Where Do You Stand If/When War Breaks Out With Iran?

Part of my atheism and humanism is my pacifism. However as a realist and a rationalist, and from what I am seeing in the news, war with Iran is a forgone conclusion. Even if we don't attack preemptively, in all likelihood Israel will and we will be bound to support them. This war will be bigger than Iraq and Afghanistan combined and there is a huge chance Russia may support Iran. 

A third war. It's tragic and terrifying. Just as one war ended and talk of withdrawing from Afghanistan begins to move forward, the war hawks have their eyes on yet another conflict.

This one however is not easy.

As an atheist, I can see how the influence of extreme Islam, and the might of the ultimate seat of power the Khomeini, will indeed push Iran in the direction of acquiring a nuclear bomb. So when they say they are looking to nuclear power for peaceful means, can we take them on their word? Can even inspectors tell us the truth? If the country was not a theocracy, perhaps we would not have this problem. 

However, part of me wants to acknowledge history, whereas we were so certain their were wmds in Iraq.

I just don't know what to believe any more or whom.I'm scared for my children. I don't want this country to end up in another war.

Is there another option? What about waiting for the worst case scenario; they acquire a bomb and there goes most of Israel or a city in the US? Then when we attack and at least it will be justified? I just don't know.

Where do do you stand? How does this affect you and your family? Does your atheism have anything to do with it? Is this an inevitable course of events?

Views: 556

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

If I knew how I would invade Iran right now with an all out internet assault and start an uprising from all of the non religious fundamentalist. As far as I know they out number the fundamentalist and would take over the country if they only stood together against their oppressive government. 

If our military had any common sense they would find a way to infiltrate the country with internet servers and wifi towers to get as many people involved as possible. Once the ball got rolling the US could send some surgical bombers and hit the biggest threats to the rebels. 

Like Egypt and Libya democratic take over without massive casualties.

Danny I totally agree. And I think this is happening although not to the degree you or I would like. Shut down the system I say. The problem is Israel.

I agree with the use of computer resources to influence change in Iran however its a dance we must be careful doing. Internet attacks are military attacks even our own military has stated such so we have to be careful on what is done unless we want a start a shooting war with the click of a mouse. Israel is one factor that is hard to control, they are after all their own nation with their own very real concerns. Israel makes and has made some major mistakes in my opinion over the years i.e settlements and un-equal treatment of non-Jewish citizens etc but they are also a very small country that has and is under a constant threat of attack. For Israel if they lose a convential war ... well then there is a high likely hood it ceases to exist. They play a dangerous game with very prideful people on both sides who are very hard headed folks.  We can look at the history of war between Israel and the nations around it to see they have some legit concerns that I'm sure are only becoming more serious as they watch events unfold in the countries around them currently. I mean just look at the most popular way to get votes in nations around them... use Israel. It makes sense to pander to the less educated people in rural areas with calls of destruction to Israel etc... but sometimes these leaders have to pay up...all that talk has to be shown not be just talk and they have to take actions to ensure their own ability to remain in power.  So while we would hope that they wouldn't undertake action on their own it's also very hard for us to say hey you don't have a reason to do so or to very worried about things.  All in all it sucks and it wouldn't matter if we said we were supportive of actions taken by Israel there is a chance we could get dragged in on purpose by Iran because if they are bluffing about attacking U.S or allied interests in case of attack it would make Iran look weak.

I agree Jared. Good analysis.

Israeli propaganda is the problem,Iran hasn't attacked another country in over 450 years,their military is set up as a defensive one not an attacking one.And one of the main parts of their constitution is to never strike or attack first and they have stuck true to this.For anybody interested on what is really going on in the middle-east you will have to search outside the scope of U.S media for the truth and it is shocking what go's on.

Exactly.

