US Declassifies Document Revealing Israel's Nuclear Program

Fenton · Mar 27, 2015

Hatuey said:
Show the post where I've made "light of this" and defended Obama. I can wait.

Blaming this on Israel, saying it was the right thing to do because it wouldn't make us look like hypocrites to start.

Hatuey · Mar 27, 2015

Apocalypse said:
What are you talking about?

We both know that Israel's opposition is to an Iran nuclear program period. Not just Iran having nuclear weapons.

Not really, there would be hypocrisy if Israel was signed on the NPT and was in violation of it, as it is your argument for hypocrisy is holding no water.

It's like trying to tell people to be law abiding citizens when you're siting in prison. It's hypocritical at best.

Again, no idea what you're talking about.

What I'm talking about is that it's getting clearer and clearer that Israel's constant cries of "they want wants to kill us!" is just a cop-out for doing whatever the hell it wants. It got the US to play cover for its nuclear program for 28 years while it avoided having to answer the same questions it asked everyone else answer.

Hatuey · Mar 27, 2015

Fenton said:
Blaming this on Israel, saying it was the right thing to do because it wouldn't make us look like hypocrites to start.

Lmao, you can't show the ****ing post can you? Good. Show where I defended Obama. I can wait.

Hell, I even argued that a cases SHOULD be brought against Obama over this. How much of a ****ing defence is that? You're desperate.

Kal'Stang · Mar 27, 2015

Hatuey said:
You and I get to voice and pressure our representatives on laws BECAUSE WE LIVE IN THE DAMN COUNTRY AND PAY TAXES. Israel is a non-signatory to the party and has had no role in its draft or for that matter anything even remotely concerned with upholding it for itself.

Do you live in Idaho? Chances are the answer is nope (and if you do then choose another state which you don't live in). Yet you have the right to mail a letter or email one of our Reps and try to pressure them about law in MY state. And you don't pay taxes in MY state. I don't begrudge you that. Why do you begrudge Israel the right to put pressure to enforce a treaty in an area that quite literally hates them and indeed has had one country openly voice its agenda of wanting to wipe Israel off the map? Or do you really think that countries live in a vacuum and that what countries that are around them can't affect them or won't affect them? Treaties can affect countries that are not signatory to it whether you admit that or not. As such they have a right to put pressure on the appropriate things and in the appropriate times and places. You might not like this fact. But it is a fact none the less. And you can ignore it all that you want. Fact remains that it still happens and will continue to happen. And it also happens in far more areas and with far more countries than Israel. IE: Its a common occurrence.

ALiberalModerate · Mar 27, 2015

Fenton said:
Too bad there's this thing called the internet where someone who's so inclined could spend a whole 3 minutes and completely debunk that ridiculous Time article.

For example, one could use the internet to pull up the 2012 Presidential debate between Obama and Romney where Obama pledged that there would be no SOFA or troops left at all in Iraq.

This alone demonstrates how ignorant you are of this issue. The SOFA negotiations occurred to 2 years before the 2012 election. We no longer had any forces in Iraq in 2012.

ALiberalModerate · Mar 27, 2015

cpwill said:
So your problem is that they voted wrong.....

Oh yes, naturally. Because when I look at the other Baathist regime in the area (Syria), gosh, I see just a bastion of peace and stability and no extremists at all....

:shrug: They wanted the same thing from Bush. I guess The Smartest President Ever just wasn't as good a negotiator as his predecessor?

Maliki was willing to go to bat to get that requirement waived if we were willing to leave enough troops to make it worth his while by supporting the coalition that al-Maliki was building between moderate Shia, moderate Sunni, and the Kurds. Then the White House torpedoed the talks by inserting a ceiling of 5,000 troops at the last minute, and the coalition fell apart (the administration also apparently tasked Joe Biden with the role of keeping it together, whether that was deliberate sabotage or not is anyone's guess). Maliki had no choice but to join with the Sadrists if he wanted to retain his position, which meant he could no longer get the requirement waved.

