Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Muslim nations demand Israel open its nuke program to IAEA viewing

page: 1
125
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+112 more 
posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 03:36 PM
link   
I came across this article today. It's ironic that this story came out on the exact same day Netanyahu condemned Iran's nuclear program during his speech at the UN general assembly.

Washington Post


VIENNA — Muslim countries at a 151-nation conference demanded Friday that Israel open its nuclear program to international purview, asserting that its undeclared arsenal is a threat to Mideast peace.


Israel is quick to point the finger at other countries for not following international law, but they seem to think they are excluded from doing so.


Unlike in recent years, however, Arab states did not push for a resolution directly targeting Israel by name after such an attempt was narrowly voted down at last year’s International Atomic Energy Agency general conference.


Voted down? Why would it get voted down? We sure go after NK and Iran, when Israel has arguably caused just as much if not more terror worldwide. I'm not saying NK or Iran should have the bomb. I'm only saying that Israel should not have it unless the are willing to submit to international regulations such as other countries. Am I the only one who sees the irony in all of this?


But even Israel did not oppose that document, abstaining instead of voting against it after failing to have a specific paragraph that effectively singled out the Jewish state without naming it struck from the document.


So instead of opposing or arguing their point, they abstain and dont even acknowledge the request. Not very surprising considering their track record with transparency. And they wonder why people are sick of their bullying while the play the role of the regional victim.


In comments echoed by other Arab states before and after the vote, Syrian nuclear chief Ibrahim Othman said Israel’s refusal to join the nonproliferation treaty and throw open its nuclear facilities to IAEA perusal “is a threat ... to the security and stability of the Middle Eastern states.”


Israel a threat to stability in the Middle East? No way


Okay end sarcasm.

Anyone else getting sick of the hypocrites running Israel? I sure am.




posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Israel is not a signatory to the treaty, why should they follow it?


+28 more 
posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


They should sign it. That is the whole point. If you are unable to get the point, there is no point in trying to reason with you.

Do you not see it as a double standard that they criticize Iran for their nuclear ambitions which follow international law yet they have up to 300 nuclear war heads themselves? They are talking about striking Iran because of this. They are hypocrites, plain and simple.
edit on 24-9-2011 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Until they sign it, you cannot hold them to it. Iran did sign it, thus they should be held to it. How is this difficult to understand?


+16 more 
posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


Would you apply the same logic if Iran withdrew from the treaty and pursued nuclear weapons?

"They withdrew from the treaty, why should they follow it?"


+23 more 
posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
Israel is not a signatory to the treaty, why should they follow it?


So I guess if Iran withdraws from that treaty, they can do whatever they want? Sounds good for Iran does it?

Iran signed the NPT, they can use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. That is what they are doing. If the West and Israel claim they have or are developing nuclear weapons they have to prove it.

Fact is there is NO PROOF !!!
edit on 24-9-2011 by ALF88 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
If Iran is not a signatory, then you cannot hold them to the treaty. If they wish to withdraw, they should do so.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
If Iran is not a signatory, then you cannot hold them to the treaty. If they wish to withdraw, they should do so.


Why would they? They only use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALF88

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
If Iran is not a signatory, then you cannot hold them to the treaty. If they wish to withdraw, they should do so.


Why would they? They only use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
Does anybody actually believe that? Why so much secrecy for peaceful purposes? I don't believe it for one second. If they want to build nukes, just withdraw from the treaty.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Transparency is required for any form of trust to be breached if you wish to have nations developing nuclear programs. Israel loves to break out these documents to verbally attack neighbors, and misconstrew the situation. They need new management. As do many established states around the world. I only see a real issue with Israel because of the connection they keep with the U.S. and the U.N..


+2 more 
posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by ALF88

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
If Iran is not a signatory, then you cannot hold them to the treaty. If they wish to withdraw, they should do so.


Why would they? They only use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
Does anybody actually believe that? Why so much secrecy for peaceful purposes? I don't believe it for one second. If they want to build nukes, just withdraw from the treaty.


The CIA and all of the inspectors that have gone into Iran says they are not developing nukes. They are keeping it secret so Israel won't steal their tech like they did with the US.
edit on 24-9-2011 by buster2010 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


The difference between Israel and Iran, is that Israel isn't rulled by some nutbag who is trying to bring the 12th Imam via mass genocide of jews. Thats why Iran is developing nuclear weapons. not because every other kid on the block has them but because Iran actually intends to use theirs at some point to further their agenda.


+7 more 
posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


Hello! Out of curiosity, could you please link me to an interview or speech in which this is solidly laid out or said?

I just want to get every angle of this situation, gracias!


+12 more 
posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


The difference between Israel and Iran, is that Israel isn't rulled by some nutbag who is trying to bring the 12th Imam via mass genocide of jews.


