Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 55

Thread: Iran May Open Military Site to UN Nuclear Watchdog

  1. #31
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:00 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,299

    Re: Iran May Open Military Site to UN Nuclear Watchdog

    Quote Originally Posted by johnny_rebson View Post
    We went through the same crap when Saddam reluctantly let inspectors in.

    These dictators that run these mideast oil countries can't be trusted. We must always be ready to attack.

    Not only that, but wars, threats of wars, percieved enemies, really bad adders, OIL, resources, pipelines, refineries, strategic necessity, etc. are all public relations gambits used by our Military/Industrial/Corporate complex to gin up wars and threats of wars to generate that old capitalist ally, really big profits. Separating the factors generating profit from the facts that would inhibit profits is a truly tricky business and that is where your favorite politician is bought and sold. Not only that but also an opportunity for fossil fuel distribution networks to bring more product into the profitable supply lines. War and threats of war is just "good business" the US of A way. Then the public relations specialists work hard to make the soft headed believe that the threats are real and the bogey man is just outside the back door and he gonna get ya'. Some o' his victims are working hard as debate politics typists and just spewing those chunks. Those public relation mind benders are good, eh?
    Last edited by DaveFagan; 12-28-12 at 02:40 PM.

  2. #32
    Sage
    gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    uk
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,365

    Re: Iran May Open Military Site to UN Nuclear Watchdog

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Do you think that the US should be able to force Iran to ratify the Rome statutes? And, if not, then why should Iran be able to force another country to ratify something? Via nuclear blackmail, nonetheless. You really don't see a problem with breaking agreements regarding nuclear weapons, starting a cold war and blackmailing the world in attempt to force another country to ratify a UN treaty against their will and benefit?

    Who gave Iran the ability to break UN agreements without consequence and made them the boss of everyone? You did. Why?
    I see a problem with Iran breaking her agreements. I also see a problem with Israel Politicking over Iranian issues. I would not go as far as saying Iran can take the 'moral' high ground here, but, Israel has very little room to talk.

    Paul
    RIP THE EUROPEAN FORUM 2016

  3. #33
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,400

    Re: Iran May Open Military Site to UN Nuclear Watchdog

    Quote Originally Posted by gunner View Post
    I see a problem with Iran breaking her agreements. I also see a problem with Israel Politicking over Iranian issues. I would not go as far as saying Iran can take the 'moral' high ground here, but, Israel has very little room to talk.

    Paul
    Israel is not in violation of the NPT. Iran is. End of story.

  4. #34
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,159

    Re: Iran May Open Military Site to UN Nuclear Watchdog

    A ploy. The keep saying they are going to do this and that, to get our hopes up, then they either don't do it or they restrict access. They're using a playbook similar to NKs to stall while they finish building nuclear bombs.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  5. #35
    Sage
    gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    uk
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,365

    Re: Iran May Open Military Site to UN Nuclear Watchdog

    [QUOTE=ecofarm;1061296388]
    Israel is not in violation of the NPT
    .

    Agree. But, what gives a non-signatory to the NPT the right to challenge Iran (the signatory)?

    Iran is. End of story.
    Unfortunately, I doubt this will be the end of the story.

    Paul
    RIP THE EUROPEAN FORUM 2016

  6. #36
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,400

    Re: Iran May Open Military Site to UN Nuclear Watchdog

    Quote Originally Posted by gunner View Post
    Agree. But, what gives a non-signatory to the NPT the right to challenge Iran (the signatory)?
    Really? You don't get it?

    1. Israel is a member of the UN.
    2. Iran is in violation of an agreement it made with the UN.
    3. Israel, as a member state, has the right to object to another member breaking ratified agreements.


    Is that difficult? It's looks simple to me.

  7. #37
    Sage
    Khayembii Communique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,887

    Re: Iran May Open Military Site to UN Nuclear Watchdog

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    You covered <= 20% which accounts for medical research, but evidence of even greater enrichment cannot be justified as civilian use only.
    Well, there are absolutely more uses for HEU than weapons, so it is quite silly and ignorant of you to state otherwise when we know that is not the case. Research reactors can use any percentage of enrichment, and still be used for civilian purposes.

    As for Iran enriching past 20%, this is the only story that I could find stating anything above 20%, which isn't proof of anything, really, if you knew anything about uranium enrichment.