The President wanted us out by the 2012 election, and he made sure we got out. :shrug:

Everyone knew that a shia majority country would vote for a shia government that would be a puppet of Iran, a shia country. So the best case scenario when we went into Iraq back in 2003 is that we would depose a dictator that was fully contained and a mortal enemy of Iran and at some point there would be elections where that country would then elect a government that was a puppet of Iran.

Apocalypse · Mar 27, 2015

Hatuey said:
We both know that Israel's opposition is to an Iran nuclear program period. Not just Iran having nuclear weapons.

We both know (or at least I seriously hope so) that that is because Israel does not want to see a nuclear-armed Iran, not because it doesn't want Iran to use nuclear energy for peaceful means. Israel has no concern regarding Iran's economic decisions.

It's like trying to tell people to be law abiding citizens when you're siting in prison. It's hypocritical at best.

Only that Israel is not in violation of laws and as such it's completely fine for it to tell people from a different country who need to abide by different laws that they should abide by these laws.

What I'm talking about is that it's getting clearer and clearer that Israel's constant cries of "they want wants to kill us!" is just a cop-out for doing whatever the hell it wants. It got the US to play cover for its nuclear program for 28 years while it avoided having to answer the same questions it asked everyone else answer.

That's delusional at best and does not warrant a serious comment.

Hatuey · Mar 27, 2015

Kal'Stang said:
Do you live in Idaho? Chances are the answer is nope (and if you do then choose another state which you don't live in).

Nope, which is why I can't vote in Idaho or for that matter have any ground to demand any serious change in the politics of Idaho. At a federal level? Sure I pay my taxes like everyone else and can discuss an issue concerning constitutional politics. However, any state issue is really their problem at the end of the day.However, we're not talking about voicing a political opinion. We're discussing the US pretending to have some mandate to make other countries deal with UN inspectors and wanting to deal with non-proliferation while turning a blind eye for 3 decades to Israel's proliferation of nuclear weapons. What makes me sick about this entire thing is how many signatories of the NTP are involved in this issue. How could the US have been so f'n stupid for so long.

Hatuey · Mar 27, 2015

Apocalypse said:
We both know (or at least I seriously hope so) that that is because Israel does not want to see a nuclear-armed Iran, not because it doesn't want Iran to use nuclear energy for peaceful means. Israel has no concern regarding Iran's economic decisions.

Good grief, the NPT is about NUCLEAR WEAPONS. Not nuclear as a source of power which is what Iran seems to be after (as corroborate by Mossad's admission to SA on the matter). However, as Israel isn't even a signatory to the agreement, it doesn't have a right to ask others to abide by it, much less attempt to others nuclear power for any reason.

Only that Israel is not in violation of laws and as such it's completely fine for it to tell people from a different country who need to abide by different laws that they should abide by these laws.

The question of hypocrisy isn't about Israel being in violation of laws. It's about Israel trying to get people to abide by something it's neither a signatory to or feels the need to abide by.

That's delusional at best and does not warrant a serious comment.

Delusional? Your entire defence of Israel's program and calls for transparency is based on the other guys supposedly want to destroy you when it's clear your country is less than upfront about its activities.

Kal'Stang · Mar 27, 2015

Hatuey said:
Nope, which is why I can't vote in Idaho or for that matter have any ground to demand any serious change in the politics of Idaho. At a federal level? Sure I pay my taxes like everyone else and can discuss an issue concerning constitutional politics. However, any state issue is really their problem at the end of the day.

And Israel can't vote in NPT situations either.

And you would have plenty of grounds to demand serious change if something that Idaho tried to enact could possibly affect your state. Such as tax provision that could take businesses away from your state and into ours.

Hatuey said:
However, we're not talking about voicing a political opinion. We're discussing the US pretending to have some mandate to make other countries deal with UN inspectors and wanting to deal with non-proliferation while turning a blind eye for 3 decades to Israel's proliferation of nuclear weapons. What makes me sick about this entire thing is how many signatories of the NTP are involved in this issue. How could the US have been so f'n stupid for so long.

