Why Iran would develop an A-Bomb

[Brian Foley]

Israel deploys nuclear arms in submarines
Israeli and American officials have admitted collaborating to deploy US-supplied Harpoon cruise missiles armed with nuclear warheads in Israel's fleet of Dolphin-class submarines, giving the Middle East's only nuclear power the ability to strike at any of its Arab neighbours.

That is a very provocative action , now remember this Israeli action was on October the 12th 2003 . Just 3 months before began the US campaign against Irans supposed Atomic Weapons programme it started with the

IAEA Presses Iran to Comply With Nuclear Safeguards
Increasing pressure on Iran to come clean about its nuclear program, the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) Board of Governors issued a statement June 19 expressing “concern” that Tehran has failed to report nuclear “material, facilities, and activities as required by its safeguards obligations.”

Of course no one believed it so the ante had to be upped , and a good prod was needed to make Iran do something .

Israel's seaborne nuclear doctrine is designed to place one submarine in the Persian Gulf, the other in the Mediterranean, with a third on standby. Secret test launches of the cruise missile systems were understood to have been undertaken in May 2000 when Israel carried out tests in the Indian Ocean.

And of all places Israel decides to station this submarine is right under Iran in the Persian Gulf . Isnt that an internatioanl action desired to increase tensions and make Iran want to develop a nuclear weapon !

Commonsense tells us such weapons are repulsive and are against humanity . But when normal circumstances are not present and the political climate is dangerous and foreboding such weapons become a possession of security . And faced with such a critical situation at hand Iran has everyright legally to develop the A-Bomb .

 

[Stokes Pennwalt]

What are your feelings regarding the NNPT?

 

[Anomalous]

There is no need for Iran to do all this now. All they have to do is buy a few 100 N missiles from N number of countires. Secure the borders with nuclear arms. And then proceed with creation and research of new Weapon of Mass Catastrophe against USA only.

 

[Brian Foley]

What are your feelings regarding the NNPT?

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is a treaty supposedly to restrict the possession of nuclear weapons. However here we have an incident designed to simply provoke Iran into attaining a A-Bomb involuntarily .

There is no need for Iran to do all this now. All they have to do is buy a few 100 N missiles from N number of countires. Secure the borders with nuclear arms. And then proceed with creation and research of new Weapon of Mass Catastrophe against USA only.

Thats hopefully is the idea get Iran to by fear to procure a bomb , therby giving the moral greenlight which justifies an invasion .

 

[spidergoat]

Maybe if the United States abided by the Non-Proliferation Treaty, less people would be interested in attainting these weapons. Iran just wants to play the game that most other world powers do.

 

[towards]

Originally posted by Brian Foley:
And of all places Israel decides to station this submarine is right under Iran in the Persian Gulf . Isnt that an internatioanl action desired to increase tensions and make Iran want to develop a nuclear weapon !

I think the fact that Iran has for decades supplied Hamas and Hezbollah weapons used against Israel, plus trained those organizations members to use the weapons, is reason enough for Israel to be putting subs off Iran's coast. Iran, remember, is a country that Israel has never attacked or been the aggressor. Did Israel steal Iranian land perhaps? Who is the aggressor between the two countries?

 

[towards]

Originally posted by spidergoat:
Maybe if the United States abided by the Non-Proliferation Treaty, less people would be interested in attainting these weapons.

Please remember that the United States has spent billions reducing its own nuclear stockpile, and billions more reducing Russia's stockpile, as well.
The fact that they pulled out of the treaty with Russia in order to create a missle defense system was overly criticized. Why would the U.S. stay in something that they had to pay for anyway? Not to mention the fact that reduction still continued after pulling out of that treaty.

 

[Brian Foley]

I think the fact that Iran has for decades supplied Hamas and Hezbollah weapons used against Israel, plus trained those organizations members to use the weapons,

According to this US intelligence article it is Syria which funds and arms Hezbollah and Palestinian freedom fighters .

Has American Pressure Sidelined Hezbollah?
Nevertheless, it appears that the unprecedented level of American pressure on Damascus and Beirut to rein in Hezbollah over the last two months may have produced results - Hezbollah has not launched an attack against Israeli forces since October 22.
In the immediate aftermath of September 11, the Bush administration excluded Hezbollah, along with Syrian-backed Palestinian groups, from its war on terror in order to secure the backing of Arab states.

Sure the Hezbollah are shiite with Iranian ties that is only logical .

is reason enough for Israel to be putting subs off Iran's coast.

There is no reason for Israel to do this other than at Americas behest to provoke Iran .

