would the concept of MAD work with iran and isreal

fife

during the cold war between teh USA and USSR, many believe that the concept of MAD or mutual assured destruction saved both countries into a war. The MAD doctrine assumes that neither side will dare to launch a first strike because the other side will launch on warning or with secondary forces resulting in the destruction of both parties. The payoff of this doctrine is expected to be a tense but stable peace.

While talking to a friend of mine, we were discussing if this concept of MAD would work with isreal and Iran.

My friend said no since, he believes that the Iranian governemtn along with its people would be die for the movement. i don't know if he is right but it is an interesting idea.

what do you all believe. do you believe that if Iran had nukes and Isreal had them also woudl that make life more peaceful for both countries since both countries would be scared to attack the other for the reason laid out in the idea of MAD or do you believe like my friend who believes that IRAN woudl use there weapons first.

arthurdent

MAD only works if you "don't" want the world to end. I don't really think Iran gives a rats ass.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

arthurdent wrote:

MAD only works if you "don't" want the world to end.

EXACTLY.

fife

arthurdent wrote:

MAD only works if you "don't" want the world to end. I don't really think Iran gives a rats ass.

so you really believe that teh leaders in iran don't care about being alive? i still don't believe that.

arthurdent

fife wrote:

arthurdent wrote:

MAD only works if you "don't" want the world to end. I don't really think Iran gives a rats ass.

so you really believe that teh leaders in iran don't care about being alive? i still don't believe that.

I don't exactly think that they don't care, just as long as they take out israel in the process. It's that whole martyrdom thing. Same thing with North Korea, really.

Byrnzie

arthurdent wrote:

I don't exactly think that they don't care, just as long as they take out israel in the process. It's that whole martyrdom thing. Same thing with North Korea, really.

When was the last time Iran attacked anyone?

fife

Byrnzie wrote:

arthurdent wrote:

I don't exactly think that they don't care, just as long as they take out israel in the process. It's that whole martyrdom thing. Same thing with North Korea, really.

When was the last time Iran attacked anyone?

fair question so do you believe that the concept of MAD would work in the middle east?

arthurdent

Byrnzie wrote:

arthurdent wrote:

I don't exactly think that they don't care, just as long as they take out israel in the process. It's that whole martyrdom thing. Same thing with North Korea, really.

When was the last time Iran attacked anyone?

directly or through their proxies?

fife

i am sorry i should have posted what i believe. i remember one time i was reading an article after a school shooting in american and there was discussion about how if everyone had a gun in teh school this would never have happen. i found it to be sad but i believed that maybe its true. maybe we need people to be scared so they don't do things that are bad and that is exactlly what MAD is.

you F**k me i F**k you more.

Byrnzie

arthurdent wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

arthurdent wrote:

I don't exactly think that they don't care, just as long as they take out israel in the process. It's that whole martyrdom thing. Same thing with North Korea, really.

When was the last time Iran attacked anyone?

directly or through their proxies?

Both. When was the last time Iran attacked anyone?

arthurdent

Byrnzie wrote:

Both. When was the last time Iran attacked anyone?

Directly... Iran/Iraq war comes to mind. Indirectly... you have to look at the links between Iran and Islamic terrorism. Basically, Iran's been gunning for The West since '79.

Byrnzie

arthurdent wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

Both. When was the last time Iran attacked anyone?

Directly... Iran/Iraq war comes to mind. Indirectly... you have to look at the links between Iran and Islamic terrorism. Basically, Iran's been gunning for The West since '79.

I think you'll find that it was Iraq that attacked Iran, and these links with Islamic terrorism are all spurious and ultimately groundless.

Now tell me how many times Israel has attacked anyone in the past 50 years?

CJMST3K

arthurdent wrote:

MAD only works if you "don't" want the world to end. I don't really think Iran gives a rats ass.

+1

arthurdent

Byrnzie wrote:

arthurdent wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

Both. When was the last time Iran attacked anyone?

Directly... Iran/Iraq war comes to mind. Indirectly... you have to look at the links between Iran and Islamic terrorism. Basically, Iran's been gunning for The West since '79.

I think you'll find that it was Iraq that attacked Iran, and these links with Islamic terrorism are all spurious and ultimately groundless.

Now tell me how many times Israel has attacked anyone in the past 50 years?

I'm not going to defend Israel. Hell, I think dumping the Jews into a place where they weren't wanted just because it was their "bilbical" right is probably the biggest foreign policy mistake in the past century. Personally, I think we ought to tell the entire region to fuck off. Israel included.

Byrnzie

arthurdent wrote:

MAD only works if you "don't" want the world to end. I don't really think Iran gives a rats ass.

And you base this assumption on what exactly?

fife

please lets try not just to turn this into a debate about who is more wrong Israel or iran. the thread is about whether the concept of MAD would work.

Byrnzie

fife wrote:

please lets try not just to turn this into a debate about who is more wrong Israel or iran. the thread is about whether the concept of MAD would work.

No one said anything who is 'more wrong'. We were simply looking at both countries track records re: aggression. I'd rather see a stable country like Iran have nukes than a racist, aggressive rogue state like Israel.

g under p

Byrnzie wrote:

fife wrote:

please lets try not just to turn this into a debate about who is more wrong Israel or iran. the thread is about whether the concept of MAD would work.

No one said anything who is 'more wrong'. We were simply looking at both countries track records re: aggression. I'd rather see a stable country like Iran have nukes than a racist, aggressive rogue state like Israel.

I totally agree look what they did to Mordechai Vanunu for just revealing that Isarel had nukes.

Peace

Drowned Out

Byrnzie wrote:

arthurdent wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

Both. When was the last time Iran attacked anyone?

Directly... Iran/Iraq war comes to mind. Indirectly... you have to look at the links between Iran and Islamic terrorism. Basically, Iran's been gunning for The West since '79.

I think you'll find that it was Iraq that attacked Iran, and these links with Islamic terrorism are all spurious and ultimately groundless.

Now tell me how many times Israel has attacked anyone in the past 50 years?

I think you'll also find that Iran has been gunning for the West for much longer than 30 years. I don't blame them.

blackredyellow

arthurdent wrote:

MAD only works if you "don't" want the world to end. I don't really think Iran gives a rats ass.

I'm disagreeing too... ever notice that the "leaders" of these extremist movements are never the ones to die for the cause?

North Korea won't attack South Korea, Iran won't attack Israel, because the people in those governments are more interested in being in power and getting attention to satisfy their egos, than dying for any "cause".

tybird

The mutual destruction of two of the larger landmasses(The U.S. and the former Soviet Union) on the planet would probably mean tits up for everybody else....that global event possibility was the scary part of MAD as related to the Cold War meaning.....if Iran wiped out Israel how would the rest of the Islamic world react to the destruction of some of their scared sites?