It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iran calls for Israel's nuclear disarmament

page: 4
35
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

What do you Think Iran would do with Nuclear Weapons ? They would surely Use them to Attack Israel . Do you Think Israel would use it's Nuclear Weapons to Attack any Country in their Region that did not Threaten them First with Nuclear Weapons ? No , they would not . There's the Difference .

Case in Point......


www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 2-8-2015 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Your case in point is an ats thread about a book?

It iran wanted to nuke israel they could have done it by now. They are allies with Russia, and news flash they have nukes.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 01:36 PM
link   
OH GOD! I find myself agreeing with everybody on the thread. As in both sides of the argument! How can that be?
I need a nap. A nice refreshing nap. Forget all about nuclear weapons on this glorious Sunday afternoon. That's it.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: PickledOnion


If the U.S was hit by 1 or more nukes most Iranians would be out on the street praising Allah and partying.


How do you think the states streets would look if iran got nuked?

You don't think there would be people partying and prasing god?

I wonder if people read the article, unless I missed it they didn't actually say they want them disarmed but let their nukes be known and subject to the npt.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 02:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: MaxMech
Here you go kid:


So you deny that Israel uses the threat that if they go down others will be going down with them?


originally posted by: MaxMech
2. So what? The fact that they had nukes before the NPT was created, gives them the right to hold them forever?


Pretty much, yes. The NPT calls for the disarmament of current nuclear weapons but gives no guidelines on how to do it. It also faces a very real problem that the fewer nukes in existence, the more valuable the remaining stockpile becomes. Under the NPT it's very unlikely for a nation to give up it's nuclear weapons though Ukraine and South Africa each did so, but they were not in any way bound to doing that.

If you want to disarm a nation, the best way to do so is to not antagonize them, and be their friend. If they see they have no need for nukes they might consider giving them up.


originally posted by: MaxMech
India and Pakistan never did signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
North Korea and Iran did, and broke it.


Iran hasn't broken it. Everyone, including Mossad has concluded Iran isn't seeking nuclear weapons.
edit on 2-8-2015 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-8-2015 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

You obviously didn't read the link and also have shown your ignorance to history...but please go right on ahead parroting the same propaganda and crap you were taught by the history books in school. We all know how accurate they are. I mean those lessons we learned in school are exactly how the world really works right. I am embarrassed for you.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

I have read about the USS liberty before. Israel warned that it would sink any unidentified ships in the area during the six day war(Attacked by 5 nations at once), the US knew about that but didn't listen, it was there own fault it was sunk, I don't blame the Israelis for it.

The Palestinians are Arabs who moved in to Israel after the Romans invaded Israel. The Romans named Israel Palestine or 'Palistina'. The Arab land mass is HUGE but the Palestinians are refused any citizenship into any of the Arab countries, in accordance with Arab League Decree 1547 for 1959, "in order to preserve the Palestinian entity and Palestinian identity." Even in Jordan they can no longer become citizens. (There have been some exceptions: Palestinian Christians in Lebanon in the 1950s, Palestinians born from Egyptian mothers in 2011.)

The Arabs are to blame more than the Jews for this problem. Below is a list of Arab discrimination and abuse against Palestinians since 1948

All Arab countries except Jordan:

Palestinians are not allowed to become citizens of Arab countries, in accordance with Arab League Decree 1547 for 1959, "in order to preserve the Palestinian entity and Palestinian identity."

Palestinians face severe travel restrictions throughout the Arab world. They do not receive passports and their travel documents are only accepted by a few countries.

Palestinians cannot vote or run for office in national elections.

Children born to Palestinians do not get citizenship in their host countries, violating Article 7 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Jordan:

1967: Jordan refused to allow Gazans who came after the Six Day War to become Jordanian citizens. Today some 165,000 Palestinians in Jordan cannot become citizens and get no government services.

1970: 3500-5000 Palestinians killed and 20,000 Palestinians expelled, their camps demolished, in the Black September events.

1988: Jordan revoked citizenship for millions of West Bank Palestinians as they declared "independence." As usual, this move was justified as being for their own good.

2010: Jordan continued to revoke citizenship for thousands more Palestinians

2012: Jordan passed an electoral law that effectively limits the number of Palestinian members of Parliament to less than 10%

2013: Jordan places Palestinian refugees from Syria in special camps that they cannot leave, separate from other refugees, and turns hundreds or thousands back to a dangerous future in Syria.

2014: Palestinians who are citizens are still denied equal rights in the military, and on getting college scholarships and being admitted to some public universities, among other areas.