Iran, remember, is a country that Israel has never attacked or been the aggressor.

Israel last year thraetened military strikes on Iran .

Did Israel steal Iranian land perhaps?

No European Jews stole Palestinian land to set up their zionist squatter shithole . Iran is a completely innocent and blameless nation .

Who is the aggressor between the two countries?

Israel

 

[towards]

Originally posted by Brian Foley:
According to this US intelligence article it is Syria which funds and arms Hezbollah and Palestinian freedom fighters .

Appartently you have forgotten about the 50 ton arms shipment Israel caught coming from Iran...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1741862.stm

Shaul Mofaz, Israeli Chief of Staff, said commandos had boarded the boat 500 kilometres (300 miles) from the Israeli port of Eilat on Thursday.

He said the arms had come from Iran, an allegation which the Iranian government later denied.

Here is your own source stating the same thing...

http://www.meib.org/articles/0308_l3.htm

Hezbollah was involved in three major attempts to smuggle arms to the territories. In January 2001, Israel intercepted a ship carrying a large load of weapons, the San Torini, that had embarked from Lebanon. A year later, Israel intercepted the Karine A, which embarked from Iran with a Hezbollah-trained crew. In May 2003, Israel seized an Egyptian fishing boat, Abu Hassan, attempting to deliver explosives from Lebanon to Gaza. One member of its crew, Hamad Masalem Mussa Abu Amra, was a Hezbollah explosives expert. Other efforts were made to smuggle weapons into the West Bank via Jordan.

Notice the comment "From Iran with a Hezbollah-trained crew"

Now are you going to deny the credibility of the web-site you used as your own source for this thread?

 

[Brian Foley]

Appartently you have forgotten about the 50 ton arms shipment Israel caught coming from Iran...

An assertion which has yet to be proven , perhaps you could do a follow up on this story for me . Conveniently you fail to provide these quotes from your source .

But the Palestinian Authority says it knew nothing about the shipment, which included rockets, mines and anti-tank missiles, and has accused Israel of trying to sabotage the envoy's visit with propaganda.

And

He said the arms had come from Iran, an allegation which the Iranian government later denied.

You are picking flyshit out of pepper here .

Notice the comment "From Iran with a Hezbollah-trained crew"

Now are you going to deny the credibility of the web-site you used as your own source for this thread?

My own source was provided by me to validate my claim that Syria and not Iran was Hezbollah and HAMAS's main backer . I have already stated quite clearly .

Sure the Hezbollah are shiite with Iranian ties that is only logical .

That is an open admission from me of Iranian ties , however your claim was very clear here .

I think the fact that Iran has for decades supplied Hamas and Hezbollah weapons used against Israel, plus trained those organizations members to use the weapons, is reason enough for Israel to be putting subs off Iran's coast.

And I provided a link which clearly states Syria is the political backer , armourer and financier of HAMAS and Hezbollah . Now I would like from you a link which clearly contradicts that assertion with Iran being HAMAS and Hezbollah's political backer , armourer and financier .

And Hezbollah is a genuine resistance movement against Israeli occupation as Lebanon was an object of an illegal Israeli invasion , so in effect any arms shipments from Syria is legal and moral aid against an aggressor .

 

[Neildo]

Arms supplies are a weak argument. Everyone and their mother supplies arms to other countries, even their enemies all to make a quick buck. So long as it's not top-of-the-line equipment, head haunchos couldn't care less. We all supply arms to these so-called "evil" countries, whether you realize it or not.

- N

 

[Stokes Pennwalt]

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is a treaty supposedly to restrict the possession of nuclear weapons. However here we have an incident designed to simply provoke Iran into attaining a A-Bomb involuntarily .

Congratulations, you know what NNPT stands for.

So, do you believe it is a noble goal to curb the spread of these weapons?

 

[funkstar]

The fact that they pulled out of the treaty with Russia in order to create a missle defense system was overly criticized.

That wasn't the NPT, that was the ABM treaty (Anti-Ballistic Missile). The US is still a signatory to the NPT.

 

[Anomalous]

Here is why IRAN should develope a BOMB

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/printstory.mpl/nation/3632894

 

[phlogistician]

That wasn't the NPT, that was the ABM treaty (Anti-Ballistic Missile). The US is still a signatory to the NPT.

USA is still a signatory to ABM afaik? A statement of intention to withdraw was made some time ago, but did it happen?

The USSR cheated with their deployment of 'Galosh' anyway, it didn't comply to the strict rules set out in the ABM, as it used Radars deployed outside the allowed boundaries.

