• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Russia lifts ban on missile deliveries to Iran, start oil-for-goods swap

In, say, a country with the intended purpose of wiping Israel off the map?

Some Ariel Sharon

“Even today I volunteer to do the dirty work for Israel, to kill as many Arabs as necessary, to deport them, to expel and burn them, to have everyone hate us, to pull the rug out from underneath the feet of the Diaspora Jews, so that they will be forced to run to us crying. Even if it means blowing up a few synagogues, I don’t care. And I don’t mind if after the job is done you put me in front of a Nuremberg Trial and then jail me for life. Hang me if you want, as a war criminal… What your kind doesn't understand is that the dirty work of Zionism is not finished yet, far from it.”
 
No but I would say as a whole for the past 50 years or so most Western countries have not been looking for a fight for acting aggressive to its direct neighbours.

Whereas Iran is the worlds' largest supporter of terrorism, the creator of Hezbollah, currently engaged in destabilizing Yemen......
 
Simpleχity;1064534398 said:
Because it would not be in Israel's best interests to simply bomb nuclear facilities where a military application is absent.

As it was pointed out above, 19 new ME nuclear power-reactors in six different nations are coming online by 2010. Israel has not complained nor threatened to bomb any of them.

Besides the fact that countries don't always do what's in their best interests. If Iran wanted to keep its facilities secreted from Israel, obviously they wouldn't be telling the IAEA or anybody else.
 
Simpleχity;1064534364 said:
Can you point me to another enrichment facility which is underground in which the IAEA was not informed of and was totally unaware of its existence for three years?

If there's any other underground facilities in Iran or anywhere else for that matter, they must be secret.
 
Simpleχity;1064534598 said:
In any country. Nations simply don't build a uranium enrichment facility underground and fail to inform the IAEA for three years if everything is aboveboard.

To posit otherwise is absurd.

Actually, Iran doesn't trust Israel. And people here are still spouting that mischaracterized bull**** that Iran wants to "wipe Israel off the map" for crying out loud.
 
Israel is led by a man whom Sarkozy has accused of being an unbearable liar. Israel would bomb the facility, lie and say it was being used for military purposes.

Exactly, and Iran has every reason to believe that would happen.
 
No but I would say as a whole for the past 50 years or so most Western countries have not been looking for a fight for acting aggressive to its direct neighbours.

I don't know if a British diplomat has ever admitted to recent nefarious British activity, but we have folk here all the time that acknowledge the hypocrisy of Washington. But the patronizing Americans will continue to peddle that bull **** that Iran, a fraction of what the US is, in every conceivable way, is the biggest exporter of terrorism. We have to put up with this bull**** right here, on this board.

The director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan – Lt. General William Odom – noted:

Because the United States itself has a long record of supporting terrorists and using terrorist tactics, the slogans of today’s war on terrorism merely makes the United States look hypocritical to the rest of the world.

Odom also said:

By any measure the US has long used terrorism. In ‘78-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against international terrorism – in every version they produced, the lawyers said the US would be in violation.
 
Why not apply the same level of scrutiny and punishment for violations to ALL countries in the Region.
I'd rather not engage in thread hijacking. This thread is about Russia sending S-300 missile systems to Iran and that's what I address in this thread.
 
If there's any other underground facilities in Iran or anywhere else for that matter, they must be secret.
You can't point to another exemplar then. Didn't think so.

I'd like a good P5+5 deal worked out also. I have no idea why you ignore Iran's recent unsavory history with the IAEA.

Secreting undeclared nuclear facilities from the IAEA (for whatever reason) is a NPT violation.
 
Simpleχity;1064537319 said:
I'd rather not engage in thread hijacking. This thread is about Russia sending S-300 missile systems to Iran and that's what I address in this thread.

Russia is a weapons dealer of sufficient size to justify independent scrutiny. Also in light of the mischief Russia has been up to in various other situations it is Russian behavior that is becoming a real and present danger not withstanding the activities of others.
I agree.
 
Simpleχity;1064537324 said:
You can't point to another exemplar then. Didn't think so.

I'd like a good P5+5 deal worked out also. I have no idea why you ignore Iran's recent unsavory history with the IAEA.

Secreting undeclared nuclear facilities from the IAEA (for whatever reason) is a NPT violation.

