y.

Answer 59

Because the Iranians won't drop it on themselves. They will drop it on England, Germany, USA, or the french.

That is like saying I have a gun but it doesn't scare me.

My neighbor hates me and he has a gun and that does scare me.

Answer 60

We know that the president of Iran is crazy,and when he get the bomb he will use it,and that is a line that America,Israel,and France will never cross,because when the president of Iran get the bomb and use it he will destabilize the whole entire world,and no one wants that.

Answer 61

its american govt bullshit they want to get rid of anti american iranian govt and replace it with pro american let america try the same with china the only reason america is doing it is because of oil

Answer 62

Only imbeciles would suppose that... Unfortunately, there's an awful lot of imbeciles in the USA - and the UK...! - who believe America should rule the world.

Answer 63

A Muslim extremist nation that has vowed to exterminate or convert the western world being in possession a nuclear weapon should scare the hell out of any non-muslim in the world!

Answer 64

Not so much the bomb being dangerous as it is the willingness of the gov't to use it.

Answer 65

Because nobody in the west understands or trusts or thinks like the arabs...so we are unsure what these people might do with the bomb..

Answer 66

A country whose leader publicly states that another nation doesn't have the right to exist, as the U.S. or France hasn't is generally more dangerous with any kind of weapon.

Answer 67

al fin y alcabo la bomba sirve para lo mismo no importa cual sea mas poderosa deberia no existir ninguna ok

Answer 68

Why is a gun more dangerous in the hands of a criminal than a police officer?



Do you people really think this way? I am fearful for our future.

Answer 69

because of who wields it. We trust ourselves, the

French and the Israelis not to bomb us. that trust is lacking for Iran.

Answer 70

I think that it is a facile question, but my quick response is, that it would be far more likely to be activated proactively. Beyond that, it is not worthy of discussion.

Answer 71

because Americans need oil, since France and Israel don't have their own oil resources - Americans decided that Iranian nuclear bomb is the most dangerous, all these wars are because of oil

Answer 72

Given how your question is worded, I'm inclined to believe that your organization is a front for the Mossad.



I notice that your questions have started off rather innocently and then they have slowly descended into the danger of Iranian nuclear bombs. Iran is entitled to have nuclear weapons - PERIOD. The US, UK and Germany, under Zionist instruction, provided technical support to Iran. Israel blew up Iraq's reactor at Osirak in 1981 - where is a question about that - Zionist?

Answer 73

The enrichment process



Iran has little or no experence in this field so the chances are of a contaminated nuclear device,



So in essance a dirty Bomb that could kill millions more that say an american or brittish nuclear devise

Answer 74

Wolfgang, you moron, in and of itself the nuclear device is very dangerous in anybodies hands, but as a moderate, even I feel extremely hesitant to see a nuclear device in the hands of any theocracy. (PS Israel is not a theocracy ) To be frank, I would never allow you Germans to posses nuclear weapons either.

Answer 75

It is not the bomb itself

that is dangerous.

It is the 'finger' and the

'intentions' that separate

them into dangerous

to less dangerous.

Answer 76

Why produce an atomic bomb in the first place? Think about it and about who did it first!!!!

Answer 77

An adult with a knife in his hand knows what to do with it. A kid with a knife may shove it anywhere from his asss to his mothers belly.

Answer 78

Countries that aren't afraid of nuclear retaliation should not be allowed to possess nuclear power.

Answer 79

It is no more dangerous it is only the person with their finger on the button.

Answer 80

They are more or less the same. It's just the press that's highlighting how dangerous that Iranian bomb is.

Answer 81

It has nothing to do with the bomb in and of itself. It has to do with what will be done with it and to who.

Answer 82

I do not believe that it is. I do believe that it is just another ploy for bush to stick his and our noses into something and someplace we should not be.

Answer 83

Because Iran is most likely to use one.

Answer 84

A nuke in the hands of a people whose religion calls for them to kill all unbelivers is a terrorist weapon.



This calls for a pre-emptive strike.



Nuke 'em till they glow in the dark.

Answer 85

This one certainly got our excitable raghead brothers going didn't it? Now you know why.

Answer 86

Its simple. The Iranians are more likely to use it or sell it to a terrorist group. With the latter, they can smile and say it wasn't us.

Answer 87

what an assenine question.



because we would not use a nuclear bomb unless we absolutely positivly had to. Iran could use a nuclear bomb at any time.



you still dont get it. people like you NEVER will.

Answer 88

Because they are fanatic Islamic..we (the democratic world) have a value of life..They don't.

Answer 89

it isnt more dangerous. we should be more worried about the other countries with nuclear weapons like the US for example

Answer 90

Well, to me it is because Iran claims to NOT be seeking to build a special weapon... yet they are racing ahead to build missiles capable of reaching Israel and Europe...



