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.

 

NEWS: IAEA Refuses to Condemn Israel Over Nukes

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 11:04 PM
link   
The International Atomic Energy Agency refused a request made by several Arab nations to condemn Israel over its suspected possession of nuclear weapons. Israel neither admits nor denies having a nuclear weapons program, though it's thought to possess between 100 and 200 bombs. Israel is not a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty therefore isn't subject to IAEA oversight.
 



www.haaretzdaily.com
VIENNA - An Arab drive to have the United Nations nuclear watchdog condemn Israel over its alleged nuclear arsenal failed on Friday in the face of opposition by the United States and the European Union, diplomats said.

Each year, Arab states push at the annual general conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to condemn Israel over its nuclear arms and demand that it signs up to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) arms control pact.

Israel neither admits nor denies having nuclear weapons. Some experts believe it has 100 to 200 atom bombs.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


I don't see how the IAEA could do anything about this since they never did sign the NPT treaty. Anyway, I don't see Israel's possession of nuclear weapons as any threat to world peace, as they're obviously just for its own defense.




posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 11:14 PM
link   

as posted by djohnsto77
Anyway, I don't see Israel's possession of nuclear weapons as any threat to world peace, as they're obviously just for its own defense.

Need to be weary of saying this, because then you give ammunition to those who wish to support other nations who are seeking nuclear weapon capabilities as being just for their own defense.

Anyhow, what do Arab nations have to fear from Israel having nuclear weapons capabilities, unless of course, some are still planning conflict with Israel in the future?







seekerof



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Need to be weary of saying this, because then you give ammunition to those who wish to support other nations who are seeking nuclear weapon capabilities as being just for their own defense.


Well my real point was they've had them for decades and haven't used them.



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Anyway, I don't see Israel's possession of nuclear weapons as any threat to world peace, as they're obviously just for its own defense.


Also IMO Isreal would not likely sign on to the NPT without a confirmed nuclear-disarmed Iran, for starters. With the Iranians having been secretive about some aspects of their program, there is no way of knowing at the moment if they have some nukes or are farther along in the enrichment process than believed. And also who really knows to what degree Iran's program may have been helped by Russia.

But if Iran withdraws completely from the NPT and ousts the IAEA, then all the more reason Israel is not likely to sign on, IMO. And all the more reason Iran will risk an eventual war with that move, whether with the US or Isreal. Isreal has just stated in an article I saw that "they will do it themselves if they have to," meaning keep Iran from obtaining nukes. I wonder if they are already too late.



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 11:44 PM
link   


I don't see Israel's possession of nuclear weapons as any threat to world peace, as they're obviously just for its own defense.


Thats the same argument used by many to justify the nuclear programs in North Korea and Iran - two countries that are signatories to the NPT, two countries that have proven their word is not to be trusted when it comes to the NPT.

Many do not understand the other mission of the IAEA which is to provide peaceful nuclear knowhow to signatory countries. North Korea and Iran used the international goodwill of other countries to gain weaponization through dual programs. I fail to see the equivalency argument put forth by many applying to Israel.

Israel by its long standing possesion and non-use of its arsenal has proven its reliability even under circumstances where the use may have been likely had it desired to do so.

Israel would not exist today without its arsenal, it is the only reason Israel has not been overun from all sides - anyone claiming different is ignoring many events in the last 57 years.

Both North Korea and Iran IMHO would exist just fine without nuclear weapons - neither is under any pre-existing threat of invasion by its neighbors no matter what they may claim.

It is the insistance upon this course that will bring what they claim is feared.

If the UN fails to take concrete action Israel will be under threat once again of national annihilation - it was said by Irans leader just a few years ago that it would destroy Israel with a nuclear weapon while sustaining itself through a retaliatory attack.

Israel will be boxed in and have no choice but to pre-empt Iran. This deadly course was one charted by Iran, only Iran can avert disaster in the middle east.

With the fanatics firming up their grip on power recently in Iran I fear no change of course is going to happen - the ramifications will be worldwide.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phoenix


I don't see Israel's possession of nuclear weapons as any threat to world peace, as they're obviously just for its own defense.


Thats the same argument used by many to justify the nuclear programs in North Korea and Iran - two countries that are signatories to the NPT, two countries that have proven their word is not to be trusted when it comes to the NPT.

Many do not understand the other mission of the IAEA which is to provide peaceful nuclear knowhow to signatory countries. North Korea and Iran used the international goodwill of other countries to gain weaponization through dual programs. I fail to see the equivalency argument put forth by many applying to Israel.

Israel by its long standing possesion and non-use of its arsenal has proven its reliability even under circumstances where the use may have been likely had it desired to do so.

Israel would not exist today without its arsenal, it is the only reason Israel has not been overun from all sides - anyone claiming different is ignoring many events in the last 57 years.

Both North Korea and Iran IMHO would exist just fine without nuclear weapons - neither is under any pre-existing threat of invasion by its neighbors no matter what they may claim.

It is the insistance upon this course that will bring what they claim is feared.

If the UN fails to take concrete action Israel will be under threat once again of national annihilation - it was said by Irans leader just a few years ago that it would destroy Israel with a nuclear weapon while sustaining itself through a retaliatory attack.

Israel will be boxed in and have no choice but to pre-empt Iran. This deadly course was one charted by Iran, only Iran can avert disaster in the middle east.

With the fanatics firming up their grip on power recently in Iran I fear no change of course is going to happen - the ramifications will be worldwide.





If what you're saying happen, it will be very ugly because the US will nuke Iran and others muslims countries and China and Russia will nuke US and the EU will nuke Russia and China so it will be a chain effect...



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 08:25 PM
link   



If what you're saying happen, it will be very ugly because the US will nuke Iran and others muslims countries and China and Russia will nuke US and the EU will nuke Russia and China so it will be a chain effect...



Yeah - maybe not in that order or combination but you get the point it will be very very ugly for all of us.




top topics



 
7

log in

join