Egypt:

1948: Placed all Palestine refugees that reached Egypt into camps, forced men to go back to Palestine to fight.

1949: Expelled all Palestinian from Egyptian camps into Gaza. Very few Palestinian Arabs were left in Egypt.

1950: Egypt refused any UNRWA presence on its territory, relegating it to Gaza.

1949 - 1956: Any Palestinians in Egypt were barred from schooling and employment.

2013: Hundreds of Palestinian refugees from Syria placed into jail as they try to enter Egypt

2013-now: Egypt has effectively closed the Rafah border with Gaza, even limiting hospital patients from traveling, effectively imprisoning 1.7 million Gazans.

Lebanon:

1950-58: Would only issue one-way travel documents for Palestinians to leave the country

1962: Palestinians classified as "foreigners":
73 job categories banned for Palestinians until 2010; now there are "only" 50 jobs off limits
They are still banned from working as physicians, journalists, pharmacists or lawyers.
They are not permitted to build new houses or own property, or even to repair their homes
Martial law imposed on refugee camps. Army stops people from entering and exiting.
Limitations on schools for Palestinian "foreigners"
Not allowed to live outside refugee camps, which in turn are not allowed to grow. Population of camps is now triple capacity.
Palestinians not allowed to create organizations.

1975-78: At least 5000 Palestinians killed in Lebanese civil war

1985-88: Thousands killed in "War of the Camps"

1995: Law prohibiting Palestinians from entering country without a visa; and visas weren't issued. Those expelled from Gulf states could not return to Lebanon. (Law repealed in 1999.)

2005: Specific laws prohibiting foreigners who are not "nationals of a recognized state" - Palestinians - from owning property. Those who owned it previously cannot pass it to their children.

2007: 31,000 Palestinians homeless because while Lebanese Army destroyed Nahr el Bared camp

2013: Some 50,000 refugees from Syria treated differently from other Syrian refugees; expensive temporary short-term visas effectively make them criminals

2013: Lebanon starts turning some Palestinian Syrian refugees away at the border

Kuwait:

1991: 400,000 Palestinians were harassed and forced out of the country.

Libya:

1994-5: Expelled 30,000 Palestinians, dismissed many from their jobs and confiscated their houses
Arab countries refused to take in the new refugees. Hundreds were stranded in the desert or the sea. Eventually Libya allowed some to stay but kept threatening to expel them again. In the end about 15,000 were forced to go to Arab countries they had documents for, Gulf countries, and Western nations.

2011: Palestinians were forced to pay a special tax of $1550.

2012: Many Palestinians lost their homes as properties were claimed by others in the wake of the revolution and the collapse of the judicial system.

2014: Banned Palestinians from entering in what is billed as a temporary move, because they say Palestinians are involved in terror groups.


Iraq:

Early 1950s: Expelled striking Palestinian workers, along with Saudi Arabia and Libya..

2005: After Saddam Hussein lost power, Palestinians in Iraq were subjected to abduction, hostage-taking, killing and torture from armed groups. Politicians derided them. About 15,000 were forced to leave Iraq. Thousands were stranded in camps in the desert between Iraq and Syria, where no Arab country would allow them to enter.

Qatar:

1994: Refused to grant Palestinians work visas.

Syria:

1970: Palestinians cannot vote, cannot run for office, cannot own farmland, cannot own more than one property..

2005-2008: Syria did not allow thousands of Palestinian Arab refugees fleeing from Iraq to enter the country.

2012-today: Some 2000 Palestinians killed so far in Syria's war. About 50 have starved to death as forces cut off all food and water to the Yarmouk camp.
edit on 2-8-2015 by PickledOnion because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Israel is the biggest state sponsor of terrorism. I am afraid of them and their apartheid state and racist ideologies. They would kill everyone on the planet before they fell due to their atrocities too. They are vengeful and manipulative. They are pure evil.

"Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under"
-Martin van Creveld

Look up the "Samson Option".

Someone please disarm them. For the love of Jesus I don't want to die like that. Iran is being the hero here to finally call it out.
edit on 8/2/2015 by TheLegend because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

... and so they should!



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyinwaiting

They should disarm.

Just abide by the same rules as other nuclear power.

Though it would be nice if they did disarm as one less country with nukes is a good thing.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 05:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: crazyewok

What do you Think Iran would do with Nuclear Weapons ? They would surely Use them to Attack Israel . Do you Think Israel would use it's Nuclear Weapons to Attack any Country in their Region that did not Threaten them First with Nuclear Weapons ? No , they would not . There's the Difference .

