Muslim nations demand Israel open its nuke program to IAEA viewing

reply to post by backinblack

As B.I.B is still in the convo, I reply generally to this thread (if one can do so). I honestly find it interesting that weapon specifics and politics aside, Change appears to be aligning itself in this region and the world over in a way that we may be bearing witness to for the first time since things were written in ancient scripture. No matter what book you read, no matter what calendar you track, I have to say it really is extraordinary.

Why is a country in a position like Iran wanting to get nuclear power when some countries who have it and some who dont realise what an uneconomic, dangerous and outdated technology it is.

Australia mines the fuel and still doesnt have a nuclear power station, in UK nuke power isnt the future, germany is dropping it, any country who is researching for peaceful means is a lier cos if you had to research a power source, nuclear isnt the future.

If they have a nuclear program then the commercial front is just that a front.

They should invest in reknewables, solar, wind, make some use of their deserts, not nuclear...

FRONT...

reply to post by akaroan13

No matter what book you read, no matter what calendar you track, I have to say it really is extraordinary.

Yes. but is it natural or orchestrated?
That's the big question IMHO.

Originally posted by intrepid

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.

You have two choices:

1. Oppose Gaddafi and he finances terrorism against you (exactly as he did)
2. Be friendly with Gaddafi and the terrorist attacks stop.(exactly as happened)

which would you choose? (Blair took the flak for stopping Gaddafi financed terrorism against British civilians) It's called politics not armchair perfection which does not exist. The reason why the west went against Gaddafi was because he was a brutal dictator and there is no point in getting rid of someone unless those around him want rid of him. That's what happened recently......unless you believe all those happy faces in Libya are actually CIA/NATO agents paid by the west as a an awful lot of people here on ATS do.

Anyway this thread is about Israel's hypocrital stance towards nukes.

Originally posted by Phoenix

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......................

What a false arguments
"If you are surrounded with hostile nations it's necessary to have nuclear weapons". From that perspective Iran has every right to develop them, because hostile nuclear Israel is near them. From that point of view even Cuba and Venezuela should built a nuclear weapon, because they are located close to nuclear America.

And to talk here about the UN: It is Israel that violated plenty of UN rules. Many more that Iraq violated. Iraq violated 17. And yet Iraq was attacked by America. While Ameirca gives Israel a lot of military aid, although Israel violated plenty of UN resolutions .

There is simply no discussion that the West is full of hypocrisy in the Israel case. And by the way I am from a Western nation.

The reality of course is that the best way to get peace in the middle-east is that both Israel as well as Iran drop their nuclear ambitions. As well as there is a need to solve the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

Originally posted by Humanity4Ever
reply to post by ALF88

 

Actually, my post was written directly in response to the questions/false accusations made against past and present Israeli regimes with respect to alleged military aggression. Furthermore, the evidence I provided to substantiate my position on the matter is irrefutable, based on a historical account of World War II and the Intafada.

Typically, you have no recourse other than to resort to ad hominem attacks in the absence of a valid rebuttal. I would expect no less. Ignorance breeds contempt.

edit on 24-9-2011 by Humanity4Ever because: (no reason given)

Those accusations are not false. They are pretty accurate my friend and you still didn't answer a single of my questions. You just danced around the issue throughout this thread. That's what I would call ignorance.

Did we meet before? I don't think so, but maybe you opened several accounts on ATS, which would explain the last paragraph of your reply.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
If you have a nuclear reactor, you can make nuclear bombs and Iran does have a weapons program. [/quote

You are assuming that they develop nuclear weapons! That is no proof!

Originally posted by malcr

which would you choose? (Blair took the flak for stopping Gaddafi financed terrorism against British civilians) It's called politics not armchair perfection which does not exist. The reason why the west went against Gaddafi was because he was a brutal dictator and there is no point in getting rid of someone unless those around him want rid of him. That's what happened recently......unless you believe all those happy faces in Libya are actually CIA/NATO agents paid by the west as a an awful lot of people here on ATS do.

Anyway this thread is about Israel's hypocrital stance towards nukes.

Would you mind posting proof that Gaddafi is a brutal dictator please? Thanks.

Gaddafi locked the Islamist and Al Qaeda fighters in prison to prevent that they go to Iraq to fight against the US and GB. Proven fact.

Gaddafi didn't fund terrorism. Same question I asked another User before to you: Who defines who is a terrorist and who is not?

And please the Lockerbie and La Belle attacks both had CIA involvement. In case of Lockerbie the CIA fabricated the main piece of evidence. That is a proven fact as well.

You didn't do your research!

Why does Israel have ANY right to tell countries if the can or can not have Nuclear weapons?

c'mon Israeli people, serious question, i need an answer to why you think you are superior than others

Originally posted by GLaDOS
Why does Israel have ANY right to tell countries if the can or can not have Nuclear weapons?

Surely "God's Chosen" have absolute veto power over mere Goyem..

Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II

Originally posted by buster2010
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)

So Israel doesn't know how to develop and design nuclear reactors? Because Iran isn't doing anything they weren't taught to do by other countries.

Israel is real big on reversengineering. They do it with our weapons all of the time they buy or have their spies steal the info then build from there.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


so, let me get this straight. israel has 200+ nuclear warheads and they are not signing the treaty.
their choice and right. right? iran has 0 nuclear warheads, but it does, just like israel, have
a nuclear weapons programme. therefore, when iran actually develops a real nuclear warhead
they are going to use it immediately?

has it ever crossed your mind that iran will be just like israel, having nuclear weapons
but NOT using them? ah, i forgot. they're muslim. right? they will use that bomb right
away!

lol. you #ing warmongers of all colours. playing gods. and telling lies. argh!

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.

the big secret the security coun.sel doesnt want the world to know is they all have nuclear powered flying saucers.iran has them too.this is the big problem.nobody wants to admit it.iran has had saucers but just recently added nuke power.look at the red ball on irans flag.it is a red draggon/pheonix.draggons are the old symbol for ufos.notice how its red and round ,ufos in the sky look like that.israel doesnt like to share power.now that iran has them there is a stalemate.game over israel.that why dinner jacket can say they are for peaceful purposes and not be lying.no more controlling irans airspace and weather.no more spying on irans people.this has the security counsel up in arms .iran even admitted they had a small drone version but nobody payed attention.

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by Phoenix

 

There are parts of your post that I agree and disagree with. The part that caught my attention is ...

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.

I have not seen any proof that Iran is weaponizing their program.

What exactly are you looking for? What would constitute proof, in your eyes, and how can it be properly and satisfactorily established (in public) without Iranian cooperation and transparency? What do you think we not doing at the moment that we should be doing to prove/disprove the theory that Iran is developing a deliverable nuclear weapon?

reply to post by Corruption Exposed

Haven't read the whole thread yet but poor Israel is the only one surrounded by nut job Arabs that want to make the people of Israel extinct and push the nation into the sea. If the stupid Arabs keep poking at the sleeping lion, a lot of them will reach 10,000 degrees in a few milliseconds and their countries will be dead zones for years. The Arabs have more to loose than Israel and they should be trying to get along with them.

But, maybe they should go for it. I remember reading somewhere about ways to work in radioactive areas. Might be expensive but we probably have the tech to drill and repair ol fields in that environment.

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

Because they think they are above any laws
they cant even respect the 10 commandments of God

Iran is a signatory and they dont even have the bomb
why is it so difficult for Israel to also sign it ??
because they know they have futur plan to use their nukes on someone ?

USA created frankenstein
Papa should say .. ok little impolite silly boy its time you sign
that you approve the laws

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by Phoenix

 

There are parts of your post that I agree and disagree with. The part that caught my attention is ...

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.

I have not seen any proof that Iran is weaponizing their program. In fact, evidence points towards the opposite. Only the western media propaganda machine supports the idea that Iran is pursuing nukes.

Would you mind posting your proof of Iran pursuing nukes?

I imagine the only proof you would accept is a post destruction soil analysis of the remains of Tel Aviv that determine the materials of the bomb were manufactured in Iran. But, then again that may be called a lie if Israel or US did the analysis.

Originally posted by Soshh

What exactly are you looking for? What would constitute proof, in your eyes, and how can it be properly and satisfactorily established (in public) without Iranian cooperation and transparency? What do you think we not doing at the moment that we should be doing to prove/disprove the theory that Iran is developing a deliverable nuclear weapon?

The CIA says they don't have nuclear weapons. What else do you want?

Originally posted by Bramble Iceshimmer
I imagine the only proof you would accept is a post destruction soil analysis of the remains of Tel Aviv that determine the materials of the bomb were manufactured in Iran. But, then again that may be called a lie if Israel or US did the analysis.

Bl, bla, bla, typical Zionist argument when they run out of the same.

Originally posted by Bramble Iceshimmer
If the stupid Arabs keep poking at the sleeping lion, a lot of them will reach 10,000 degrees in a few milliseconds and their countries will be dead zones for years. The Arabs have more to loose than Israel and they should be trying to get along with them.

So will Israel. How effective do you think it will be for Israel itself, if it nukes the Middle East?

Originally posted by ALF88

Originally posted by Soshh

What exactly are you looking for? What would constitute proof, in your eyes, and how can it be properly and satisfactorily established (in public) without Iranian cooperation and transparency? What do you think we not doing at the moment that we should be doing to prove/disprove the theory that Iran is developing a deliverable nuclear weapon?

The CIA says they don't have nuclear weapons. What else do you want?

I dare say that they don't have them at the moment. That isn't what I said and what I want are his answers to my questions, obviously.

It makes me feel so warm and squidgy inside when the tinfoils cite CIA as a source.