Why Iran would develop an A-Bomb

That is a very provocative action , now remember this Israeli action was on October the 12th 2003 . Just 3 months before began the US campaign against Irans supposed Atomic Weapons programme it started with the

Of course no one believed it so the ante had to be upped , and a good prod was needed to make Iran do something .

And of all places Israel decides to station this submarine is right under Iran in the Persian Gulf . Isnt that an internatioanl action desired to increase tensions and make Iran want to develop a nuclear weapon !

Commonsense tells us such weapons are repulsive and are against humanity . But when normal circumstances are not present and the political climate is dangerous and foreboding such weapons become a possession of security . And faced with such a critical situation at hand Iran has everyright legally to develop the A-Bomb .

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What are your feelings regarding the NNPT?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

There is no need for Iran to do all this now. All they have to do is buy a few 100 N missiles from N number of countires. Secure the borders with nuclear arms. And then proceed with creation and research of new Weapon of Mass Catastrophe against USA only.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is a treaty supposedly to restrict the possession of nuclear weapons. However here we have an incident designed to simply provoke Iran into attaining a A-Bomb involuntarily .

Thats hopefully is the idea get Iran to by fear to procure a bomb , therby giving the moral greenlight which justifies an invasion .

 

Maybe if the United States abided by the Non-Proliferation Treaty, less people would be interested in attainting these weapons. Iran just wants to play the game that most other world powers do.

 

I think the fact that Iran has for decades supplied Hamas and Hezbollah weapons used against Israel, plus trained those organizations members to use the weapons, is reason enough for Israel to be putting subs off Iran's coast. Iran, remember, is a country that Israel has never attacked or been the aggressor. Did Israel steal Iranian land perhaps? Who is the aggressor between the two countries?

 

Please remember that the United States has spent billions reducing its own nuclear stockpile, and billions more reducing Russia's stockpile, as well.
The fact that they pulled out of the treaty with Russia in order to create a missle defense system was overly criticized. Why would the U.S. stay in something that they had to pay for anyway? Not to mention the fact that reduction still continued after pulling out of that treaty.

 

According to this US intelligence article it is Syria which funds and arms Hezbollah and Palestinian freedom fighters .

Sure the Hezbollah are shiite with Iranian ties that is only logical .

There is no reason for Israel to do this other than at Americas behest to provoke Iran .

Israel last year thraetened military strikes on Iran .

No European Jews stole Palestinian land to set up their zionist squatter shithole . Iran is a completely innocent and blameless nation .

Israel

 

Appartently you have forgotten about the 50 ton arms shipment Israel caught coming from Iran...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1741862.stm

Here is your own source stating the same thing...

http://www.meib.org/articles/0308_l3.htm

Notice the comment "From Iran with a Hezbollah-trained crew"

Now are you going to deny the credibility of the web-site you used as your own source for this thread?

 

An assertion which has yet to be proven , perhaps you could do a follow up on this story for me . Conveniently you fail to provide these quotes from your source .

And

You are picking flyshit out of pepper here .

My own source was provided by me to validate my claim that Syria and not Iran was Hezbollah and HAMAS's main backer . I have already stated quite clearly .

That is an open admission from me of Iranian ties , however your claim was very clear here .

And I provided a link which clearly states Syria is the political backer , armourer and financier of HAMAS and Hezbollah . Now I would like from you a link which clearly contradicts that assertion with Iran being HAMAS and Hezbollah's political backer , armourer and financier .

And Hezbollah is a genuine resistance movement against Israeli occupation as Lebanon was an object of an illegal Israeli invasion , so in effect any arms shipments from Syria is legal and moral aid against an aggressor .

 

Arms supplies are a weak argument. Everyone and their mother supplies arms to other countries, even their enemies all to make a quick buck. So long as it's not top-of-the-line equipment, head haunchos couldn't care less. We all supply arms to these so-called "evil" countries, whether you realize it or not.

- N

 

Congratulations, you know what NNPT stands for.

So, do you believe it is a noble goal to curb the spread of these weapons?

 

That wasn't the NPT, that was the ABM treaty (Anti-Ballistic Missile). The US is still a signatory to the NPT.

 

Here is why IRAN should develope a BOMB

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/printstory.mpl/nation/3632894

 

USA is still a signatory to ABM afaik? A statement of intention to withdraw was made some time ago, but did it happen?

The USSR cheated with their deployment of 'Galosh' anyway, it didn't comply to the strict rules set out in the ABM, as it used Radars deployed outside the allowed boundaries.

At least the Soviet version worked though.

 

Supplying arms and training the soldiers who lead the attack is no different then attacking with a regular army. It is just easier to conceal. Iran's president has called for the end of Israel, and its nation supplies and trains guerrillas to attack it directly. It is different then say, Russia supplying Vietnam with weapons to combat U.S. troops, and Russia supplying Vietnamese with weapons and training to attack U.S. citizens on American soil. The latter would have led to nuclear war.

Iran has been attacking Israel for years. Israel is not training guerrillas to attack Iranian civilians are they? Who is the aggressor here?

 

Didnt I provide a link which clearly stated that Syria was the armourer and trainer of Hezbollah and the Palestinian Liberation armies ? Yet you still pig headedly carry on insisting that Iran is the culprit !

 

You article only mentions Syria's role in Hezbollah, but does nothing to disprove Iran's role. It would be like writing an article about Cheney's role in the march to war with Iraq, and just because the story is focusing on Cheney, you discount Bush's role entirely.

I gave you a well known and proven capture of Iranian weapons going directly to Palestine on a boat carrying members of Hezbollah, and you still ridiculously deny Iran's involvement.

As for the Hezbollah/ Iran connection, news sources are endless, but here is one.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1908671.stm

I could see a reasonable argument against close ties of Iran and Hamas, but denying Iranian ties to Hezbollah? Are you kidding?

Besides the boat caught supplying the Palestinians, Iran does not do much to hide their opinion of Hamas...

http://www.rferl.org/reports/iran-report/

Again, here is your middle east organization making reference to it..

http://www.meib.org/articles/0404_pal1.htm

So now your own source makes a connection between Hezbollah, Iran and Hamas. Still deny?

 

Brian can't answer my question, but somehow I missed this gem.

Ignoring the fact that this is a blatant ad hominem to quoque fallacy, answer me this: How, exactly, is the United States failing to adhere to its obligations as a signatory to the NNPT?

 

Curb the spread of nuclear weapons ! Its irrelevant , the world is awash with atomic weaponery , the very nations which developed and built atomic arsenals are the ones fueling the arms race . If the Iranain goverment in power was that of the Shah the US would be helping him build a bomb . I believe the goal is to dismantle the global arms industry period .