Just asking.

There re some countries that shouldnt have atomic bomb so Iran is one of them my own opinion sha

Oga why you carry our assignment come here nah

@Op,a very good question:
(1)Iran as we know it,is an islamic nation that supports,funds and directly arm many islamic terror groups all over the middle east{such as hamas,homus,hezbollah,al nusrah,al quaeda etc..},and indeed the world at large{AQUIM,al-shebaab,islamic brotherhood,houthi islamic militia etc..},infact,iran practically holds power and influence in many regions of the world through a vast network of islamic jihad militias.
Therefore,allowing such a nation to possess nuclear munitions is a terrible disaster in making.
(2)Iran has always held expansionist agenda in the middle east,countries like saudi arabia,isreal,egypt etc..feel threatened by iran's unchecked ambition to become the regional leader of the middle east.iran's primary agenda is to spread sunni islam across the region,which may involve persecution of shia muslims,jews and christians; something which terrifies both the saudis and isreal.
(3)iran and isreal abhor deep hatred for each other,nuclear weapon will escalate the conflict.

@Evran
I hate terrorists, still I do not know whether Hezbollah and Hamas are terrorists.
Do they kill people like Al qaeda, ISIS and Boko haram do around the world or are
they defending their lands against invaders?
Hezbollah is in Lebanon right. Do they strike innocent people around the world other than those who infringe on Lebanon's territory ?
Isn't Hamas defending the encircled people of Palestine who are being pounded by Israeli warplanes and army tanks?

Iran is Shia right? not Sunni.

If Iran supports AL Shaabah that would be too bad. They should not have any atomic bomb then.
We don't want to take a chance!

Weldon @panafrican

EVarn:
@Op,a very good question:
(1)Iran as we know it,is an islamic nation that supports,funds and directly arm many islamic terror groups all over the middle east{such as hamas,homus,hezbollah,al nusrah,al quaeda etc..},and indeed the world at large{AQUIM,al-shebaab,islamic brotherhood,houthi islamic militia etc..},infact,iran practically holds power and influence in many regions of the world through a vast network of islamic jihad militias.
Therefore,allowing such a nation to possess nuclear munitions is a terrible disaster in making.
(2)Iran has always held expansionist agenda in the middle east,countries like saudi arabia,isreal,egypt etc..feel threatened by iran's unchecked ambition to become the regional leader of the middle east.iran's primary agenda is to spread sunni islam across the region,which may involve persecution of shia muslims,jews and christians; something which terrifies both the saudis and isreal.
(3)iran and isreal abhor deep hatred for each other,nuclear weapon will escalate the conflict.

Totally disagree.

1. Yes Iran is an Islamic nation but supporting terror organization is not exclusive to Islamic nations is it? The US supported alqeada during the soviet Invasion and are currently supporting " Syrian rebels" considered as terrorists by the Syrian government. so one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and being a Muslim country has nothing to do with it. Besides, Pakistan is a Muslim country and there are terrorists operating inside its border (Waziristan region)

2. Every great power in the middle east (Iran, Saudi, Turkey, Israel) want have expansionist agenda. That is a characteristic of any great regional power (Iran is Shia by the way not Sunni)

3. There is precedent for that. Pakistan and India hate each other and they both have nuclear weapons. They fought each other but it was conventional (Kargil War). Nation states are always rational and nuclear weapons are for deterrence against genuine existential threats.

Iran signed the NPT Israel did not. Israel is the bigger threat.