Their President openly states that he wishes to wipe the state of Israel "OFF THE MAP" !!



Iran seems to WANT to use a nuc... We will only use in response to someone else using one.

Answer 91

Because they're more insane than we are.

Answer 92

Because of the "hotheads" and irresponsible individuals "running" those countries.

Answer 93

While American and Israeli nukes sit on top of missiles, the Irianians would prefer to make theirs fit in the trunk of a car. America would probably warn of impending nuke attack, Iran would like it if you didn't know what hit you.

Answer 94

to even ask this question u just have to be mental.this question shouldn't need a answer

Answer 95

Would you give an atomic weapon to a madman?

Answer 96

because Iran has a dogmatic, theocratic vision for world domination, and is calling for another country (Israel) to be wiped off the map. That's why, dumbass!

Answer 97

More worried about korea doing it they will use them

Answer 98

It's not the bomb that's the problem, it's who has it

Answer 99

because people that are crazy have it and may allow other crazy terrorists to have it as well.

Answer 100

Well, Iran did say it wanted to wipe Israel of the face of the earth. So far America or France hasn't said it wished to totally destroy a country. Iran also had riots when the Pope read from that medieval manuscript. A country that can catch fire that quickly defiantly doesn't need to have nuclear weapons.

Answer 101

It's not necessarily the nuke itself but who is in control of it.

Answer 102

because they dont want to see that we ( muslim) can be in peace by others !

i dont know why they said BOMB !

its u ! i mean BUSH ! you man !

you r the biggest bomb !

you destroy iraq , lebnon , palestine , ... to become devil !!

i want to ask a question :

which one is more dangerouse ?

israel WITH atomic BOMB or iran with atomic reaserch !!!??

come ON !!!

Answer 103

Because of who's hands' it is in.

Answer 104

Because Iran and North Korea will manufacture them, wholesale, and sell them to the highest bidder. That's why.

Answer 105

They're quicker on the trigger.

Answer 106

wow. this is less of a question, and more of a 'statement' of your beliefs. Way to abuse the system.

Answer 107

Because muslim extremists are crazy and they will use it for evil and we use it for peace.

Answer 108

Because Americans, Israelis and the French dont generally call for the complete anihillation of other nations. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, publically stated that Israel should be destroyed.



Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, while addressing close to four thousand students at a Tehran conference entitled "The World Without Zionism," called for the unequivocal destruction of Israel. In no ambiguous terms, Ahmadinejad stated that Israel "must be wiped off the map."

Answer 109

Because theirs will be aiming at us.

Answer 110

CANT BE BOTHERED READING YOUR **** IF YOU DONT KNOW ANY BOMBS BLOODY DANGEROUS

Answer 111

the problem comes from the person that push on the button

Answer 112

Cause it'd be aimed at us, doh!

Answer 113

IT'S NOT THE BOMB IT'S WHO HAS THEIR FINGER ON THE BUTTON.

Answer 114

iran will use the bomb, that is why.

Answer 115

because it will be aimed at the infidels. dduuuhhh!!!

Answer 116

possiblity of using them.

Answer 117

Why is this anti-america and anti-semetic question a featured question?

Answer 118

It's not the bomb that is more dangerous it's the people who possess it.

Answer 119

The weapon is not dangerous - just the idiot weilding it.

Answer 120

The risk of religious fanaticals getting ahold of a nuclear device, esp. fanticals with a history of attacking US targets, should make all americans worried. Spain, UK, and other areas targeted should also be worried.

Answer 121

Because it is Them, and we are Us.



;-)

Answer 122

BECAUSE THEY ARE FOOL ENOUGH TO USE IT YOU DUMB CLUCK

Answer 123

Because they will use it.

Answer 124

hahaha exactly!!! That's what i thought also...its like you stole my idea..I'm suing....Where is my lawyer?

Answer 125

Basically, its all about control. America wants to control most of the world and especially that region. America backs Israel hence why America will enter any country that is opposed to Israel. Its about, greed, oil, land. etc.

Answer 126

Because they are the "enemy".

Answer 127

because its in the hand of the Iranians

Answer 128

exactly, especially considering the states probably sold iran (and other countries) the bombs to begin with!

Answer 129

Of course it's not, but life is precious to Americans, Israelis and French people whereas Islamic nations don't care about that and are willing to die for their 'cause' as we have seen on many occasions. It would therefore be very dangerous for them to possess such a weapon as they would not hesitate to use it to wipe Israel off the map - as they have already called for - and then, no doubt, to attack the USA.

Answer 130

um, because they're TERRORISTS???!!!!???

Answer 131

Sheer jealousy by the west. Bravo Ahmedinaj!