Netanyahu says US warnings not enough to stop Iran - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said US assurances about military options are not enough to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons. [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19081612[/url] Mr Netanyahu said the Iranians believe the international community "does not have the will" to stop Iran. He spoke after visiting US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta reiterated Washington's line that military action was an option against Iran. Iran maintains that its nuclear programme is for civilian energy uses. "Right now the Iranian regime believes that the international community does not have the will to stop its nuclear programme," Mr Netanyahu said at the prime minister's residence in Jerusalem. He told the Pentagon chief: "You yourself said a few months ago that when all else fails, America will act. But these declarations have also not yet convinced the Iranians to stop their programme. "This must change, and it must change quickly because time to resolve this issue peacefully is running out." On Tuesday, US President Barack Obama ordered new economic sanctions against Iran's energy sector and some financial firms. Earlier on Wednesday, Mr Panetta toured Israel's "Iron Dome" rocket defence shield south of Tel Aviv with Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak. Mr Barak also said he thought there was an "extremely low" probability that international economic sanctions would prove enough to stop Iran. Mr Panetta said repeatedly on Wednesday that "all options" including military force were on the table to stop Iran, should sanctions and diplomacy fail. But he also said: "[Israel's] effort to decide what is in their national security interest is something that must be left up to the Israelis." The US has cautioned Israel against taking unilateral action against Iran, and Israel's current army chief has expressed reservations. Speaking to an Israeli television station on Tuesday, Mr Netanyahu hinted that Israel might act alone despite American misgivings. "With our very existence, we do not put our faith in the hands of others, even our best of friends," he said. The visit by Mr Panetta comes as the Obama administration announced $70m (£45m) in new military aid to help Israel expand its Iron Dome system. Presidential challenger Mitt Romney visited Israeli at the weekend and met top officials. He has accused the Obama administration of not being supportive enough of Israel. [/QUOTE] Israel needs to stop mooching off the US.

They're waiting for the election results before doing anything.

When have warnings ever worked to stop anyone from making nuclear arms?

[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;37039164]When have warnings ever worked to stop anyone from making nuclear arms?[/QUOTE] Doesn't matter given that Iran isn't developing nuclear weapons, only nuclear energy.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;37039464]Doesn't matter given that Iran isn't developing nuclear weapons, only nuclear energy.[/QUOTE] Didn't IAEA say they were?

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;37039137]They're waiting for the election results before doing anything.[/QUOTE] Does it really matters? I mean the US is Anti-Iran anyway, Democrats dont like Iran, Republicans dont like Iran.

[QUOTE=Bucketboy;37040730]Does it really matters? I mean the US is Anti-Iran anyway, Democrats dont like Iran, Republicans dont like Iran.[/QUOTE] Obama is significantly less anti-iran then all the other candidates.

[QUOTE=Bucketboy;37040730]Does it really matters? I mean the US is Anti-Iran anyway, Democrats dont like Iran, Republicans dont like Iran.[/QUOTE] Yeah it kind of really matters if there's going to be another fucking nuclear power in the world.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;37039464]Doesn't matter given that Iran isn't developing nuclear weapons, only nuclear energy.[/QUOTE] It's unclear whether that is the extent of their nuclear program or not.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37041661]It's unclear whether that is the extent of their nuclear program or not.[/QUOTE] Dident their supreme leader issue a Fatwa over nuclear weapons? [editline]1st August 2012[/editline] Also I'm pretty sure Iran is more open about its nuclear activities then Israel..

[QUOTE=Chernarus;37041685]Dident their supreme leader issue a Fatwa over nuclear weapons? [editline]1st August 2012[/editline] Also I'm pretty sure Iran is more open about its nuclear activities then Israel..[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.npr.org/2012/06/14/154915222/irans-nuclear-fatwa-a-policy-or-a-ploy[/url] "As far as anyone knows, the fatwa was never written down." "Fatwa is changeable by nature and the Shia theology gives this freedom to be flexible and go for the most updated interpretation and circumstances," Khalaji says. "One of the problems here is this assumption that Iranian foreign policy is somehow driven, motivated and directed by a religious, ideological agenda," Hashemi says, "thus elevating the importance of this fatwa as a way of understanding the inner workings of the Iranian regime."

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37041786][url]http://www.npr.org/2012/06/14/154915222/irans-nuclear-fatwa-a-policy-or-a-ploy[/url] "As far as anyone knows, the fatwa was never written down." "Fatwa is changeable by nature and the Shia theology gives this freedom to be flexible and go for the most updated interpretation and circumstances," Khalaji says. "One of the problems here is this assumption that Iranian foreign policy is somehow driven, motivated and directed by a religious, ideological agenda," Hashemi says, "thus elevating the importance of this fatwa as a way of understanding the inner workings of the Iranian regime."[/QUOTE] Sure, speculative quotes. But why is it okay that Israel have a stockpile yet Iran cannot, yet being 100%+ more open about their activities? I honestly can't see much of a bad scenario if Iran had nukes. If anything this region would be more peaceful.

