It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
VIENNA — Muslim countries at a 151-nation conference demanded Friday that Israel open its nuclear program to international purview, asserting that its undeclared arsenal is a threat to Mideast peace.
Unlike in recent years, however, Arab states did not push for a resolution directly targeting Israel by name after such an attempt was narrowly voted down at last year’s International Atomic Energy Agency general conference.
But even Israel did not oppose that document, abstaining instead of voting against it after failing to have a specific paragraph that effectively singled out the Jewish state without naming it struck from the document.
In comments echoed by other Arab states before and after the vote, Syrian nuclear chief Ibrahim Othman said Israel’s refusal to join the nonproliferation treaty and throw open its nuclear facilities to IAEA perusal “is a threat ... to the security and stability of the Middle Eastern states.”
Originally posted by DarthMuerte
Israel is not a signatory to the treaty, why should they follow it?
Originally posted by DarthMuerte
If Iran is not a signatory, then you cannot hold them to the treaty. If they wish to withdraw, they should do so.
Does anybody actually believe that? Why so much secrecy for peaceful purposes? I don't believe it for one second. If they want to build nukes, just withdraw from the treaty.
Originally posted by ALF88
Originally posted by DarthMuerte
If Iran is not a signatory, then you cannot hold them to the treaty. If they wish to withdraw, they should do so.
Why would they? They only use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
Originally posted by DarthMuerte
Does anybody actually believe that? Why so much secrecy for peaceful purposes? I don't believe it for one second. If they want to build nukes, just withdraw from the treaty.
Originally posted by ALF88
Originally posted by DarthMuerte
If Iran is not a signatory, then you cannot hold them to the treaty. If they wish to withdraw, they should do so.
Why would they? They only use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
The difference between Israel and Iran, is that Israel isn't rulled by some nutbag who is trying to bring the 12th Imam via mass genocide of jews.
Thats why Iran is developing nuclear weapons.
Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
The difference between Israel and Iran, is that Israel isn't rulled by some nutbag who is trying to bring the 12th Imam via mass genocide of jews. Thats why Iran is developing nuclear weapons. not because every other kid on the block has them but because Iran actually intends to use theirs at some point to further their agenda.
There are 25,000+ Jews living in Iran. When Israel backed a plan to pay Iranian Jewish families $60,000 to settle in Israel, Society of Iranian Jews met the announcement with scorn, issuing this statement: "The identity of Iranian Jews is not tradable for any amount of money. Iranian Jews are among the most ancient Iranians. Iran's Jews love their Iranian identity and their culture, so threats and this immature political enticement will not achieve their aim of wiping out the identity of Iranian Jews."
Originally posted by buster2010
Iran hasn't started a war in a couple of hundred years how long has it been since Israel started a war?
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by DarthMuerte
Do you not see it as a double standard that they criticize Iran for their nuclear ambitions which follow international law yet they have up to 300 nuclear war heads themselves? They are talking about striking Iran because of this. They are hypocrites, plain and simple.edit on 24-9-2011 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by DarthMuerte
Would you apply the same logic if Iran withdrew from the treaty and pursued nuclear weapons?
"They withdrew from the treaty, why should they follow it?"
Originally posted by Phoenix
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by DarthMuerte
Would you apply the same logic if Iran withdrew from the treaty and pursued nuclear weapons?
"They withdrew from the treaty, why should they follow it?"
I can answer that!
Yes so long as every scrap of knowledge and all materials gained from being a signatory was immediately given up forthwith.