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.

 

Rome within Iran missile range: Israeli FM

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2005 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Curio
Out of interest, what would your opinion be if Iran were to "not play ball"?


- That is part of the absurdity of all of this.
For some it will never matter what they do, they'll always be imagined to have hidden 'the really secret stuff'.


Sure, they've let some inspectors in to a site today (which, the skeptic in me, says has been nicely cleaned out by now anyway...)


- OK, that is a possibility but this is not about a visit today or any other spot check, what about the cameras and various observation and accounting methods put in place - and which have been in place for a long time now?

IIRC even when the IAEA seals were broken the cameras were kept in place and kept on working.


and I've no doubt they'll keep on with the line that they'll cooperate. But that's my worry - they 'll probably just string the UN along for years to come, giving them the run around, letting them inspect sites on their own terms, doing just enough to make it seem to the world like they are cooperating


- Except that unless they have a means to duplicate the monitored sites and personnel those sites stay under 24/7 365 inspection.

Iran is a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty etc etc and they are nothing like Iraq was in this matter.
They have hidden nothing.


I don't think anybody in the world wants Iran to have nukes.


- I agree, I don't think anyone wants nuclear weapon to spread any further than they have.

However for all of that I do not think Iran is run by insane people; if they do get them they will be in the same deterrence 'game' as anyone else with them.


But it's going to happen unless somebody gets tough or they will just lead us on a wild goose chase until they've got them.


- I don't think so.
I think the more they feel under threat the more likely it is they will attempt to get them.

Who would blame them?


I'm not saying military action is the only answer - I just think the EU/UN needs to show Iran it means business, rather than its usual method of sitting around in the UN offices all day scratching their backside.


- I think Iran is fully aware that Europe wants them to reach agreement.

I am also certain that Iran would feel a lot of pain if sanctions were ever applied to her by Europe and the rest of the western world so I am pretty sure they know 'we mean business' and have the power to make life difficult for them.
I do not agree this is a matter of powerless people sitting around doing nothing.

Given the back-drop I think threats and intimidation are probably the last thing that will help resolve this matter.


There should no messing around - give us totally unlimited access, on our terms, or we take it to the UNSC and get tough. If they've got nothing to hide then they have nothing to worry about, etc, etc.


- I'm sorry but I don't see how the currently freely bandied about comments that they face sanctions and bombing are "messing around".

They (rightfully) have issues about their security and sovereignty, numerous people are telling them, not asking them, to accept a degree of openness few on the other side of the coin would accept if it were them (and certainly not one being forced on Israel over her illegal nuclear arms for instance).

Perhaps if 'we' were a lot less belligerent and a tad more consistant in this matter they would be a lot more forthcoming.
I also think that given the USA's not-too-distant history with Iran it is a great idea they keep out of this and it would be an even better one if they could stop 'stirring the pot'.

Like I said I see this as preferable that we do not end up with a new member of the nuclear 'club' but even so I see absolutely no reason for it to appear as the end of the world at hand if they do end up in possession of nuclear arms either.




posted on Nov, 3 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   

- That is part of the absurdity of all of this.
For some it will never matter what they do, they'll always be imagined to have hidden 'the really secret stuff'.


But don't you think it's a justified concern? They've certainly given us reason for that concern. Some would argue it's absurd to trust them. It's a difficult situation to call either way, IMO.



- OK, that is a possibility but this is not about a visit today or any other spot check, what about the cameras and various observation and accounting methods put in place - and which have been in place for a long time now?


Well that's assuming they're only working on things in front of the cameras - it's not as if they don't know where they can and can't be seen. I don't think it can be completely dismissed as paranoia to suggest they might possibly have things going on behind closed doors.


- Except that unless they have a means to duplicate the monitored sites and personnel those sites stay under 24/7 365 inspection.


Again, it's not beyond reason that they could run duplicate sites. Unless you're trusting them to be 100% transparent on the issue? Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. Who could possibly know for certain, apart from Iran?


Iran is a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty etc etc and they are nothing like Iraq was in this matter.
They have hidden nothing.


As far as you know. Again, it's a matter of trust. If you're willing to take them at face value then fair enough. But other people won't, with (in their opinion) good reason.




- I agree, I don't think anyone wants nuclear weapon to spread any further than they have.

However for all of that I do not think Iran is run by insane people; if they do get them they will be in the same deterrence 'game' as anyone else with them.


You maybe not concerned with the fairly constant talk of wiping Israel off the map, but you don't live in Israel. The leadership of Iran act pretty insane to me! Maybe Iran would only use the nukes as a deterrent - but if they didn't we can't do much about it then. Should we let it get to that point, even if the risk is slim? Israel certainly won't.


- I don't think so.
I think the more they feel under threat the more likely it is they will attempt to get them.

Who would blame them?


True, but it's a catch22. If we don't pressure them they will.....if we do pressure them they will.


- I think Iran is fully aware that Europe wants them to reach agreement.

I am also certain that Iran would feel a lot of pain if sanctions were ever applied to her by Europe and the rest of the western world so I am pretty sure they know 'we mean business' and have the power to make life difficult for them.
I do not agree this is a matter of powerless people sitting around doing nothing.