Case in Point......


www.abovetopsecret.com...


But Iran dont have nukes.

But hey lets ignore that!

Lets nuke Iran and kill millions! RAR RAR RAR!!!!!
edit on 2-8-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 05:35 PM
link   
And of course, in comes all the Israel haters to attack the victims. Yup...victims. Everyone agrees to stop fighting...a Muslim country starts it up again. Israel is living in peace and here comes the Muslims from all around to destroy them. Israel takes land in a war started by the Muslims...Israel is bad. You call them the occupation while they were placed there...not by their choice or an invasion.

I have no love for Israel, but I have less for the Muslims. Israel has never used their nuclear option and are like a good, law abiding gun owner compared to the criminal Iran. Of course they can keep their nukes...they haven't done anything wrong to even question it. Iran? Terrorism, "Death to America", "Death to Israel", hostages, their personal war against anything non-Muslim and their providing support and weapons the other criminals. Yeah...Iran shouldn't have a "gun" and Israel needs a "gun".

I don't see a problem here.
edit on 8/2/2015 by WeAreAWAKE because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 06:58 PM
link   
So if Israel declares it's nuke capability it's going to change everything ?. Of course it's not, it won't change a thing as everybody already knows they have them so it's no point really. And the last time I checked Israel wasn't threatning to wipe any Arab country of the face of the map unlike a few others who to keep telling us that they will.

It also appears the Saudi's are extremely upset with the deal and are likley to go Nuclear as well because of it. It's possible they already are equiped !!. Now who would I prefer to have Nukes in the ME ??...The Saudi's ?, The Iranians ? or Israel ?. Without thinking to hard Israel is a clear winner.

It's a good thing that Israel has Nukes. It has kept relative peace and the murderous hordes at bay for so long (from Israel's borders anyway)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 07:12 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

I think it's fair for all the countries what have nuclear arms to dismantle their arsenal.

Why only stop at Iran and potentially Israel?

Who decides which countries are allowed to harbour nuclear arms and which don't?



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 07:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Yep. Israel should sign the treaty and/or disarm. They're probably at least as dangerous as Iran as far as trigger happy goes, and more dangerous considering they actually have nukes. For some reason they always get a pass.



They always get a pass, because Israel owns America, and the Bankers own Israel....They are colloquially referred to as "Zionists".
edit on 2-8-2015 by IlluminatiTechnician because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

" It iran wanted to nuke israel they could have done it by now. They are allies with Russia, and news flash they have nukes. "


Care to Explain WHY Russia would let Iran use THEIR Nuclear Weapons Against Israel ? You cannot , so whats your Point ?



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 07:55 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

" But Iran dont have nukes. "


True , Not Yet . Obama is sure trying to make sure they do in the Not To Distant Future though.....



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 10:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: crazyewok

" But Iran dont have nukes. "


True , Not Yet . Obama is sure trying to make sure they do in the Not To Distant Future though.....


What would you have the US do instead? Sanctions would have guaranteed war and with Irans 3 month breakout time to a nuke you can virtually guarantee that the policy of sanctions ultimately leads to the US or an ally being nuked. Diplomacy is the only long term solution here, as a party to the talks the US was able to extract some concessions. Had the US not been a party to them the other nations that were would have looked out for their interests, not ours.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 10:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: crazyewok

" But Iran dont have nukes. "


True , Not Yet . Obama is sure trying to make sure they do in the Not To Distant Future though.....


What would you have the US do instead? Sanctions would have guaranteed war and with Irans 3 month breakout time to a nuke you can virtually guarantee that the policy of sanctions ultimately leads to the US or an ally being nuked. Diplomacy is the only long term solution here, as a party to the talks the US was able to extract some concessions. Had the US not been a party to them the other nations that were would have looked out for their interests, not ours.


Sanctions would had lead to "conventional war" and not a nuclear war actually. A conventional war Iran was not in any posistion to fight due to sanctions. And I have news mr president the other nations still are looking out for themselves and not ours. Zero sum game apparently. Iran might had gotten off one nuke but that would has been it before it was glassed with the response.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 10:20 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

A conventional war that would have brought in Russia and China as Iran's allies, and regardless of Iran's situation that would have gone nuclear. With this negotiation, if Iran attempts to build a nuclear weapon Russia and China have to join on our side with sanctions and not defending them in a war at a minimum.
edit on 2-8-2015 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)







 
35
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join