    And I think any attack of Iran would involve airstrikes on nuclear facilities only. I would agree that a general invasion is a bad idea, but airstrikes on nuclear facilities (specifically targeting the issue) is quite workable.
    Then you are crazy as well.
    "I do not claim that every incident in the history of empire can be explained in directly economic terms. Economic interests are filtered through a political process, policies are implemented by a complex state apparatus, and the whole system generates its own momentum."

  8. #38
    Sage
    gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    uk
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,365

    Re: Iran May Open Military Site to UN Nuclear Watchdog

    [QUOTE=ecofarm;1061296423]
    Really? You don't get it?
    I get it just fine.

    1. Israel is a member of the UN.
    But not a signatory of the NPT.

    2. Iran is in violation of an agreement it made with the UN.
    Thus, the criticism should come from their fellow 188 signatories

    3. Israel, as a member state, has the right to object to another member breaking ratified agreements.
    An agreement they have not signed?

    Paul
    RIP THE EUROPEAN FORUM 2016

  9. #39
    Sage
    Sherman123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Northeast US
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,774

    Re: Iran May Open Military Site to UN Nuclear Watchdog

    Quote Originally Posted by Khayembii Communique View Post
    There isn't any evidence.



    20% U-235 is hardly weapons-grade. It's considered the absolute bare minimum of weapons-usable, on the upper end of LEU. It's being used in their research reactor and, in fact, was being supplied by Argentina since 1994. Interestingly, the US were the ones who provided the reactor to Iran and even supplied them with HEU to operate it between 1987 and 1994!

    In 2009 the US proposed that Iran send some LEU to Russia for enrichment to 20% which would be sent to France for manufacture. It was Tehran who rejected this proposal on the grounds of delivery concerns.

    So it's comical that you are complaining about this.



    There are plenty of reasons to enrich uranium up to and past 20% besides producing weapons (naval reactors, neutron reactors, producing medical isotopes, etc.). You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.



    "Some" people "worry[ing]" isn't proof of anything.



    Why don't you cite your source?



    You are absolutely insane if you think attacking Iran is a good idea.
    No there isn't any reason for Iran to be enriching to 20% let alone past 20%, it isn't the upper end of LEU it is the absolute threshold line between LEU and HEU. If you are attempting to argue that Iran has retained and maintained several hundred kilograms of borderline HEU because they plan on some really serious medical testing you are being ludicrous.

    As for weapons design and implosion report:

    Nuclear Weapons Design Efforts

    As the IAEA notes, these indicators raise growing questions as to whether Iran ever halted its de facto nuclear weapons program in 2003, regardless of what it may have done with its formal structure. One key indicator is its concealment of the facility at Parchin, which may have been designed to carry out explosiveóbut not fissileótesting of a nuclear weapons design:
    As stated in the Annex to the Director General's November 2011 report,41 information provided to the Agency by Member States indicates that Iran constructed a large explosives containment vessel in which to conduct hydrodynamic experiments. The information also indicates that this vessel was installed at the Parchin site in 2000. The location at the Parchin site of the vessel was only identified in March 2011.


    Further Moves toward an Iranian Nuclear Weapons Breakout Capability: The New IAEA Report on Iran | Center for Strategic and International Studies
    Iran dismisses claims of military site clean-up - Telegraph
    IAEA due to expose Iranian nuclear weapons design and testing facility | World news | guardian.co.uk

    IAEA due to expose Iranian nuclear weapons design and testing facility | World news | guardian.co.uk

  10. #40
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,400

    Re: Iran May Open Military Site to UN Nuclear Watchdog

    Quote Originally Posted by gunner View Post
    An agreement they have not signed?

    Paul
    Of course! Why is this even a question.

    There are a myriad of agreements in the UN ratified by little, some, many or all the members. Each member is not expected to agree to all of the treaties, and each is party to various according to their own sovereign interests. Given the diversity of treaties, signatories and ratifications, it would be self-defeating to require comments and actions be restricted to personal business. As a member of the UN, one is not only entitled but obliged to address violations of agreements, whether or not one is party to any particular treaty.

    For example, non-ratified states are free to comment on and address formally any state's breaking of the Rome statutes, to include the ICC. Just because the US has not ratified Rome does not mean that the US is excluded from saying to Kenya (if they were to withdraw): "hey, wait a minute, you agreed and then withdrew after violations. This undermines the UN itself and cannot go without repercussions". Kenya will not withdraw from Rome because it would cost development dollars.

    I hope you can see the points of this lengthy explanation with an (actually happening, real life, current) example.
    Last edited by ecofarm; 12-28-12 at 03:33 PM.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •