Obama himself has made more than several claims that neglect Israeli interests, and hence, the US being in bed with Israel is a baseless claim.
This would only make sense if it was the same Iranian regime that has signed the NPPT.The only point that is of intrinsic value to me is that Iran signed the non-proliferation treaty, so according to its own voice it is against its own possession of nuclear weapons. Any other standard to me is irrelevant.
The current regime is nearly the opposite of the one who signed on the document.
Furthermore, the NPPT does not deny a nation the freedom to produce nuclear energy.
Iran however has violated the NPPT more than a dozens of times already and has over twenty times more centrifuges than allowed.
As the world leaders said, Iran's desire to nuclear power is no longer controversial, the second nuclear facility is the cutting evidence that it is not after mere nuclear energy.
The evidence is already strong enough, that's why the world leaders already act towards the disarmament of Iran from nuclear weapons.If the atomic agency can prove Iran has weapons or is developing them, and it hasn't, then I'll consider the options.
Not all of the nations with nuclear weapons are on the security council, so I do not understand your claim.I believe it's universally bad no matter what nation has them, but that, simultaneously, we cannot always control who develops them. There are also aggravating factors. For example, the Security Council powers have set the standard of only granting nations with nuclear arms the power of the veto. I've always been an advocate of inviting nations like Germany and Japan to have a seat on the council to offset this impression.
When Iran has begun its way towards nukes, Israel was in a very good relationship with it, one of its biggest allies.Israel is, of course, the other factor. As long as Israel has nukes in the basement, Iran will want them too. That's POLISCI 101.
Israel having nuclear weapons or not is by no means different than France or the UK having them, as those nations are democracies that have never threatened to destroy another nation or to use their nuclear weapons.
Irrational regimes, however, such as North Korea and Iran, are certainly not to be allowed such devastating power into their hands.
Israeli nuclear power is rumored around for more than 40 years.It depends on who has them at this point, but I think every power in the Middle East, without exception, is is not suited to have such weapons. That said, Israel has them, and Israel is backed by a world super power, and so other nations will want to balance that.
It is a based fact by now that the Israeli nuclear power, if existent, is by no means harmful to the world's nations.
Same goes for France, the UK, etc.