[QUOTE=Chernarus;37041842]Sure, speculative quotes. But why is it okay that Israel have a stockpile yet Iran cannot, yet being 100%+ more open about their activities? I honestly can't see much of a bad scenario if Iran had nukes. If anything this region would be more peaceful.[/QUOTE] Israel is a special exception because they are "allied" to the USA. Iran is opposed to the USA, therefore it is against the USA's interests to allow Iran to gain any power or bargaining chips to elevate their status in the middle east.

[QUOTE=Chernarus;37041842]why is it okay that Israel have a stockpile yet Iran cannot[/QUOTE] This is ridiculous why should Iran be entitled to weapons because Israel has them, it's not like anyone wanted Israel to become a nuclear power in the first place, why should the global community allow another country to have it. PS don't say MAD because you wrote about it once in an 8th grade DBQ, fuck MAD

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;37041894]This is ridiculous why should Iran be entitled to weapons because Israel has them, it's not like anyone wanted Israel to become a nuclear power in the first place, why should the global community allow another country to have it. PS don't say MAD because you wrote about it once in an 8th grade DBQ, fuck MAD[/QUOTE] Why should Israel be entitled to have them because anyone else has them?

Yes, lets give the country that has mass public hangings, executes gays, executes minors and executes people who consume even the smallest bit of alchohol nuclear capacity, nuclear capacity that could indeed turn into a nuclear weapon.

[QUOTE=Chernarus;37042211]Why should Israel be entitled to have them because anyone else has them?[/QUOTE] omg bro they aren't but already have them!

[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;37039164]When have warnings ever worked to stop anyone from making nuclear arms?[/QUOTE] Yeah it's not like it's the creation of an entirely new nuclear power that hates the vast majority of the other nuclear powers. Think about it, Iran hates Israel, hates the US, not sure about Europe but I don't think they're too friendly either. The only nuclear power they are friends with are china and russia.

[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;37039164]When have warnings ever worked to stop anyone from making nuclear arms?[/QUOTE] Gaddafi?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37041786]<a href="http://www.npr.org/2012/06/14/154915222/irans-nuclear-fatwa-a-policy-or-a-ploy" target="_blank">[URL]http://www.npr.org/2012/06/14/154915222/irans-nuclear-fatwa-a-policy-or-a-ploy[/URL] "One of the problems here is this assumption that Iranian foreign policy is somehow driven, motivated and directed by a religious, ideological agenda," Hashemi says, "thus elevating the importance of this fatwa as a way of understanding the inner workings of the Iranian regime."[/QUOTE] Oh my fucking god the double standards here "Iran is driven by a batshit insane theological religious dogma and is using it as a justification to attack Israel and nuke all infidels!!!" But then when Iran issues a religious fatwa banning nuclear weapons "oh no, Iran isn't driven by religion by any means" jesus christ the irrationality and hypocrisy of this "bomb Iran/dont let them develop nukes" campaign and how so many people are oblivious to it never ceases to amaze me

[QUOTE=Starpluck;37042692]Oh my fucking god the double standards here "Iran is driven by a batshit insane theological religious dogma and is using it as a justification to attack Israel and nuke all infidels!!!" But then when Iran issues a religious fatwa banning nuclear weapons "oh no, Iran isn't driven by religion by any means" jesus christ the irrationality and hypocrisy of this "bomb Iran/dont let them develop nukes" campaign and how so many people are oblivious to it never ceases to amaze me[/QUOTE] Did these specific people say that? Or is this just a fake double standard you are pulling out of your ass? Because the entire USA is not the fucking Borg. We do not have a single consciousness and you should probably learn that. [editline]2nd August 2012[/editline] And this is NPR, our public radio service. This isn't some conservative news source that is advocating the bombing of Iran.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37042886]Did these specific people say that? Or is this just a fake double standard you are pulling out of your ass? Because the entire USA is not the fucking Borg. We do not have a single consciousness and you should probably learn that.[/quote] The leading arguments against Iran obtaining nuclear weapons is due to their religious nature. And if you think NPR is suddenly going to go "Oh OK, we can't be inconsistent in our anti-Iranian campaign so we should drop the whole 'Iran is a theocratic-extremist nation thing' " then you're incredible naive. I've even recalled you constantly bringing up the fact they're a theocracy in the past as to why they shouldn't obtain nuclear weapons so seeing you contradict yourself here and there is amusing. [quote]And this is NPR, our public radio service. This isn't some conservative news source that is advocating the bombing of Iran.[/QUOTE] You give American media to much credit, I know what NPR is. I also know it was one of the dozens of news services that was in line with the government position of bombing Iraq. Bombing Iran/Supporting Israel is a bipartisan effort, you're a fool if you think only conservatives think Iran should be dismantled.