In this case the US DOES have a mandate to make sure that the countries that are signatory to the NPT allow UN inspectors come in and inspect their nuclear facilities. It is in fact a part of the treaty. Indeed the very NAME of the treaty (Non-Proliferation Treaty) implies that mandate in and of itself. And the reason that it "turns a blind eye to Israel's proliferation of nuclear weapons" is because Israel is not a signatory to the NPT. The US has no mandate to ensure that countries that are not signatory to the NPT follow it. That's not turning a blind eye. That is in fact not sticking its nose where it doesn't belong. Israel however does have to stick its nose in due to the fact that it is about national/self defense. Iran has repeatedly and publicly stated that it wants to wipe Israel off the map. That is a real national concern for Israel. Just as it would be a real national concern for any other country in the entire world. Just as we have a national concern were it concerns terrorist organizations in other countries that want to target us and our allies. We're out there doing everything that we can to ensure our (and our allies) safety. Just as Israel is ensuring its safety.

Fenton · Mar 27, 2015

SouthernDemocrat said:
This alone demonstrates how ignorant you are of this issue. The SOFA negotiations occurred to 2 years before the 2012 election. We no longer had any forces in Iraq in 2012.

LOL !!

According to the video Obama never had any intention of leaving troops behind...

Poor Obama was hampered by the previous administrations Foreign policy decisions and had no choice but to pull out all US Military assets.

Unreal.

What lengths you people will go to to defend the indefensible is impressive. Slimy but impressive.

Montecresto · Mar 27, 2015

SouthernDemocrat said:
Everyone knew that a shia majority country would vote for a shia government that would be a puppet of Iran, a shia country. So the best case scenario when we went into Iraq back in 2003 is that we would depose a dictator that was fully contained and a mortal enemy of Iran and at some point there would be elections where that country would then elect a government that was a puppet of Iran.

So predictable, why wasn't it?? Wesley Clark told us.

Apocalypse · Mar 27, 2015

Hatuey said:
Good grief, the NPT is about NUCLEAR WEAPONS. Not nuclear as a source of power which is what Iran seems to be after (as corroborate by Mossad's admission to SA on the matter). However, as Israel isn't even a signatory to the agreement, it doesn't have a right to ask others to abide by it, much less attempt to others nuclear power for any reason.

The Mossad said nothing in the SA "leak" (which wasn't a leak at all since the document was public) which could be understood as "Iran is after nuclear energy, not nuclear weapons" so not only are you wrong you are also misleading. To believe that Iran is not after nuclear weapons when it keeps nuclear facilities secret from the international community and was willing to risk sanctions for the purpose of gaining an alternative to the oil it has plenty of is not merely delusional, it's insane.
You were already notified that you don't need to be signed on an agreement to demand that someone who is signed on it will be held to its restrictions.

Delusional? Your entire defence of Israel's program and calls for transparency is based on the other guys supposedly want to destroy you when it's clear your country is less than upfront about its activities.

Play it however you'd like to Iran calls for Israel's destruction and acts against its soldiers, civilians and interests through the use of proxy terror organizations, not the other way around. Your claims that Israel wants to gain something from the Iranian issue other than not having a nuclear Iran, saying that it's only objecting to a nuclear Iran so it can "do whatever it wants" (what that might be I have no damned idea) are simply delusional.

Hatuey · Mar 27, 2015

Kal'Stang said:
And Israel can't vote in NPT situations either. And you would have plenty of grounds to demand serious change if something that Idaho tried to enact could possibly affect your state. Such as tax provision that could take businesses away from your state and into ours.

Yep, it also can't get members of the NPT to provide it with technology for nuclear weapons or for that matter nuclear material. Yet it has.

Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

These five NWS agree not to transfer "nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices" and "not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce" a non-nuclear weapon state (NNWS) to acquire nuclear weapons (Article I). NNWS parties to the NPT agree not to "receive," "manufacture" or "acquire" nuclear weapons or to "seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons" (Article II). NNWS parties also agree to accept safeguards by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to verify that they are not diverting nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices (Article III).