@Missy89,i beg to differ;
(1)I never claimed that iran has the monopoly of sponsoring violent islamic movements,what i'm faulting is the motive behind such unholy 'charity',for Iran,it is all about
*becoming the regional hegemon of the middle east at all cost
*reclaiming territories which were lost after the fall of the persian empire,and wiping out the minorities who according to them,'illegaly' occupies land in the middle east.iran still considers the middle east as its personnal domain.
*waging of jihad and spreading of ethnic islam i.e spreading of shia islam throughout the arab league
(2)pardon my mistake,iran is shia.nevertheless,the expansionist ambition of Iran includes driving out 'infidels hordes' and committing ethnic massacres through sponsoring indigenous terrorist groups..an idea which most arabic nations are firmly against.it is wrong to conclude that states like isreal and turkey have expansionist agenda,clearly these nations only seek to establish their statehood and gain international clout

@panafrican,ah....i understand why you are still not convinced that hamas and hezbollah are terrorist cells nurtured by Iran to destabilize sunni and jews who are percieved to be 'unlawfully' occupying territory in the middle east.Nations of the middle east have remained alternating between war and
cold war for over a century now due to territorial disputes and ethnic intolerance which has always been fueled by Iran in its ceaseless quest for power and dominion.
Do you think that hezbollah is protecting lebanon's interests?,of course not,hezbollah is protecting iran's interest in lebanon!.it all boils down to isreal,groups like hamas and hezbollah seek to take back territories that originally belong to them,if this is allowed to happen,millions of jews will be displaced,israel's fragile statehood would be demolished,jews would become refugees in need of special charity.What do you expect isreal to do?,sit back and get beaten down?.
Iran is a big sponsor of Al quaeda.
pardon my mistake,iran is indeed shia

..and why can't Nigeria, and why can't Sudan?

Your argument seems to naively rely on what is fair and just - but reality is far from fair and just.

The question of nuclear weapons is all a bit of paradox - a doomsday weapon and a necessary evil

If no country have nuclear weapons, the chances of major wars will be higher - big countries with big militaries will seek to gain military advantage over others

if all countries have nuclear weapons then the chances of a nuclear disaster is high

If some countries have it and others don't - then those with nuclear weapons will bully the ones without.

In all these three scenarios, it appears that the last one is the most convenient. Countries with nuclear weapons already have it - they can't unlearn the technologies that they've learnt. They can however prevent its proliferation and persuade/force other countries from having the same rights.

Missy89:

Iran signed the NPT Israel did not. Israel is the bigger threat.

Iran signed the NPT Israel did not,--- > does not make Israel a threat to Iran.

Iranian Leaders publicly calling for wiping out Israel -----> makes Iran a threat to Israel.

bookface:

..and why can't Nigeria, and why can't Sudan?

Your argument seems to naively rely on what is fair and just - but reality is far from fair and just.

The question of nuclear weapons is all a bit of paradox - a doomsday weapon and a necessary evil

If no country have nuclear weapons, the chances of major wars will be higher - big countries with big militaries will seek to gain military advantage over others

if all countries have nuclear weapons then the chances of a nuclear disaster is high

If some countries have it and others don't - then those with nuclear weapons will bully the ones without.

In all these three scenarios, it appears that the last one is the most convenient. Countries with nuclear weapons already have it - they can't unlearn the technologies that they've learnt. They can however prevent its proliferation and persuade/force other countries from having the same rights.

Iran signed the NPT Israel did not,--- > does not make Israel a threat to Iran.

Iranian Leaders publicly calling for wiping out Israel -----> makes Iran a threat to Israel.

If Libya had nuclear weapons, the French and the British would have thought 77 times before invading this country and destroying the life of more than 4 million Libyan today.
BTW Who is next on the list of those nuclear powers that prevent other from from having atomic bombs?
If Nigeria or Africa had nuclear weapons the west would think twice before destabilizing Africa.

Israel prime minister Benjamin netanyahu recently said there won't be palestinian state as long as he is the prime minister of israel.that statement also make Israel to be a big threat to the Arab world especially the palestinians.

opey25:
Israel prime minister Benjamin netanyahu recently said there won't be palestinian state as long as he is the prime minister of israel.that statement also make Israel to be a big threat to the Arab world especially the palestinians.

It is hard to understand why in the mind of the Jewish people Human Rights do not apply to Palestinians ! Why do they -the Jews - want the whole world to cheer when their tanks and warplanes are bombing and killing women and children trapped in a tiny place like the west bank? This is really crazy !