Poll: Do you think this deal will allow for Iran to eventually develop nuclear weapons ?

[Siavash]

Iran was not\will not going to build nuclear weapons but Iran has the capability to build and it is it's right to have this capability due to obvious reasons.
Meanwhile Iran is not that fool to give this capability to US and it's allies. Lybia and Iraq are two governments that trusted US...

Today Iran has this capability and no one dare to attack Iran.

Mr. siavash mass destruction weapons or any sort of weapons that use against civilians are clearly haram in Islam. That's why Iran always has said don't want mass destruction weapons.

The Islamic fatwas prevent Iran to test or build nuclear weapons, but another reason is, if Iran build nuclear weapons UN sanctions will come for Iran and also west will find a stronger reason to attack Iran. Building nukes is not good for security and economy of Iran.

Iranians are wise and know what they are doing.

With all due respect, based on what basis in Islamic text do you say it is Haram. When all the text and the islamic doctrine says otherwise how can one believe the Fatwas supporting it. Definitely such view seems not to be supported by Sunni regimes and clerics and the Shia Fatwa seem not to have much basis. Repeating a phrase does not make it true nor helps people believing it.

By the way I didn't say I am supporting building Nuke or I am against it. I said what I think will happen. For sure now any Nuke is counterproductive and I can not make up my mind how it is in 20 years, most probably Pakistan would have 500 million fanatics instead of 120 and Saudi's will be more and more thirsty of Shia eradication.

What I believe is non proliferation is an unrealistic dream that will only happen if all the region is Nuke free which wont happen if China has Nukes though India needs to keep Balance with China and Pakistan with India.

 

[Arminkh]

I think the question is wrong. If Iran wanted nukes, it would have it by now, deal or no deal.

 

[[Bregs]]

This question is still pre mature at the moment , If deal implanted in letter and spirit honestly by US and West then Iran might not give the final push

 

[Styx]

the poll was meant only for Iranian members, why are Pakistanis and Indians behaving like Pakistanis and Indians ?

 

[Blackmoon]

I don' think Iran is looking for nuclear bomb if so it would achieve it earlier. Even more we cannot obtain nuclear bomb by starving our people to dead or get all kinds of sanctions and in the end what is point of having it ?
Those countries that has its just for show off otherwise in wars they are not allow to use it which we witnessed from Israel - Arabs wars.

 

[SipahSalar]

Yes, the deal can allow Iran to procure nuclear weapons if they use the 10 years to make massive military acquisitions. So when the deal expires and they go for nuclear weapons, it will be very hard for US to stop them.

 

[bdslph]

even Russia said this is the besst deal
but i am not sure when the EU and USA moods change and find a fault and start a war with iran

 

[Styx]

even if the next POTUS is from among the right winger hawks like Cruz or Graham (who has 0 chance), I dont think they're just going to march into the oval office and start ripping international treaties etc..

I think the deal is done, obama will veto any motions to block it, and the next guy will stick to it.. they'll just spin in and sell it to the electorate as something good.

next step should be Iran - Israel peace efforts.

 

[Hack-Hook]

even if the next POTUS is from among the right winger hawks like Cruz or Graham (who has 0 chance), I dont think they're just going to march into the oval office and start ripping international treaties etc..

I think the deal is done, obama will veto any motions to block it, and the next guy will stick to it.. they'll just spin in and sell it to the electorate as something good.

next step should be Iran - Israel peace efforts.

For that peace effort they must first go to war otherwise both country are at peace, they only dont have relation with each other .

 

[FaujHistorian]

Not gonna happen . Ayatullah sistani is also a shia marja . we shia muslims believe that weapons of mass destruction are haram ..

with due respect haman Agha Jaan,

Did Iran not use missiles (sometimes tipped with chemicals) in war with Iraq?

p.s. I am feeling too sleepy to google (but not enough sleeping to post incomplete posts on PDF )

 

[Hack-Hook]

with due respect haman Agha Jaan,

Did Iran not use missiles (sometimes tipped with chemicals) in war with Iraq?

p.s. I am feeling too sleepy to google (but not enough sleeping to post incomplete posts on PDF )

You are severly wrong here . All facts and evidence point that iran opted not to retaliate with chemical weapons and even saddam didn't used chemical missiles. The way saddam delivered chemical weapons was with bombs, mortars and artillery .

 

[haman10]

Did Iran not use missiles (sometimes tipped with chemicals) in war with Iraq?

No .

 

[بلندر]

how about if Ayatullah from Najf give fatwa that building nukes for defense is allowed?

There is too kind of Fatwa in Velayat Faqih ...
Religious Fatwa ...
Dominion Fatwa ... ( only leader of Islamic State have right to use it - > Vali or Caliph )
no one ban it through Religious Fatwa , Our Supreme Leader used Dominion Fatwa , and he can change it because it is just a tool to help them rule ....

 

[Serpentine]

Did Iran not use missiles (sometimes tipped with chemicals) in war with Iraq?

No, it did not, despite having tens of thousands of casualties by chemical weapons, used by a madman which was being helped by 'Muslims' which in my eyes, are worse than animals.