Iran should be allowed to develop a nuclear arsenal

Apology is accepted and I also appreciate your civility as we discuss this very important topic. You're terminology is a way of sounding more intelligent, but no really making good points. MY REBUTTAL: First of all I want to ask you to not change the topic please. It is a desperate tactic by my opponent to bring in other issues rather than sticking to the issue of nuclear weapons. The quick answer to that question is yes and here is why. My opponent has never stated once how Iran having nuclear weapons would be dangerous to the U.S., rather he keeps his argument vague,. they are "unstable'(they are not unstable, they have a strong central government and there has never been terrorist attacks in the country. They have a well developed army, and a strong national culture, its almost impossible that nuclear weapon could get in the hands of terrorists.) So I am supposed to read your mind when you mention random countries? That makes no sense and the good people reading this will see that. Pakistan have nuclear weapons which has been fine up to now and will remain so; based on mutual destruction. I would rather the whole world didn't have nuclear weapons but that's just not the case; it isn't fair that the U.S., thousands of miles away can tell Pakistan or Iran for that matter what they can't or can not do. Of course, within reason; if it was a terrorist group trying to get it that was at war with the U.S. then we have every right to defend ourselves and do pre emptive strikes. Yet so far, every time another country has managed to shoulder its way into the nuclear club, the other members have always changed tack and decided to live with it. In fact, by reducing imbalances in military power, new nuclear states generally produce more regional and international stability, not less. INEQUALITY AND JUSTICE? Again, you are trying to bring the specific issue of nuclear weapons and stability together with social and political justice. Tell me this, who are we to judge when we arrest our own whistle blowers who expose horrible evil government corruption(private Bradley revealed the U.S. helicopter mowing down civilians in Iraq, with NO punishment) We lock up Snowden for revealing government horrendous government abuse, so please lets stick to the issue. ("do you recall the 2009/2010 riots; did that look like the countenance of societal equilibrium?") Do you consider occupy movement protests all across the U.S. the countenance of societal equilibrium? Please don't accuse me of being anti-Israeli with no proof; you're only goal of this comment is what exactly? If Iran goes nuclear, Israel and Iran will deter each other, as nuclear powers always have. There has never been a full-scale war between two nuclear-armed states. You see, you are taking a small section of my overall argument and using it for your own propaganda. Of course I don't think a country should or shouldn't have nuclear weapons based on past inventions(please. since you are so smart, stop bringing the conversation down to pre school level). I was merely trying to make a point that the Iranian people have existed for thousands of years; they are not about to all of a sudden blow up the middle east or the world. Even if Iran has a weapon of mass destruction (which we know they do not), and even if Iran has long range ICBMs to reach across the Atlantic with (which we know they do not), Iran would still not be a threat to the US because any attack with a weapon of mass destruction would be national suicide. The 1953 coup d'eta is extremely relevant today and there is a reason why I brought it up. The 1951-53 embargo and its implications are particularly relevant today, as Washington and the world contemplate next steps in dealing with Iran's nuclear ambitions and how best to leverage the far-reaching sanctions regime erected to thwart them. The current sanctions have eroded Iran"s oil exports, trade and integration in the international financial system. As international negotiators prepare for a return to talks on the Iranian nuclear program, delving into the history of the 1951-53 embargo would be instructive for all sides. HEZBOLLAH is in the middle east, it seems you don't read and think about the statement sometimes, you're too eager to attack my points. Hezbollah operates largely in the middle east and struggles specifically against Israel and that's their business. They are not in the business of world domination, where you get your information I don't know; they have a legitimate democratically elected government in Palestine. I do appreciate the respect that my opponent has given me and i respect him and his opinions as well. It is important in arguments to understand that neither one of us is 100% right and we can even learn something from each other