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.
If you are going to play stickball in Brooklynn you better know the rules. Japan started the war, not the US. Japan also had a nuke program, just like the Nazis, and I guarantee if Japan or Germany got them first things today would be a lot different. We deployed nukes in order to force an end to the war instead of an invasion of the Japanese main islands that would have resulted in many more deaths than the nukes did.
Sanctions to Japan started in 1939 when US denunciated Treaty of Commerce and Navigation. Since this treaty was central to the trade with US, due to the lapse of this treaty, Japan had a tremendous damage to its economy. Amount of import to Japan was limited by US, which made it really hard for Japan to keep fighting with China. Not only gasoline for airplane, but also other resources were cut down; scrap iron, ironstone, pig iron, copper, nickel, white vitriol and etc. Since Japan was heavily relied natural resources on US, this sanction meant depletion of Japan’s fuel supplies, and Japan was driven into a corner.
Originally posted by buster2010
Pretty ignorant about WW2 aren't you? Japan didn't start it America did with the sanctions we placed against Japan.
Originally posted by buster2010
Also nukes were not needed to end the war we could have accepted their offer of surrender that they were giving. America used the bombs to throw a scare into the Russians.
Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
Actually I would bet all my money that they would never use it unless someone attacked them first.
Originally posted by Xcathdra
Incorrect - Iran supports Hamas / Hezzbullah who attack Israel. Secondly if you research Iran going way back you will find they have attacked others.
Originally posted by waveydavey
Seriously who cares anymore? I don't care what Iran has or has not got, they haven't attacked anybody ever.
Originally posted by waveydavey
Seriously who cares anymore? I don't care what Iran has or has not got, they haven't attacked anybody ever. Yet the world police, USA, the ONLY nation to EVER use Nuclear weapons in ANGER has the gall to dictate to anybody who should or should not have these weapons. Please, I'm not anti American I'm anti US Government.
Idiots.
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandy
He also urged Iran “to provide access to the Parchin site,” where the IAEA believes suspicious testing has been carried out.
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandy
I do agree that Iran isn't forced to disclose any military technology to outsiders.
But that's what the IAEA is exactly for. A peaceful organization that studies and analyzes any case (nation, if you prefer) and makes a respected assessment of how a nuclear program is being developed.
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandyI'm not saying Iran is developing nuclear weapons in that facility, or any other. But there is reason to be suspicious when Iran is blocking any attempt to see certain key places.
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandyBut if Iran wants to walk out of this with their head in one piece, I think the most sane and reasonable thing to do is to work something out that suits all people involved, them and the U.N./IAEA.
Parchin is a military installation. Therefore there is no violation of the NPT, if they don't grant access.
Can they ask Iran to allow inspectors to access it? Yes, but they can't expect to be granted access or threaten Iran with war, period!
The West, Israel and the UN have to back off.
Their job is to check if Iran complies with the NPT, nothing more, nothing less.
You are using the plural (places) again. What places are those? So far you have only mentioned Parchin.
Again if I was Iran I wouldn't let my enemies access military installations and expose my military capabilities and secrets either.
(...)especially if you consider the fact that Iran accuses the IAEA to have given secret information about their nuclear scientists to the US and Israel (...)
In that case we don't need the NPT. Either it is the same for everybody or we abolish it.
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandy
But if there is evidence that the possibility of Iran using that facility to pursue nuclear weapons, then Iran should allow access to it. Like I said multiple time, the terms of that access can be negotiated.
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandyWhat matters here is that if you agree with something like the NPT, you must do everything in your power to show your intentions. Iran has secrets, and has the right to governmental privacy. But shouldn't we support transparency? I'm not talking about Iran, but to all countries.
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandyIn my opinion, if you are going to participate in something like the NPT, then you should be aware that the members will make huge amounts of pressure in case there is the smallest amount of suspicion.
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandyIn another thread I was speaking with several members about radiation detection technology, and we have tech that is able to detect radiation from space. I'm sure that the IAEA has measurement tools that allow them to search an area - a bunker, storage units, crates - without having to see what kind of weapons or explosives are being developed.
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandyAs for Israel, although some people paint me as pro-Israel, I don't support their offensive rhetoric. In my opinion, Israel is only in IAEA with no-member or non-signatory status, which takes away their credibility and power to influence IAEA decisions.
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandyYes, but you should be aware that complying with the NPT means no pursuit of nuclear weapons. They have to check facilities in order to know if they are actually complying with the NPT or not. As sad as it may be, we can't trust the word of governments or leaders...
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandyBut they deny access to certain parts of the facilities. One of which was suspected to have high-velocity explosives.
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandyI'm sure you are aware of the recent buzz about the clean-up job.
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandyWhy? I don't understand that logic, with all due respect.
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandyIran doesn't have anything that the U.S. or any allied country doesn't have better or in larger numbers. If you are referring to military power assessment, then the CIA, Mossad and other intelligence agencies have plenty of resources to know exactly that.
Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandy
It's voluntary. Which makes Iran even more responsible to cooperate and facilitate the investigations. If Iran doesn't want IAEA to study them, then they should leave. And leave the US and Western dollars they received at the IAEA ...
There is no evidence
and as Iran sticks to the NPT
B. whereas the report further takes note of the fact that Iran continues its nuclear enrichment and reprocessing activities, which it is obliged to suspend under several Security Council Resolutions; whereas however the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Treaty as such does not rule out enrichment activities by its state parties and whereas Iran’s enrichment program is therefore not in breach with the NPT;
C. whereas in breach of its obligation under the NPT, Iran has clandestinely constructed an enrichment facility at Fordo close to Qom and only notified the IAEA of its existence long after its construction started; and whereas such secretive approach further undermines the trust in Iranian assurances about the purely civil character of its nuclear program;
there is no need for the IAEA to stick their nose in there.
Every country has secrecy to a certain extent.
Why don't they do this with all countries. Saudi Arabia probably got nuclear weapons already, they helped Pakistan to get theirs.
Saudi Arabia is not known to have a nuclear weapons program. From an official and public standpoint, Saudi Arabia has been an opponent of nuclear weapons in the Middle East, having signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and is a member of the coalition of countries demanding a Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone in the Middle East. Studies of nuclear proliferation have not identified Saudi Arabia as a country of concern.
They don't have evidence.
I never thought that you are pro Israel and by the way I am not anti Israel either.
Which facilities?