I am strictly against this war, not only because I am against war in principle – which I am –, but because those who want to declare war on Iran are hypocrites. All of the so-called ‘New Wars’ have been fought for natural resources, and the egotistical, selfish interests of the privileged Western nations. They, who apply double standards to humans worldwide as concerns human rights, cheating, lying, and stealing wherever they can so as to maintain inequality, injustice, and suffering among 80% of the world’s human population, cynically purport to fight for these people’s ‘universal rights’.
To those in charge, the life of the masses and its quality matters only inasmuch as it suits the purpose of cementing the status quo. They would tell any lie, and would sacrifice each and every single person, if only it serves the purpose of keeping the privileged privileged, and the rest away from power and influence. Soldiers and their beloved are always told that they fought for freedom and justice and societal values, and so forth. But, of course, this is not true. Soldiers never fight for these things. They are used as a means to the aforementioned purposes.
How have all the circumstances we now face in the Eastern countries come about in the first place? They came about by the continuous interventions of the Western nations who actually dare call themselves ‘civilized’. Both the United States of America and European countries supported dictatorships politically as well as economically.
But now, as they realize that their influence, and thereby their access to several natural resources including oil, may wane, they suddenly come up with propaganda so as to foment fear among their peoples. Fear is the most powerful means to make someone approve of something he or she would not approve of if he or she could judge it rationally. Thus, political and economic decisions made beforehand are made to appear as results of democratic processes.
As concerns the state of Israel, it has been a tyrant to its neighbours for decades, but has only been able to do so because it has been both directly and indirectly protected and supported by Western countries, especially the USA. Whoever is in his or her right mind has to realize that Israel simply cannot afford to declare war on Iran. If it did, it would soon be buried by its neigbours.
Iran, on the other hand, theocracy or not, would not use a nuclear bomb. When the USA dropped two nuclear bombs on Japan (one on Hiroshima and one on Nagasaki, respectively) at the end of the Seond World War, the entire world witnessed that it would be insane to use this kind of weapon as a major means in a war. This is exactly the reason for which there has been no nuclear war so far, although myriads of nuclear weapons have been around for more than half a century. Everyone is eager to own them, but no one is actually willing to use them.

I do not know whether my view is in any manner related to my atheism. I believe one can be a pacifist, or at least someone who rejects war in general (which does not necessarily entail rejecting violence in general), without being an atheist, or even a humanist.

If you're against war in principal, then oppressed peoples can only become free by begging for their freedom. What sort of "principle" is that?

You're right about nuclear war to a limited extent. The next use of a nuclear weapon will be by a crazy individual, by mistake, or by religious zealots. Iran is a religious zealotry.

You are thinking in a one-way street.
First of all, oppressed peoples can become free by revolution. Revolution is obviously different from war, although both concepts may overlap in certain aspects.
Second, I am against war in principle as a part of my idealism, which does not match reality as of now, but should do so in the future. Where there is no oppression, there is no need for war. Needless to say, this dream may never come true, but from this it does not necessarily follow that it principally cannot.

Ah . . . idealism which acknowledges reality. That's the kind of idealism I can get behind.

Iran, on the other hand, theocracy or not, would not use a nuclear bomb. When the USA dropped two nuclear bombs on Japan (one on Hiroshima and one on Nagasaki, respectively) at the end of the Seond World War, the entire world witnessed that it would be insane to use this kind of weapon as a major means in a war. This is exactly the reason for which there has been no nuclear war so far, although myriads of nuclear weapons have been around for more than half a century. Everyone is eager to own them, but no one is actually willing to use them.

I agree with you. Iran would be idiots. However, the concern that as I understand it, is that Iran would give one to a terrorist group. Hamas for example.

I have to agree. The majority and more sane factions of the Iranian government would never be dumb enough to use a nuclear weapon... however this is not a government that is united and it has some very dangerous fellows in it such as theocratic extremists and what I would classify as organized crime members who would if anything use indirect means to use or sell a weapon. The President of Iran and even the Supreme Leader don't have full control of all the factions there. Even these two people the Iranian President and the Supreme Leader are locked in a power struggle that is causing some major cracks in the control on the various groups in the government, military and quazi military.   Now honestly if the people were able to change the Iranian government and it became a more stable government not based on the whim of theocratic beliefs who casually throw around insane ideas I would have no problem with Iran having nuclear power plants or weapons. It's bad enough that Pakistan has these weapons or that any number of weapons from the Soviet Union may just be floating around out there.

RSS

Blog Posts

What do you do with the anger?

Posted by dataguy on September 20, 2014 at 5:12pm 3 Comments

Aftermath

Posted by Belle Rose on September 20, 2014 at 2:42am 5 Comments

Ads

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service