• 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!

Iran's powerful Guard rejects inspection of military sites

i would bet that iran would permit such inspection of their military infrastructure if we and the other negotiating nations open our military facilities to the iranian scientists for inspection

and if we are unwilling to do so, then is iran wrong in doing the same?

There's a vital difference. The U.S. is a nuclear weapons state. Iran, on the other hand, claims not to seek such weapons, even as it has not been transparent with the IAEA in the past. If Iran wants an end to the sanctions regime, it will need to accept an agreement that permits robust verification. If Iran chooses to try to thwart the kind of verification that is needed in such an agreement, it can choose that alternative course, fully cognizant that such a choice has consequences e.g., a continuation of the kind of sanctions that it wishes to have lifted.
 
There's a vital difference. The U.S. is a nuclear weapons state. Iran, on the other hand, claims not to seek such weapons, even as it has not been transparent with the IAEA in the past. If Iran wants an end to the sanctions regime, it will need to accept an agreement that permits robust verification. If Iran chooses to try to thwart the kind of verification that is needed in such an agreement, it can choose that alternative course, fully cognizant that such a choice has consequences e.g., a continuation of the kind of sanctions that it wishes to have lifted.

If verification of nuclear facilities that are designed to ensure such facilities are for peaceful purposes, expand to include the nations defensive infrastructure, I can see this being problematic for Iran, and any other country for that matter.
 
If verification of nuclear facilities that are designed to ensure such facilities are for peaceful purposes, expand to include the nations defensive infrastructure, I can see this being problematic for Iran, and any other country for that matter.

Under a nuclear agreement, the IAEA would not inspect installations at which there are no suspected or ongoing nuclear activities. Assured access would only give the IAEA the capability to respond to suspected or actual nuclear activity wherever it might occur and would reduce the risk that Iran could use its military installations to evade its obligations to refrain from military-related nuclear activities.
 
Under a nuclear agreement, the IAEA would not inspect installations at which there are no suspected or ongoing nuclear activities. Assured access would only give the IAEA the capability to respond to suspected or actual nuclear activity wherever it might occur and would reduce the risk that Iran could use its military installations to evade its obligations to refrain from military-related nuclear activities.

Right, and the legitimacy of "suspected" (subjective as that could be) I can just see as being hugely problematic for Iran, or anybody for that matter. I don't know where this is going to end. I am perplexed by the Khomeini's alleged tough talk back at home that seems counterproductive to the cause, unless as one poster commented (even if sarcastically) it's for domestic audiences.
 
i would bet that iran would permit such inspection of their military infrastructure if we and the other negotiating nations open our military facilities to the iranian scientists for inspection

and if we are unwilling to do so, then is iran wrong in doing the same?
Just a wild guess but perhaps nuclear weapons in the hands of crazed religious fanatics is not such a good thing?
 
Just a wild guess but perhaps nuclear weapons in the hands of crazed religious fanatics is not such a good thing?

i know, right?!

but it's too late, the israelis already have the bomb
 
Under a nuclear agreement, the IAEA would not inspect installations at which there are no suspected or ongoing nuclear activities. Assured access would only give the IAEA the capability to respond to suspected or actual nuclear activity wherever it might occur and would reduce the risk that Iran could use its military installations to evade its obligations to refrain from military-related nuclear activities.

And as soon as Netanyahu, Bolton, or any number of other freaks "suspect" one Iranian facility or another, then the IAEA is ordered over for inspection? No, no country's going to tolerate this, it's far to arbitrary.
 
Back
Top Bottom