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 Urges Citizens to Conserve Energy (and jet fuel!)

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by nenothtu
 

They haven't even officially confirmed or denied that they have nuclear weaponry. But in any case, no, their not signatory to the NPT, and they should be. And they should be inspected like anyone else. Why people aren't all over them about that is beyond me. I guess they have an important big mouthed, hypocritical ally in that game.


OK, they're NOT signatories. They therefore have no place in this debate, no bearing whatsoever on IRAN'S pursuit of nuclear weapons.




posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
That is to the current regime's opinion. Their movements and words seem to indicate they think that way.

And yes Iraq had WMDs. We put them there.


yeap just because you believe thats what the country leaders think , they must be after nukes,

you must be Psychic

also the emphasis on the Iraq HAD you do recall bombing the crap out of Iraq , think it was 1997 when they failed UN inspections which led to them detstroying all their WMDs



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
OK, they're NOT signatories. They therefore have no place in this debate, no bearing whatsoever on IRAN'S pursuit of nuclear weapons.


when said country is known to spread nuclear weapons tecnoligy and is one of the countries trying to put pressure on Iran for something which hasnt been proven, it has a place in this debate.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by illusive man
 


Yea, because we all know Iraq would listen to the UN... because we all know everyone listens to what the UN says....



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by illusive man
reply to post by Gorman91
 


do you Trust Israel with Nukes? which has been proven to have them



Refresh my memory, which country has had them and has shown a willingness to use them not once but twice? Israel has them but have they used them? You would think that by the way people talk about Israel around here that those blood thirsty Zionist Jews would have dropped at least one by now.

Pakistan [Muslim country] has nukes I don't see them on any supposed Israeli hit list. Now why is that? Why doesn't Pakistan create a big stink at the UN about Israel the way Iran does?

Maybe its becuase they have no personal beef with them?



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Seems they are on the recent sanctions against Iran. Or am I misinterpreting your statement?



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by illusive man

Originally posted by nenothtu
OK, they're NOT signatories. They therefore have no place in this debate, no bearing whatsoever on IRAN'S pursuit of nuclear weapons.


when said country is known to spread nuclear weapons tecnoligy and is one of the countries trying to put pressure on Iran for something which hasnt been proven, it has a place in this debate.



What is your authority for that statement? What gives Israel any bearing at all on a debate concerning the NPT?



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 



So far since I've been here I've read all kinds of threads about this eminent attack on Iran by the US or Israel or both, year after year.


Expect the prediction to be extended to future dates.

Somebody is bound to be right one day.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


What, in your opinion, is Iran's personal beef with Israel, per se? Other than the fact that they see the current hegemony as Zionist, which is rather obviously their term for countries with interventionalist foreign policy, particularly when it comes to the Middle East here lately.

P.S. Did you see my response to the newer statement from the NAM?

[edit on 7/6/2010 by ~Lucidity]



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


That's because it's really just the P5+1, not the entire UN.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Refresh my memory, which country has had them and has shown a willingness to use them not once but twice? Israel has them but have they used them? You would think that by the way people talk about Israel around here that those blood thirsty Zionist Jews would have dropped at least one by now.


well those blood thirsty zionest jews as you put it would be retarded if they used nukes on the countries it regularly does incursions into and attacked, including the gaza territory,

if you call attacking civilian infronstructure restraint and using indiscrimiate weapons on heavily populated areas restraint, how much would it take for them to commit suicde and use nukes (taking into fact the size of the area and the fact nuke would also effect them)



Originally posted by SLAYER69

Pakistan [Muslim country] has nukes I don't see them on any supposed Israeli hit list. Now why is that? Why doesn't Pakistan create a big stink at the UN about Israel the way Iran does?

Maybe its becuase they have no personal beef with them?



i wouldnt trust Pakistan with a cheery bomb let alone Nukes, countries unstable and unlike Iran, has been overrun and previously lost control to a large percentage of its land mass to nutters.

why would Pakistan say anything when like Israel it gets billions in aid for new military toys.

no personal beef, cool how are relations between Israel and pakistan.



[edit on 6-7-2010 by illusive man]

[edit on 6-7-2010 by illusive man]



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


I'm reading it now. Cooking dinner. I'm hungry, I'm here. I'll let you know what I think after reading it thoroughly.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


I see what you're saying. You're right. But to the uninformed, it sure "appears" as if it's the UN, doesn't it? And we know how this is all about appearances.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I'm hungry too. What are we having? lol

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts...which by the way goes to Gor's last comment about the UN too, I think.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
What is your authority for that statement? What gives Israel any bearing at all on a debate concerning the NPT?


might have something to do with the embargo on south africa and Israel which traded in nuclear secrets with it,

but what the hell thats nothing, NPT mean jack all, since its not a signatry it can do as it pleases and has no barring on these things even so its one of the main countries trying to use the NPT at the UN on Iran, but carry on



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by illusive man
might have something to do with the embargo on south africa and Israel which traded in nuclear secrets with it,



You left out the French participation in Israel obtaining nukes.

Vivi la France!



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:56 PM
link   
Pakistan (Muslim country) aint sayin' nuthin' bout Israeli nukes LOLOLOL.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


I have to agree. To Iran, it would seem like the entire world is against them.

This explains why they specifically targeted the P5+1, not just Iran in their recent anger of the sanctions.

This IS dangerous. You caught me blind sited. If Iran thinks the world is against it, all the more reason to have nukes and think the end is near, and it must fight.

Dang that's scary. All the more reason for the Petri Dish strategy.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by illusive man

Originally posted by nenothtu
What is your authority for that statement? What gives Israel any bearing at all on a debate concerning the NPT?


might have something to do with the embargo on south africa and Israel which traded in nuclear secrets with it,


Is South Africa a signatory?



but what the hell thats nothing, NPT mean jack all, since its not a signatry it can do as it pleases and has no barring on these things even so its one of the main countries trying to use the NPT at the UN on Iran, but carry on


Exactly. Treaties are contracts between signatory states. If Israel is NOT a signatory, it can't really be held to a contract it never agreed to, or signed off on. Therefore, Israeli possession or lack thereof of nuclear weapons has NO bearing on the situation with Iran, which IS signatory, and thus bound by the agreement.


[edit on 2010/7/6 by nenothtu]



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
You left out the French participation in Israel obtaining nukes.

Vivi la France!


its the french, what can you say?

didnt they aslo give saddam the gear to make chemical weapons.
countries run by idiots, (yes i hate the french)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join