Personal tools
 
Views

Argument: Iran is more concerned about self-defense than aggression

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

"Analysts: Iran's military poses little threat". USA Today. March 6, 2007 - ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Iran's outdated military presents little current threat to its neighbors, despite the fierce rhetoric from its hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, military analysts said Monday at a security conference here in the Persian Gulf.

Iran has exaggerated its military capabilities, while U.S. and Israeli leaders have engaged in "provocative rhetoric" that overstates the Iranian threat, said Anthony Cordesman of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.

In reality, Iran is more focused on national defense than using military power to boost its influence in the region, he said.

Counter-argument

  1. Argument: A nuclear Iran would be more aggressive in the Middle East
  2. The relative concern for offensive military force versus defensive military may be interesting, but it holds very little reliant information for decision makers. Before Hitler came along, perhaps all of their tanks were meant to be used in a defensive war. Once Hitler came along he could use the tanks for offence or defense. Nuclear weapons are a tool and can be used in defense or offence. The problem in Iran isn't just one or two people who want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. The problem is a country who's leading export is hatred. It is not good for these type of countries to get nuclear weapons.

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.