Which would be similar to me not voting in Idaho but somehow getting tax breaks from that state while living in VT.

In this case the US DOES have a mandate to make sure that the countries that are signatory to the NPT allow UN inspectors come in and inspect their nuclear facilities. It is in fact a part of the treaty. Indeed the very NAME of the treaty (Non-Proliferation Treaty) implies that mandate in and of itself. And the reason that it "turns a blind eye to Israel's proliferation of nuclear weapons" is because Israel is not a signatory to the NPT. The US has no mandate to ensure that countries that are not signatory to the NPT follow it. That's not turning a blind eye. That is in fact not sticking its nose where it doesn't belong. Israel however does have to stick its nose in due to the fact that it is about national/self defense. Iran has repeatedly and publicly stated that it wants to wipe Israel off the map. That is a real national concern for Israel. Just as it would be a real national concern for any other country in the entire world. Just as we have a national concern were it concerns terrorist organizations in other countries that want to target us and our allies. We're out there doing everything that we can to ensure our (and our allies) safety. Just as Israel is ensuring its safety.

It's obvious you don't even know that the US has been sharing nuclear technology (in violation of the NPT) for years, and that France shared technology with them (once again in violation of the NPT) and Britain has shared materials with Israel once again in violation of the NPT. For you to stand there and now state that it didn't turn a blind eye to Israel's actions when it was clearly violating the NPT itself is absurdly dishonest. Falling back on the usual nonsense of "they want to destroy Israel" won't help you look less hypocritical.

Fenton · Mar 27, 2015

Hatuey said:
Good grief, the NPT is about NUCLEAR WEAPONS. Not nuclear as a source of power which is what Iran seems to be after (as corroborate by Mossad's admission to SA on the matter). However, as Israel isn't even a signatory to the agreement, it doesn't have a right to ask others to abide by it, much less attempt to others nuclear power for any reason.

Who's delusional ??

Media Lens - NUCLEAR DECEIT - THE TIMES AND IRAN

" On December 14, The Times announced that it had obtained documents about Iran's nuclear programme that revealed "a four-year plan to test a neutron initiator. This is the component of a nuclear weapon that triggers the explosion".

Iran's Nuclear Capabilities Fast Facts - CNN.com

Timeline:
1957 - The United States signs a civil nuclear cooperation agreement with Iran.

1958 - Iran joins the International Atomic Energy Agency.

1967 - The Tehran Nuclear Research Center, which includes a small reactor supplied by the United States, opens.

1968 - Iran signs the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Mid-1970s - With United States' backing, Iran begins developing a nuclear power program.

1979 - Iran's Islamic revolution ends Western involvement in the country's nuclear program.

December 1984 - With the aid of China, Iran opens a nuclear research center in Isfahan.

February 23, 1998 - The United States announces concerns that Iran's nuclear energy program could lead to the development of nuclear weapons.

March 14, 2000 - U.S. President Bill Clinton signs a law that allows sanctions against people and organizations that provide aid to Iran's nuclear program.

February 21, 2003 - IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei visits Iran to survey its nuclear facilities and to encourage Iran to sign a protocol allowing IAEA inspectors greater and faster access to nuclear sites. Iran declines to sign the protocol. ElBaradei says he must accept Iran's statement that its nuclear program is for producing power and not weapons, despite claims of the United States to the contrary.

June 19, 2003 - The IAEA issues a report saying that Iran appeared to be in compliance with the Non-Proliferation Treaty, but that it needed to be more open about its activities.

August 2003 - The IAEA announces that its inspectors in Iran have found traces of highly enriched uranium at the Natanz uranium enrichment plant. Iran claims the amounts are contamination from equipment bought from other countries. Iran agrees to sign a protocol of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty that allows for unannounced visits to their nuclear facilities and signs it on December 18, 2003.