If you are referring to Amenanutjob you're wrong. He doesn't run Iran. Khamani does. Oh, what about the 120 nut jobs that run Israel?


Thats why Iran is developing nuclear weapons.


Are these the same WMD's that Saddam had?



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


The difference between Israel and Iran, is that Israel isn't rulled by some nutbag who is trying to bring the 12th Imam via mass genocide of jews. Thats why Iran is developing nuclear weapons. not because every other kid on the block has them but because Iran actually intends to use theirs at some point to further their agenda.


Unlike Israel who is making enemies of all it's neighbors so it will appear like it does in the bibles end of times prophecies? Iran hasn't started a war in a couple of hundred years how long has it been since Israel started a war? The only reason Israel hasn't used a nuke yet is because they know if they did then the whole world will come down on them like a plague of locusts.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


It's a shame that you have been had by the propaganda machine. Iran has a large population of Jews who live in total happiness. Israel even offered to pay the Iranian Jews to move to Israel and they refused. If you don't believe me check out this video from a mainstream source.

FYI, Mahmoud never threatened to wipe Jews off the map. Just saying.



There are 25,000+ Jews living in Iran. When Israel backed a plan to pay Iranian Jewish families $60,000 to settle in Israel, Society of Iranian Jews met the announcement with scorn, issuing this statement: "The identity of Iranian Jews is not tradable for any amount of money. Iranian Jews are among the most ancient Iranians. Iran's Jews love their Iranian identity and their culture, so threats and this immature political enticement will not achieve their aim of wiping out the identity of Iranian Jews."





posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by buster2010
Iran hasn't started a war in a couple of hundred years how long has it been since Israel started a war?


I was going to debate that until I did a little research into the Iran/Iraq war. Seems that it was the US backed Iraq regime that attacked Iran.

en.wikipedia.org...

Good call. Now here's a beauty. This is from the mid 80's:



Gaddafi was an enemy then. A few years back he wasn't. Now he is again. The West changes allies(with the exception of Israel) more often than a germaphobe changes underwear.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


Do you not see it as a double standard that they criticize Iran for their nuclear ambitions which follow international law yet they have up to 300 nuclear war heads themselves? They are talking about striking Iran because of this. They are hypocrites, plain and simple.
edit on 24-9-2011 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)


No not a double standard - not even a little bit. Signatories to the UN sponsored IAEA treaty get technical help and expertise for peaceful use of nuclear power, to advance medical treatments, power plants etc.

In return treaty signatories promise to NOT weaponize nuclear technology and to submit to IAEA inspections.

Israel NOT having signed the treaty and submitting to its inspections was actually honest about its path to being a nuclear power.

Iran and North Korea being signatories to the treaty took advantage of the "free" help and then reneged on their promise's by using that knowledge to weaponize their programs.

Lets watch whom we're calling hypocrites.

Israel would have been long ago over run by its oh so friendly and benevolent neighbors had it submitted to an IAEA regimen especially in light of "see nothing - hear nothing, know nothing" IAEA chairmanship by Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei of Egypt who is now openly aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization long espousing the destruction of Israel. ElBaradei is the single most destructive human being in existence IMHO because he alone seems to have been the chief enabler of proliferation, a job he circumvented judiciously in relation to Iran and North Korea.

IMHO Israel having nuclear weapons is not my wish and regrettable but seems a grudging necessity being surrounded by hostile nations, maybe Israel would rather have invested the capitol required for its program in something more befitting its citizens - national survival comes first. However Israel also now also has a history of restraint during open and asymmetric warfare that satisfies me they are have a deterrent nuclear philosophy.

The benevolent neighbors on the other-hand have attacked multiple times and/or espouse the destruction of Israel - when is the last time you've had an Israeli leader unprovoked come out and say they'd like to see "Little Satan" destroyed. Or lets say Mecca of a Capitol of another Arab country.

The OP on this post would be better off asking why neighbors won't leave well enough alone and go about their business. Hypocrisy is using another peoples differences, religion and political systems as the mechanism to blame neglect and poverty of their countrymen on others instead of their failed policies - Late 1930's Germany is a great example of that methodology "blame it on the Jews" - see where that led too and what the end result was.

Yeah hypocrisy abounds......................



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


Would you apply the same logic if Iran withdrew from the treaty and pursued nuclear weapons?

"They withdrew from the treaty, why should they follow it?"


I can answer that!

Yes so long as every scrap of knowledge and all materials gained from being a signatory was immediately given up forthwith.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phoenix

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


Would you apply the same logic if Iran withdrew from the treaty and pursued nuclear weapons?

"They withdrew from the treaty, why should they follow it?"


I can answer that!

Yes so long as every scrap of knowledge and all materials gained from being a signatory was immediately given up forthwith.


Along with all the arms and money that the US has sunk into Israel? I could get behind that.






top topics



 
125
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join