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.
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by hmdphantom
Dear hmdphantom,
Good to see you again, and thank you for posting a thought provoking thread. I can answer your question, but your not going to like it.
dtirp.dtra.mil...
Start with the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Signing it gives the IAEA the right to poke around. Israel didn't sign it, so IAEA can't inspect. Iran did sign it, they're supposed to be letting IAEA in.
Now, among the states that have signed the NPT, five are acknowledged as Nuclear Weapons States (NWS) UK, US, China, France, and Russia. These have negotiated National Security Exclusions (NSE), allowing the country to keep IAEA out of certain araeas.
So if Iran wants to keep IAEA out, it can abrogate the NPT, or declare itself a NWS and negotiate its own NSE. (I just thought it would be cool to use all those abbreviations in one sentence.)
With respect,
Charles1952
"An Iran that practices subversion and seeks regional hegemony -- which appears to be the current trend -- must be faced with lines it will not be permitted to cross. The industrial nations cannot accept radical forces dominating a region on which their economies depend, and the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran is incompatible with international security."
Note that Kissinger prioritizes Iranian (or "radical") control over regional oil supplies over concern about the country acquiring nuclear weapons.
Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by hmdphantom
It looks like your article cut Henry Kissinger's quote short.
"An Iran that practices subversion and seeks regional hegemony -- which appears to be the current trend -- must be faced with lines it will not be permitted to cross. The industrial nations cannot accept radical forces dominating a region on which their economies depend, and the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran is incompatible with international security."
Note that Kissinger prioritizes Iranian (or "radical") control over regional oil supplies over concern about the country acquiring nuclear weapons.
www.huffingtonpost.com...
So, yes, why wouldn't the entire region be concerned about Iran "seeking regional hegemony", since it's so "RADICAL"? Yes, it does affect international security. Funny how your article left that little bit of quote out.
The industrial nations cannot accept radical forces dominating a region on which their economies depend, and the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran is incompatible with international security."