October 2003 - The Foreign Ministers of Britain, France and Germany visit Tehran, and all parties agree upon measures Iran will take to settle all outstanding issues with the IAEA. Under obligation to the IAEA, Iran releases a dossier on its nuclear activities. However, the report does not contain information on where Iran acquired components for centrifuges used to enrich uranium, a fact the IAEA considers important in determining whether the uranium is to be enriched for weapons.

February 2004 - A.Q. Khan, "father" of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program, admits to having provided Iran and other countries with uranium-enrichment equipment.

June 1, 2004 - The IAEA states they have found traces of uranium that exceed the amount used for general energy production. Iran admits that it is importing parts for advanced centrifuges that can be used to enrich uranium, but is using the parts to generate electricity. The IAEA criticizes Iran for repeatedly misstating details and making contradictory statements about its nuclear program.

May 23, 2007 - The IAEA delivers its latest report to the United Nations on Iran's nuclear activities. The report states that not only has Iran failed to end its uranium enrichment program but has in fact expanded activity in that area.

February 18, 2010 - In a statement, the IAEA reports that it believes Iran may be working in secret to develop a nuclear warhead for a missile.

September 2, 2011 - An IAEA report states that Iran continues to defy U.N. sanctions aimed at curbing its nuclear program and cited increasing concerns it may be developing nuclear weapons.

May 25, 2012 - An IAEA report finds that environmental samples taken at the Fordo fuel enrichment plant near the city of Qom have enrichment levels of up to 27%, higher than the previous level of 20%.

Why do Libs like being lied to ??

Hatuey · Mar 27, 2015

Apocalypse said:
The Mossad said nothing in the SA "leak" (which wasn't a leak at all since the document was public)

Leaked cables show Netanyahu

But in a secret report shared with South Africa a few weeks later, Israel’s intelligence agency concluded that Iran was “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons”. The report highlights the gulf between the public claims and rhetoric of top Israeli politicians and the assessments of Israel’s military and intelligence establishment.

We know, we know.

You were already notified that you don't need to be signed on an agreement to demand that someone who is signed on it will be held to its restrictions.

And it's utter nonsense. Of course you do. Specially, if you've been getting other members of the NPT to violate the treaty.

Play it however you'd like to Iran calls for Israel's destruction and acts against its soldiers, civilians and interests through the use of proxy terror organizations, not the other way around. Your claims that Israel wants to gain something from the Iranian issue other than not having a nuclear Iran, saying that it's only objecting to a nuclear Iran so it can "do whatever it wants" (what that might be I have no damned idea) are simply delusional.

Utter nonsense. Of course it is. Israel has been getting other countries to violate the NPT and hiding behind "they want to kill us!" to do so. That's doing whatever it wants on the matter. It's absolutely disgusting.

Kal'Stang · Mar 27, 2015

Hatuey said:
It's obvious you don't even know that the US has been sharing nuclear technology (in violation of the NPT) for years, and that France shared technology with them (once again in violation of the NPT) and Britain has shared materials with Israel once again in violation of the NPT. For you to stand there and now state that it didn't turn a blind eye to Israel's actions when it was clearly violating the NPT itself is absurdly dishonest. Falling back on the usual nonsense of "they want to destroy Israel" won't help you look less hypocritical.

Was it done in violation? Or was that part temporarily suspended by a vote that could have taken place and we know nothing about? Parts of a treaty can be suspended if the responsible parties that are allowed to make changes vote to do so.

Fenton · Mar 27, 2015

Hatuey said:
Leaked cables show Netanyahu

We know, we know.

And it's utter nonsense. Of course you do. Specially, if you've been getting other members of the NPT to violate the treaty.

Utter nonsense. Of course it is. Israel has been getting other countries to violate the NPT and hiding behind "they want to kill us!" to do so. That's doing whatever it wants on the matter. It's absolutely disgusting.

Well they DO have a point...

Gaza Rockets Rain Down on Southern Israel - Breitbart

http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/11/20/250631.html

Iranian General Threatens Surprise Attack on Israel | Washington Free Beacon

Hatuey · Mar 27, 2015

Fenton said:
Who's delusional ?