True, but again, I suspect we won't see 100% cooperation from Iran. It would be great if the UN showed some spine and hit them with sanctions at the first sign of none-cooperation, but I'm sure Iran will do just enough to keep them happy. Also, surely there will be no sanctions as Russia/China would veto them at the UNSC?


- I'm sorry but I don't see how the currently freely bandied about comments that they face sanctions and bombing are "messing around".


And hopefully "talk" is all it will take. I just hope the UN will act if the threats fall on deaf ears.


Like I said I see this as preferable that we do not end up with a new member of the nuclear 'club' but even so I see absolutely no reason for it to appear as the end of the world at hand if they do end up in possession of nuclear arms either.


With all respect, that seems a bit like sticking your head in the sand and hoping for the best. Israel and Iran, both armed with nukes, would be a very dangerous situation indeed. Realistically, Israel's nukes aren't going anywhere, regardless of the moral rights & wrongs of that, so lets make sure Iran don't get any. I'd rather not sit and hope personally, although it is a tricky situation - both action and inaction face risks. There is no easy answer and I don't think either viewpoint is right or wrong.



posted on Nov, 3 2005 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Curio
But don't you think it's a justified concern? They've certainly given us reason for that concern.


- How so?
What is it that Iran is supposed to have done to make people insist that they are secretly developing nuclear weapons?

They are not Iraq.

The (enriched uranium) contamination that was found is now (almost) universally accepted as just that, a tiny piece of contamination.


Well that's assuming they're only working on things in front of the cameras - it's not as if they don't know where they can and can't be seen. I don't think it can be completely dismissed as paranoia to suggest they might possibly have things going on behind closed doors.


- Again I'd say this is simply a matter of tarring Iran with the Iraqi brush.


Again, it's not beyond reason that they could run duplicate sites. Unless you're trusting them to be 100% transparent on the issue? Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. Who could possibly know for certain, apart from Iran?


- I would think it reasonable to presume that the doubled demand for certain highly unusual and rare machines and materials one would have to seek abroad would alert those in the know to that kind of thing.

Even though it wasn't picked up at the time the events of the Iraqi experience was examined and traced back.
I don't think it would be so easy again.


You maybe not concerned with the fairly constant talk of wiping Israel off the map, but you don't live in Israel.


- True.

But I also know there is a difference between the rhetoric of a ceremonial President and the actions of a serious gov (Ministers of which have publicly criticised those remarks).

I also am well aware of Israel's own nuclear weapons stocks.

I know about Iran's existing WMDs and their means to deliver them.

For all the rhetoric and talk of crazed loony religious fanatics who wouldn't care about the consequences there has been no massed Iranian chemical or biological strike at Israel.
Nor do I expect one anytime soon.

Ditto if they acquired nuclear arms.


Maybe Iran would only use the nukes as a deterrent


- Why would anyone seriously expect them not to?


but if they didn't we can't do much about it then.


- You could say that about any existent nuclear power, you could then rightly point out that they have a track record of behaving in accordance with the theory of deterrence - just as Iran has done with her chemical and biological weapons.


Israel certainly won't.


- So are you suggesting that if Iran does get nuclear weapons that it is Israel that will not act in accordance with the principles of deterrence?
Is anyone seriously suggesting Israel would (and would have the right to) attack Iran with nuclear weapons!?
For what anyway - in the mere hope of destroying the secretly stored Iranian weapon(s) or to mount a multi-million murderous assault to destroy the Iranian leadership/capital/nation?!

The idea that either side in this, armed with nuclear weapons, would simply just attack the other is, IMO, quite insane.

.....and God help either of them were they to try it.


If we don't pressure them they will.....if we do pressure them they will.


- I think nuclear weapons are a curse for those with them, IMO reducing the pressure is the way to get results.

It is only the threat of an ever-aggressive (from their point of view) nuclear Israel (combined with a USA prepared to mount the odd invasion in the region when she feels like it) that is providing the impetus for this tension.


surely there will be no sanctions as Russia/China would veto them at the UNSC?


- Maybe but I don't see how even greater instability in the ME is in Russia or China's interests either.


And hopefully "talk" is all it will take.


- Sorry but I don't call the US military right next door (along with the British) and mounting the occasional incursion just "talk".


With all respect, that seems a bit like sticking your head in the sand and hoping for the best. Israel and Iran, both armed with nukes, would be a very dangerous situation indeed.


- Perhaps, but perhaps it would turn out to be the opposite of what people expect.
IMO nuclear deterrence works, the track record is so far that it does.

If people like the Indians and Pakistanis (not a situation wildly different to the ME antagonisms) can wind it down and start talking to each other sensibly now they each have these damned things maybe there is hope after-all.


Realistically, Israel's nukes aren't going anywhere, regardless of the moral rights & wrongs of that


- I don't suppose anyone really expects different; do you really think the Iranians don't know that?


so lets make sure Iran don't get any.


- I'd rather there were less nuclear weapons and less nuclear armed countries but I see no reason to imagine all of Iran and all of the Iranian leadership is suicidally insane.

.....and it is still a matter of record that the USA's intelligence consensus is that Iran is at least 10yrs away from getting a nuclear bomb if they are trying to make one.


[edit on 3-11-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join