This is where I see maybe the most difficult point for an eventual deal. The IAEA must be allowed to roam freely and have access to all documents to be able to report believably. Iran has thusfar not only prevented even modestly honest inspection, it has never been at all hones, as far as we know.
 
This is where I see maybe the most difficult point for an eventual deal. The IAEA must be allowed to roam freely and have access to all documents to be able to report believably. Iran has thusfar not only prevented even modestly honest inspection, it has never been at all hones, as far as we know.

No sovereign country would allow the IAEA to have the capability to roam freely. To think such is ridiculous.
 
No sovereign country would allow the IAEA to have the capability to roam freely. To think such is ridiculous.

Why? If they have nothing to hide but can rejoin the international community? Let their people become rich? Why shouldn't they? What exactly do you think they stand to lose? Don't IAEA inspectors inspect in the US?

PS: you might want to read up on what the IAEA does and how it works.
 
Last edited:
Why? If they have nothing to hide but can rejoin the international community? Let their people become rich? Why shouldn't they? What exactly do you think they stand to lose? Don't IAEA inspectors inspect in the US?

PS: you might want to read up on what the IAEA does and how it works.

Would Israel let the IAEA wander freely in that way? In case you don't know, the answer is no.
 
Simpleχity;1064537324 said:
You can't point to another exemplar then. Didn't think so.

I'd like a good P5+5 deal worked out also. I have no idea why you ignore Iran's recent unsavory history with the IAEA.

Secreting undeclared nuclear facilities from the IAEA (for whatever reason) is a NPT violation.

Do you understand what secrets means, hmm? I haven't ignored the fact that Iran hid anything from the IAEA. Do you think the US has never violated a treaty? If you can at least acknowledge my point, it would be good for further debate. Iran doesn't trust Israel, for good reason.
 
This is where I see maybe the most difficult point for an eventual deal. The IAEA must be allowed to roam freely and have access to all documents to be able to report believably. Iran has thusfar not only prevented even modestly honest inspection, it has never been at all hones, as far as we know.

This is impossible. You think Iran can be expected to allow inspections of every military facility? The IAEA will have access to the locations agreed to with the P5+1.
 
Would Israel let the IAEA wander freely in that way? In case you don't know, the answer is no.

- Israel did not sign the contract.
- If the Security Council ordered them to and general and robust sanctions were imposed?
 
- Israel did not sign the contract.
- If the Security Council ordered them to and general and robust sanctions were imposed?

That's right, if that were the case Israel would not do it. It is ridiculous to think otherwise.
 
That's right, if that were the case Israel would not do it. It is ridiculous to think otherwise.

I am not sure I know, what you mean. You do not believe that Israel would act like the US or Germany and let inspectors in?
 
I am not sure I know, what you mean. You do not believe that Israel would act like the US or Germany and let inspectors in?

The issue is not letting inspectors in. The issue is giving inspectors access to EVERYTHING. No sovereign country would do that. It would be stupid to expose yourself in that way. Unless your choice was utter destruction.
 
Simpleχity;1064526832 said:
Hi there MMC. What he's been saying since he rolled into Crimea ... eff off.


Maybe. Iran will have a highly sophisticated missile system to protect its nuclear infrastructure and a weapons daddy on the UNSC to help it out there also.

This isn't about helping Iran or Russia. This is a calculated move by Putin to throw something else in Obama's face. Putin is making a mockery out of Obama. We need a President that has the sack to stand up to Putin. Until then, Putin will prep for WWIII while the US cuts 500 billion from the defense budget cuts.
 
The issue is not letting inspectors in. The issue is giving inspectors access to EVERYTHING. No sovereign country would do that. It would be stupid to expose yourself in that way. Unless your choice was utter destruction.

Why would it be stupid? It was stupid to do the things that made the IAEA inspectors suspicious in the first place and caused the sanctions to be tightened to today's level. That was stupid and has destroyed any sane persons trust in anything the Iranian regime says.
 
This is impossible. You think Iran can be expected to allow inspections of every military facility? The IAEA will have access to the locations agreed to with the P5+1.

:shrug: then the deal is pointless.
 
:shrug: then the deal is pointless.

Because your "point" is the complete overthrow of the Iranian regime. These negotiations are about nuclear proliferation not regime change.
 
Because your "point" is the complete overthrow of the Iranian regime. These negotiations are about nuclear proliferation not regime change.

Oh hey look - A Strawman!
 
Back
Top Bottom