Here is some interesting reading, that answers questions as to why so much ignorance and false perceptions regarding world events exist, generally, and on this forum. SELECTIVE VISION: IRAN, ISRAEL AND NUCLEAR ARMS To illustrate the general point. Recall the recent and frequent outburst from Netanyahu, regarding Iran's nuclear ambitions. The facts regarding Iran's Nuclear program. There is no evidence whatsoever that Iran is engaging in the pursuit of nuclear weapons. This has been attested to by various US intelligence agencies, the International Atomic Energy Agency, as well as the Russian suppliers of the Nuclear reactor. The media has been stating scenarios as if they were fact, for example the very issue of Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons is clearly shown to be non existent, yet the media consistently states this as fact. (read the link for further info). Of course if Iran WERE pursuing nuclear ambition, it would be quite understandable, being surrounded by nuclear nations, that it may feel vulnerable. The media is utterly silent in this regard. Yet Israels large nuclear stockpile is not questioned nor portrayed as a threat in the ME. Even given the fact that Israel has acted in belligerent and aggressive ways towards its neighbors. Neither is Israel a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which Iran is. When challenged about this inequality, This is of course a refuted falsity. (see Jonathan Steele, 'Lost in translation,' The Guardian, June 14, 2006; http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/ 2006/jun/14/post155) This would be quite funny, if it was not so extremely dangerously stupid. Media analysis is largely silent on this obvious spin, Israels aggressive tactics, and Israels large nuclear stockpile. In conclusion, (full article - http://www.medialens.org/alerts/09/090317_selective_vision_iran.php) What this article illustrates is the danger of dishonest or incompetent media reporting (A.) in swaying public opinion to empower governments in waging war, and (B.) not engaging in their proper role of factual, unbiased reporting to keep governments in check. Essentially what we see is a tool of totalitarianism at play. Comments?
First-hand experience eh? You've seen the actual nukes yourself, or visited the underground silos? Please do elaborate... Regardless, a fair point is made- Israel has been in several recent wars with its neighbours, Iran has not directly engaged in a war with its neighbours since the 80's (minor border clashes and proxy militias excluded). I say Iran is entitled to its nukes (and trade sanctions from those countries that aren't happy with it) if that's what they want; Israel will have to content itself with the possibility Iran might enter into a nuclear war with them and become the newest addition to whatever's left of the jewish state in the aftermath.
That's the official story. That's the official story. They are both probably wrong. Israel probably has nukes, and Iran is probably pursuing them. There is no other reason to invite sanctions besides desiring to enrich uranium. If they wanted to be energy independent, they could just build refineries for their oil.
Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which gives them the right to build civilian nuclear technology. Regardless of the situation, it is illegal to prohibit them from building civilian nuclear power plants and enriching uranium for civilian use. The US, EU, and Israel should not give Iran any reason to purse a nuclear weapons program by ceasing in military and nuclear threats against Iran. Every nation on this planet which pursue programs to defend itself form its enemies. This is human nature. If the US and Israel establish peace with Iran, allow an independent Palestinian state, stop occupations of Arab land and Afghanistan, then Iran will not be threatened by foreign powers and have no reason for nuclear weapons.
It is not illegal to prohibit them from enriching uranium if they are in violation of Article 3 safeguards.
No, the NPT is very clear that signatories that wish to engage in such activities must submit to mandatory safeguards against weapons proliferation, and which Iran has been found in violation of. The onus is on the enricher to demonstrate that the activities are truly for civilian use only: promises from the leadership are not sufficient. So there is no "regardless of the situation:" the situation is exactly that Iran has failed to satisfy the IAEA of its stated intentions and so, under the terms of the treaty, is not entitled to enrich unless and until they come back into compliance. This issue has been referred through the established international legal channels - all of which Iran signed up for - and the result is straightforward: Iran's current activities are illegal. Now there are any number of criticisms to be made of the NPT itself, or its relation to other institutions, or the overall political process it functions in. And that's fine. But the fact remains that the NPT does not provide a legal justification for what Iran is presently doing: quite the opposite.
Who Iran is really afraid of is the USA, not Israel. So if Iran is trying to acquire nukes for deterrence, it is against the states. They're not scared of Israel. They are fanatically trying to destroy and discredit it with any means available to them (and soon they'll have a nuclear bomb at their disposal as part of their arsenal to achieve that goal), but they're not getting a nuke to deter Israel's alleged arsenal. Iran is far away, has 10 times as many people (66million vs 7 million), 80 times more territory (yes, literally, 80 times more territory!), hundreds of millions of Muslim allies with equally genocidal intent, and other things... you think Iran is scared of Israel? Don't make me laugh. So applying this "double standard" argument on Israel in defense of the Iranian nuclear bomb efforts is a sad joke.
Iran is surrounded by nuclear armed nations. Israel is just ONE of these, but Israel has a known, and recent history of invading neighbors. Israel is also aggressive with frequent threats against Iran. If Iran were pursuing nuclear weapons, it would be quite understandable, and justified. Fanatically trying to destroy Israel? Example? Its not about scared, a nuclear strike is an extremely destructive action, with implications for the entire ME (and surrounds) and needs to be avoided at all cost. One of the reasons Iran is purchasing Russian rocket defense systems. Even a Chihuahua, can give you a bad infection if it nips you. Did you even read the OP?
You think US Geo strategy requires reasons for sanctions? Iran is a large, wealthy, stable, highly literate, cohesive nation in the ME. The US will not allow that, thus the sanctions, and all with NO evidence of nefarious nuclear pursuits.
The US didn't invent Iran's problems with the NNPT. If you think we don't like Iran just because they are successful in some respects, that is a paranoid delusion.
IAEA is just as worthless as the UN, it is a tool used by Western nations, such as the US, to put restrictions on their enemies. Furthermore, Mohammad El-Baradei stated that there is no evidence Iran is enriching uranium for military use. This is mere propaganda. Israel is not a signatory of the Nuclear NPT, so why don't these nations pressure Israel. As a matter of fact, the UN just refused to commission a report to into human rights violations and war crimes in Israels invasion of Gaza, even though UN-run schools were bombed and illegal white phosphorous chemical bombs were used.
People.. People..people. Might makes right. Israel has the might. Of course. Might doesn't mean people bow down to you, but it helps.