At least the Soviet version worked though.

 

[towards]

Originally posted by Neildo:
Arms supplies are a weak argument. Everyone and their mother supplies arms to other countries, even their enemies all to make a quick buck. So long as it's not top-of-the-line equipment, head haunchos couldn't care less. We all supply arms to these so-called "evil" countries, whether you realize it or not.

Supplying arms and training the soldiers who lead the attack is no different then attacking with a regular army. It is just easier to conceal. Iran's president has called for the end of Israel, and its nation supplies and trains guerrillas to attack it directly. It is different then say, Russia supplying Vietnam with weapons to combat U.S. troops, and Russia supplying Vietnamese with weapons and training to attack U.S. citizens on American soil. The latter would have led to nuclear war.

Iran has been attacking Israel for years. Israel is not training guerrillas to attack Iranian civilians are they? Who is the aggressor here?

 

[Brian Foley]

Iran has been attacking Israel for years. Israel is not training guerrillas to attack Iranian civilians are they? Who is the aggressor here?

Didnt I provide a link which clearly stated that Syria was the armourer and trainer of Hezbollah and the Palestinian Liberation armies ? Yet you still pig headedly carry on insisting that Iran is the culprit !

 

[towards]

Originally posted by Brian Foley:
Didnt I provide a link which clearly stated that Syria was the armourer and trainer of Hezbollah and the Palestinian Liberation armies ? Yet you still pig headedly carry on insisting that Iran is the culprit !

You article only mentions Syria's role in Hezbollah, but does nothing to disprove Iran's role. It would be like writing an article about Cheney's role in the march to war with Iraq, and just because the story is focusing on Cheney, you discount Bush's role entirely.

I gave you a well known and proven capture of Iranian weapons going directly to Palestine on a boat carrying members of Hezbollah, and you still ridiculously deny Iran's involvement.

As for the Hezbollah/ Iran connection, news sources are endless, but here is one.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1908671.stm

I could see a reasonable argument against close ties of Iran and Hamas, but denying Iranian ties to Hezbollah? Are you kidding?

Besides the boat caught supplying the Palestinians, Iran does not do much to hide their opinion of Hamas...

http://www.rferl.org/reports/iran-report/

Iran's former president, Hojatoleslam Mohammad Khatami, sent a congratulatory message to Mishaal on 30 January, adding that the pro-reform Militant Clerics Association, which he heads, was also pleased with the outcome of the elections.

"We are happy about Hamas's victory in the Palestinian elections," Ali Larijani, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, on 1 February. He said that the countries that back democracy in the Middle East -- "including America which tries to establish it in the region within its greater Middle East plan" -- must support Hamas.

Asked whether Iran provides financial support to Hamas, Larijani said "there is no doubt that we give Hamas moral support. Hamas is our friend."

Again, here is your middle east organization making reference to it..

http://www.meib.org/articles/0404_pal1.htm

Hezbollah has long been a central intermediary in Iranian and Syrian sponsorship of Palestinian terrorism. This is partly due to pragmatic considerations - Hezbollah training camps in Lebanon are closer to the Israeli-Palestinian theater than IRGC camps in Iran and Hezbollah commanders have direct operational experience fighting Israel that the IRGC lacks. In addition, it is much easier for Hezbollah to smuggle weapons and explosives to the Palestinian territories from Lebanon than it for Iran or Syria to do so directly (and it allows them to more plausibly deny involvement).

Ideological considerations also made Hezbollah a valuable intermediary. Since many Palestinian militants reflexively distrust non-Arabs, dealing with Hezbollah was more palatable to them than dealing directly with Iran.

So now your own source makes a connection between Hezbollah, Iran and Hamas. Still deny?

 

[Stokes Pennwalt]

Maybe if the United States abided by the Non-Proliferation Treaty, less people would be interested in attainting these weapons. Iran just wants to play the game that most other world powers do.

Brian can't answer my question, but somehow I missed this gem.

Ignoring the fact that this is a blatant ad hominem to quoque fallacy, answer me this: How, exactly, is the United States failing to adhere to its obligations as a signatory to the NNPT?

 

[Brian Foley]

Congratulations, you know what NNPT stands for.

So, do you believe it is a noble goal to curb the spread of these weapons?

Curb the spread of nuclear weapons ! Its irrelevant , the world is awash with atomic weaponery , the very nations which developed and built atomic arsenals are the ones fueling the arms race . If the Iranain goverment in power was that of the Shah the US would be helping him build a bomb . I believe the goal is to dismantle the global arms industry period .