Why are you acting like it would be the first time ever that fundamentalists twist the text to whatever they want it to mean? Also it's not like there's a scarcity of reasons to prevent Iran from getting nukes out there.

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;37039481]Didn't IAEA say they were?[/QUOTE] No. The report doesn't state Iran is developing or building nuclear weaponry, and they make that explicitly clear.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;37043032]The leading arguments against Iran obtaining nuclear weapons is due to their religious nature. And if you think NPR is suddenly going to go "Oh OK, we can't be inconsistent in our anti-Iranian campaign so we should drop the whole 'Iran is a theocratic-extremist nation thing' " then you're incredible naive. [/quote] There is no anti-Iranian campaign in NPR. [url]http://www.npr.org/search/index.php?searchinput=iran[/url] This is mostly benign reporting. [quote]I've even recalled you constantly bringing up the fact they're a theocracy in the past as to why they shouldn't obtain nuclear weapons so seeing you contradict yourself here and there is amusing.[/quote] Well please find it because I've never really cared much about Iran getting nuclear weapons. I just hate Iran because they are a theocracy. [quote]You give American media to much credit, I know what NPR is. I also know it was one of the dozens of news services that was in line with the government position of bombing Iraq.[/quote] [citation needed] [quote]Bombing Iran/Supporting Israel is a bipartisan effort, you're a fool if you think only conservatives think Iran should be dismantled.[/QUOTE] Mostly conservatives. Liberals tend to take a much more laid back approach.

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;37043125]Why are you acting like it would be the first time ever that fundamentalists twist the text to whatever they want it to mean?[/QUOTE] Are you saying that "It is explicitly forbidden to develop nuclear weapons" is potentially twistable to "It is permissible to make nukes"?? This was a fatwa issued by Iran itself. Its not like the Qur'an vaguely states you can't make nukes and we're all here hoping that Iran will not twist it into something else, this is something Iran said and concluded.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;37043170]No. The report doesn't state Iran is developing or building nuclear weaponry, and they make that explicitly clear.[/QUOTE] "Last November an IAEA report claimed Iran had "carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear device"." [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18213839[/url]

[QUOTE=Starpluck;37043170]No. The report doesn't state Iran is developing or building nuclear weaponry, and they make that explicitly clear.[/QUOTE] That's not what the report released a couple months ago says: [QUOTE]The Annex to the Director General’s November 2011 report (GOV/2011/65) provided a detailed analysis of the information available to the Agency indicating that Iran has carried out activities that are relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device. This information, which comes from a wide variety of independent sources, including from a number of Member States, from the Agency’s own efforts and from information provided by Iran itself, is assessed by the Agency to be, overall, credible. The information indicates that, prior to the end of 2003 the activities took place under a structured programme; that some continued after 2003; and that some may still be ongoing.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Starpluck;37043211]Are you saying that "It is explicitly forbidden to develop nuclear weapons" is potentially twistable to "It is permissible to make nukes"?? This was a fatwa issued by Iran itself. Its not like the Qur'an vaguely states you can't make nukes and we're all here hoping that Iran will not twist it into something else, this is something Iran said and concluded.[/QUOTE] So all of those things the guy from the institute in that npr article said are completely untrue?

2003, and nothing has happened since. Plus its a dual use study.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37043245]"Last November an IAEA report claimed Iran had "carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear device"." [URL]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18213839[/URL][/QUOTE] Do you know what those activities were? A scrapped computer ~3D~ model of a nuclear warhead. That's a big stretch from "The IAEA explicitly said Iran is building nuclear weapons" [QUOTE=yawmwen;37043198]Well please find it because I've never really cared much about Iran getting nuclear weapons. I just hate Iran because they are a theocracy.[/QUOTE] Its unreasonable to assume I'm going to search posts dating back to around a year to find a mention of you stating that. I don't mind dropping the claim that you stated that as its trivial. [quote][citation needed][/quote] [URL]http://65.109.167.118/pipa/pdf/oct03/IraqMedia_Oct03_rpt.pdf[/URL] [URL]http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1145[/URL] [quote]Mostly conservatives. Liberals tend to take a much more laid back approach.[/quote] Conservatives are just more vocal, but Democratic voting records in Congress are perfectly aligned with Republicans in dealing with Iran.