Prominent U.S. Physicists Send Letter to President Bush

  • News
  • Thread starter scott1
  • Start date
  • #26
Pengwuino
Gold Member
5,009
16
EL said:
Hey, note I've never said we shouldn't put pressure on Iran!
It's the use of "nukes-scare-tactics" I'm objecting to.
Why not "threaten then like crazy" without the nukes?

Well our army is in position to attack them at any moment. We could start this war at any second. What more threat do you suggest?
 
  • #27
EL
Science Advisor
550
0
Pengwuino said:
Well our army is in position to attack them at any moment. We could start this war at any second. What more threat do you suggest?

Well, as I said, I don't think "adding the nukes to the threatening list" makes any difference from Iran's viewpoint at all. If US conventional weapons aren't a threat enough, it won't work with the nukes either. All the "nuke-threat" does is to build up more tension in the ME (and the rest of the world). I'm sure US need not use nukes to unarm Iran, and I have to say I would prefer a regular invasion over the use of (tactical) nukes.
Nuclear war is probably the greatest threat against our planet, and must be stopped whatever it takes. (That includes stopping Iran from getting nukes.) Saying that nuclear weapons is an option against nonnuclear countries is in my eyes definitely the wrong way to go.
Anyway, at this moment I suggest diplomacy, economic sanctions, and support for the rebel groups in Iran!
Only after having tried every other possibility, an invasion should take place.
We definitely need to stop Iran from getting nukes, but we need to make sure we don't give birth to larger problems than those we started with.
 
  • #28
Pengwuino
Gold Member
5,009
16
Well we are definitely supporting the Iranian opposition. Diplomacy isn't going to work all that well when you have a guy saying he's going to whipe a nation off the face of the earth and we really can't seem to get Russia and China on our side. Plus of course the Iranian president keeps threatening us... We're obvoiusly going to try and are trying, but we do need to stop them one way or the other. You can only negotiate for so long and we really can't give the impression that we're willing to talk for years and years, that's going to cause more harm then good.

Seriously, if we can get Iran to stand down but the only way to do it is to simply threaten to use nukes, are you saying you're willing to let a war happen simply because a few words weren't said when they could be?

I personally don't take the alarmist nuclear war view. If we are indeed forced to nuke their facilities because conventional bombing won't work, then it has to be done. One nuke, that's it. Either that and face the consequences of a mad region and a few thousand workers dead.. or iran gets the bomb, Israel is gone, Israel retaliates.

In my opinion, it's last resort, but if it has to happen, if it gets to a point where that actually becomes the only option, then so be it. The alternatives are far worse to think about. I mean you're looking at the total destruction of the middle east because Israel even promised to use whatever they have in their arsenal to preserve their nation... and they have a scary arsenal...

Anyhow, 3am and im sure this thread will be at page 5 with the usuals by the time i wake up, i gotta get going but i appreciate the discussion.
 
Last edited:
  • #29
zhang040321
I also think Bush cannot use nuclear weapens to Iran!!It should be wrong!
 
  • #30
469
0
Um... What the hell do physists know about global politics? Their job is to build nukes, not tell people how to use them.
 
  • #31
53
0
Entropy said:
Um... What the hell do physists know about global politics? Their job is to build nukes, not tell people how to use them.

True enough, but they also say this in scott's first link:

“We are members of the profession that brought nuclear weapons into existence, and we feel strongly that it is our professional duty to contribute our efforts to prevent their misuse,” says Hirsch [Jorge Hirsch, professor of physics at the University of California].
 
  • #32
siddharth
Homework Helper
Gold Member
1,130
0
Entropy said:
Um... What the hell do physists know about global politics? Their job is to build nukes, not tell people how to use them.

What do politicians know about politics :rolleyes: ?

EL said:
I don't think "adding the nukes to the threatening list" makes any difference from Iran's viewpoint at all. If US conventional weapons aren't a threat enough, it won't work with the nukes either

I agree with what EL said above.
 
Last edited:
  • #33
Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,083
18
Entropy said:
Um... What the hell do physists know about global politics? Their job is to build nukes, not tell people how to use them.
They're just exercising their free market clout - I see nothing wrong with that.

"If you want us to continue developing potentially dangerous technology, you'd better give us your assurance that you'll be responsible with it (or else...)"
 
Last edited:
  • #34
Astronuc
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
19,609
2,979
Entropy said:
Um... What the hell do physists know about global politics? Their job is to build nukes, not tell people how to use them.
Physicists are citizens of the same community, and some of them may know a lot more about global politics than most of the elected officials. In fact, given the appalling nature of US foreign policy, one has to wonder if any politician knows anything about global politics, and for that matter, knows much about anything, other then self-enrichment. :grumpy:

I participate in the development and use of nuclear technology. I certainly have a responsibility (and a right) to see that it used responsibly and wisely. I dare say that there are probably few people in Congress who grasp the significance of nuclear technology and energy in general. The energy policy in the US is pathetic and generally irresponsible.
 
Last edited:
  • #35
339
1
Entropy said:
Um... What the hell do physists know about global politics? Their job is to build nukes, not tell people how to use them.
It's pretty simple: They have to tell the milltary how to use the bombs without killing our guys.
And ofcource they were the guys who invented them so they do have say about what to do with nuclear weapons
 
  • #36
469
0
What do politicians know about politics ?

Good point. :rofl:

They're just exercising their free market clout - I see nothing wrong with that.

I'm not saying they don't have a right to their own opinions. Just wondering why it would be given special treatment if they dealing outside their area of expertise.

They have to tell the milltary how to use the bombs without killing our guys.

Well its too late for that now that the military already knows how to use them! :wink:
 
  • #37
Astronuc
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
19,609
2,979
Prominent U.S. Physicists Send Letter to President Bush
I wish I had thought of this response earlier -

"Why bother, he probably can't read it" :rofl:
 
  • #38
57
0
EL said:
I think a simple statement like "We won't use nukes against a nonnuclear country" could calm things down significantly.

This might be old, but thats stupid. Using nukes on a non-nuclear country is safer but not cowardly.
1) We aren't going to get in trouble, atleast into a war with acountry that could invade us. We would just tick off the UN.
2) Nukes shouldn't be used on civilizans as undoubtedly stated before.
 
  • #39
turbo
Gold Member
3,147
50
Astronuc said:
I wish I had thought of this response earlier -

"Why bother, he probably can't read it" :rofl:
He has demonstrated ad nauseum that he cannot even pronounce the word "nuclear", and apparently his staff either does not care, or they think that it helps him appeal to the demographic that is dumb enough to support him. Nukular?...duh! Honey, did you leave the pork rinds in the El Camino?
 

Related Threads on Prominent U.S. Physicists Send Letter to President Bush

Replies
23
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • Last Post
4
Replies
87
Views
6K
Z
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
2K
S
  • Last Post
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
47
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
D
Replies
6
Views
3K
Top