After being unable to back up your bull**** that I defended Obama, you went and looked for a link to attack me on something else because you only select the parts you want:

April 6, 2013 - EU High Representative Catherine Ashton says that after two days of negotiations between Iran and the six world powers (the United States, France, Britain, Germany, China and Russia), the two sides "remain far apart" on Tehran's controversial nuclear program.

April 9, 2013 - State-run TV reports that Iran opened a uranium-processing facility as well as a uranium mine in the central province of Yazd, to mark "National Nuclear Day."

September 24, 2013 - At a speech at the U.N. General Assembly Iranian President Rouhani says "Nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction have no place in Iran's security and defense doctrine, and contradict our fundamental religious and ethical convictions."

October 16, 2013 - The latest discussions between Iran and the six world powers center on a proposal put forth by Iran to recognize the peaceful nature of its nuclear energy pursuits. The meeting is described as "substantive and forward-looking."

November 24, 2013 - Six world powers and Iran reach an agreement over Iran's nuclear program. The deal calls on Iran to limit its nuclear activities in return for lighter sanctions.

January 12, 2014 - It is announced that Iran will begin eliminating some of its uranium stockpile on January 20.

January 20, 2014 - Iran's nuclear spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi tells state-run news agency IRNA that Iran has started suspending high levels of uranium enrichment.

January 20, 2014 - The European Union announces that it has suspended certain sanctions against Iran for six months. The move is part of a deal in which Iran has agreed to suspend high levels of uranium enrichment.

February 20, 2014 - Following talks in Vienna, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif announce that a deal on the framework for comprehensive negotiations over Tehran's nuclear program has been reached.

January 7, 2015 - The European Union announces that Iran, the United States, Britain, China, Russia, France and Germany will meet in Geneva to discuss Tehran's nuclear program on January 18, 2015.

But hey, why stop there:

Reports: Netanyahu, spy agency at odds over Iran - CNN.com

"Bottom line: Though Iran at this stage is not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons, it is working to close gaps in areas that appear legitimate such as enrichment, reactors, which will produce the time required to produce weapons from the time the instruction is actually given."

Apocalypse · Mar 27, 2015

Hatuey said:
Leaked cables show Netanyahu

We know, we know.

Yeah, and the guardian was misleading, which is why you should have read the article I've linked to but clearly you won't let the facts get in your way.
Mossad was saying in the report to South Africa, which wasn't a "secret" as the guardian misled but a public report, that Iran hasn't reached the stage of developing the actual weapons since intelligence reports show it hasn't begun the activities that are required for that. So far it has only managed to enrich materials and do whatever necessary for it to have the ability to begin such construction. That's also what Netanyahu is saying by the way, so to claim there's a contradiction here is ignorance at best.

And it's utter nonsense. Of course you do. Specially, if you've been getting other members of the NPT to violate the treaty.

The US is not in violation of the treaty for not revealing Israel's nuclear program. That's ridiculous.
And again there is no hypocrisy, your argument holds no water.

Utter nonsense. Of course it is. Israel has been getting other countries to violate the NPT and hiding behind "they want to kill us!" to do so. That's doing whatever it wants on the matter. It's absolutely disgusting.

I strongly agree, it's absolutely disgusting that you're insulting people's intelligence by claiming that Iran is only after peaceful nuclear energy.
And as disgusting as it is it's even more absurd if you actually believe that. :shrug:

Hatuey · Mar 27, 2015

Kal'Stang said:
Was it done in violation? Or was that part temporarily suspended by a vote that could have taken place and we know nothing about? Parts of a treaty can be suspended if the responsible parties that are allowed to make changes vote to do so.

Oh for ****s sake, it's the first ****ing article of the NPT:

NPT Treaty

NPT Treaty; Article I said:
Each nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; and not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce any non-nuclear-weapon State to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or control over such weapons or explosive devices.

Hatuey · Mar 27, 2015

Apocalypse said:
Yeah, and the guardian was misleading, which is why you should have read the article I've linked to but clearly you won't let the facts get in your way.

