- Joined
- Apr 18, 2013
- Messages
- 94,358
- Reaction score
- 82,748
- Location
- Barsoom
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
If IAEA monitors cannot inspect facilities where they believe enrichment may be occurring, then it makes no sense whatsoever to conclude a nuclear-deal with Iran.No sovereign country would allow the IAEA to have the capability to roam freely. To think such is ridiculous.
They don't ask for access to any facility on a whim. Documents/data will sometimes lead them to a facility. So can chain-of-custody records and the tracking of nuclear-related components from industry. IAEA inspectors also have a wide range of high-tech tools at their disposal. Things like multi-channel-analyzers which can detect "nuclear fingerprints" in soil and swab samples.The issue is not letting inspectors in. The issue is giving inspectors access to EVERYTHING.
Simpleχity;1064538328 said:If IAEA monitors cannot inspect facilities where they believe enrichment may be occurring, then it makes no sense whatsoever to conclude a nuclear-deal with Iran.
Because Israel and Pakistan and India are not parties to the NPT.Hmmm. Why isn't there the same pressure to inspect the Israeli enrichment facility at Dimona I wonder ? Theres a glaring double standard here thats at the root of US problems in the region
Simpleχity;1064538449 said:Because Israel and Pakistan and India are not parties to the NPT.
Iran signed the NPT in 1968. North Korea is the only nation that signed the NPT and then withdrew (2003).
If Iran obtains nuclear weapons, then every Sunni nation in the ME will strive to obtain them also. This perhaps our last opportunity to prevent a thoroughly nuclearized Middle East.Dont get me wrong. I'm not advocating Iran should have such weapons, but while this regional strategic imbalance remains she will keep trying to get them
Simpleχity;1064538563 said:If Iran obtains nuclear weapons, then every Sunni nation in the ME will strive to obtain them also. This perhaps our last opportunity to prevent a thoroughly nuclearized Middle East.
Yes, they do.
Russia has lots of oil, I think.
Aside from tweaking the USA, what's in this for the Russkies?
Do you think the US would dismember its nuclear triad if Cuba complained?Take away their excuse for trying to aquire them in the first place. If the US is that desperately worried about Israeli security (why ?) then guarantee it with its own nuclear umbrella. It worked for Germany for 40 years
Simpleχity;1064540784 said:Do you think the US would dismember its nuclear triad if Cuba complained?
Israel has had them for 50 years. You seem to conveniently forget that Pakistan, a Sunni nuclear-weapons nation, shares a direct border with Iran.Whilst Israel has nukes her neighbours will want to acquire them. Only the US has the influence on Israel to remedy this imbalance. This issue is not going to go away otherwise
Simpleχity;1064540806 said:Israel has had them for 50 years. You seem to conveniently forget that Pakistan, a Sunni nuclear-weapons nation, shares a direct border with Iran.
:shrug: then the deal is pointless.
Simpleχity;1064522854 said:Russia lifts ban on missile deliveries to Iran, start oil-for-goods swap
Russia says an arms embargo of Iran will cease when when a deal is reached with the P5+1. In the event Iran cheats on a deal, the S-300 system would make air and cruise missile strikes much more difficult.
Simpleχity;1064541090 said:Fine. You convince the American nation to use her nuclear weapons if necessary to protect Israel. I don't see that happening.
An US implicit threat (for deterrence purposes) and actually following through on that implicit threat are two vastly different things. I don't see any US president authorizing US nuclear strikes unless the US itself (or NATO nations) are directly attacked with such weapons.If by protect you mean that we would retaliate after a preemptive nuclear strike on Israel, I think that is almost a given already without any formal treaty.
This is patently untrue. The US had nothing to do with Israel's atomic program. The Eisenhower administration only learned of Dimona 5 years after construction had already began. This was a huge CIA intelligence failure under director Allen Dulles. Had the US discovered the hidden purpose of Dimona two years or perhaps even a year earlier, Israel possibly could not have withstood intense US and international pressures to cease and desist.We have sworn to protect Israels right to exist since it's inception and we practically handed them the a-bomb.
But you've always believed that anyway. Little surprise.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?