It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: PickledOnion
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.
So you deny that Israel uses the threat that if they go down others will be going down with them?
They make heavy use of their Samson option to extract concessions in negotiations with neighbors. The US, UK, France, and everyone else knows that if they let Israel get so much as a black eye, they're going to be nuked.
Pretty much, yes.
Iran hasn't broken it.
Iran is a party to the NPT but was found in non-compliance with its NPT safeguards agreement and the status of its nuclear program remains in dispute. In November 2003 IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei reported that Iran had repeatedly and over an extended period failed to meet its safeguards obligations, including by failing to declare its uranium enrichment program. After about two years of EU3-led diplomatic efforts and Iran temporarily suspending its enrichment program, the IAEA Board of Governors, acting under Article XII.C of the IAEA Statute, found in a rare non-consensus decision with 12 abstentions that these failures constituted non-compliance with the IAEA safeguards agreement. This was reported to the UN Security Council in 2006, after which the Security Council passed a resolution demanding that Iran suspend its enrichment. Instead, Iran resumed its enrichment program.
originally posted by: MaxMech
No. Israel do have a deterrence strategy for "last resort" situations. As every other superpower. Israel did not invent it, just gave it a name. But this is not what you said. No offence, but this is total BS -
Care to provide some examples that show how Israel got concessions in negotiations with neighbors by using the Samson option? Or how the US, UK, France, and everyone else know that if they let Israel get so much as a black eye, they're going to be nuked?
By this logic, you should not have a problem with Israel.
NPT entered into force in 1970.
The Israeli nuclear research center was built in the 50's. In the 60's they were telling to the world it's a textile factory.
Israel's last resort doesn't just involve nukes aimed at their enemies, but also their allies. In their mind, that gives their allies a reason to stick close to them.
Have you looked at the amount of foreign aid they get?
Or the leeway they get with Palestine?
Their claim was that the enrichment was for nuclear energy, something expressly allowed and encouraged under the NPT. Given the fact that they didn't build a bomb, that they have declared how much material they have, and that every intelligence agency on the planet has said they aren't going for a bomb I don't see any wrongdoing here. Making reactor quality fuel requires first enriching it to weapons levels, and then reducing the purity.
Now, if you could prove Iran worked with NK for their bomb (something that has been speculated) you might have a case here.
originally posted by: Aazadan
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.
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.
originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: Masterjaden
So you have information that the Israeli intelligence service, that very much wants to prove Iran is seeking nuclear weapons doesn't have?
originally posted by: TownCryer
Israel is not a friend to the US. Israel is a user. How many times have they been caught spying on us? How many times have they shown that they ONLY care about themselves? Israel having nuclear weapons makes as much sense, for that area, as Iran having nuclear weapons. There's no reason that Israel should have such imbalanced strength. It seems to only inspire other countries there to follow suit, (like Iran, hmmm….) If another country threatens Israel, we're there faster than we go to parts of our country in times of need. Ridiculous. Personally, I think if Israel would stop building their settlements in disputed territories, start dealing earnestly with the Palestinians (which means that yes, Israel would have to give up some land), and stop using their completely irrational connections to the US as leverage over the entire Middle East, everyone in that area would be better off. One loud mouthed little country with entitlement issues should not have so much influence over the US. The people who so adamantly support Israel no matter what ought to shut up and move there if they like it so much, instead of screaming their lungs out here out of some misplace sense of devotion.
a reply to: lostbook
originally posted by: coolieno99
a reply to: PickledOnion
if that's the case, just let the expatriated Palestinians return to Palestine (or Israel )
originally posted by: yuppa
You do know one of the rules in Intelligence is to deny that you have something right? So the MOSSAD says they dont have evidence in craft speak it means they dont have anything tangible or that they will admit to having due to not trying to tip off th eperson or country being investigated.