There was no misleading. You just didn't like what was said so you cited your own little article from Israel on the matter.

Mossad was saying in the report to South Africa, which wasn't a "secret" as the guardian misled but a public report, that Iran hasn't reached the stage of developing the actual weapons since intelligence reports show it hasn't begun the activities that are required for that.

Ummm, what they actually said was that Iran wasn't performing the activities to have a nuclear weapon. That has nothing to do with reaching a stage.

So far it has only managed to enrich materials and do whatever necessary for it to have the ability to begin such construction. That's also what Netanyahu is saying by the way, so to claim there's a contradiction here is ignorance at best.

Ummm considering Netanyahu is claiming that Iran is a year away from the bomb, that's patently absurd.

The US is not in violation of the treaty for not revealing Israel's nuclear program. That's ridiculous.
And again there is no hypocrisy, your argument holds no water.

Good grief, get a ****ing clue the US has been sharing technology with Israel. Britain and France have done the same. They're the ones in violation of the NPT.

I strongly agree, it's absolutely disgusting that you're insulting people's intelligence by claiming that Iran is only after peaceful nuclear energy.
And as disgusting as it is it's even more absurd if you actually believe that. :shrug:

Considering that it's clear that you're opposed any nuclear Iran, because of your paranoia about being killed, I'll take that with a grain of salt. :shrug:

Apocalypse · Mar 27, 2015

Hatuey said:
Oh for ****s sake, it's the first ****ing article of the NPT:

NPT Treaty

Honest question: Do you know what induce means? :lol:

Hatuey · Mar 27, 2015

Apocalypse said:
Honest question: Do you know what induce means? :lol:

Of course I do. Do you know what ANY RECIPIENT means? What about ASSIST?

Apocalypse · Mar 27, 2015

Hatuey said:
There was no misleading. You just didn't like what was said so you cited your own little article from Israel on the matter.

An article that contradicts the claims being made in the guardian's article, yes, and I've also contradicted the claims myself.
That you believe the Mossad would simply state in a public report to South Africa, yes South Africa which Israel basically maintains minimal relations with, that Iran doesn't go after nuclear weapons goes to show how ridiculously ignorant your point of view is and how you are reaching the delusional conclusions that you are reaching here.

Here's another article that shows how ridiculously misleading the guardian and al Jazeera (both being anti-Israeli agenda holding news outlets) were in their claim that the Mossad is contradicting the Israeli government;

Sorry, Al Jazeera: A Leaked Mossad Cable Doesn

Do read it, your avoidance from learning facts is the main reason for your delusional conclusions.

Ummm, what they actually said was that Iran wasn't performing the activities to have a nuclear weapon. That has nothing to do with reaching a stage.

And if it isn't performing the activities necessary to produce a nuclear weapon yet, does it suddenly mean that it's not working towards getting there? Obviously not.

Ummm considering Netanyahu is claiming that Iran is a year away from the bomb, that's patently absurd.

Now that's the dumbest remark so far. You can build the actual nuclear weapon, once you have the required amount of enriched materials, within far less than a year.

Good grief, get a ****ing clue the US has been sharing technology with Israel. Britain and France have done the same. They're the ones in violation of the NPT.

And where is it stated that the US had helped Israel gain nuclear weapons? And you do realize that France had only signed the NPT in 1992, so you can't really violate a treaty you weren't even signed on at the time, right? Because it doesn't look so.

Considering that it's clear that you're opposed any nuclear Iran, because of your paranoia about being killed, I'll take that with a grain of salt.

What does it have to do with me, exactly?
Did I make note of the fact that you promote a nuclear Iran, or did I discuss your (delusional) remarks such as the hilarious remark that Iran is after nuclear energy for "peaceful reasons"?

US Declassifies Document Revealing Israel's Nuclear Program

Rule of Two

Rule of Two

Pragmatist

Pragmatist

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!

Rule of Two

Rule of Two

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!

Rule of Two

Rule of Two

Rule of Two

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!

Rule of Two

Rule of Two

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!

Rule of Two

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!