PDA

View Full Version : Israel 'has 150 nuclear weapons'



islamirama
05-26-2008, 07:15 PM
Israel 'has 150 nuclear weapons'

Ex-US President Jimmy Carter has said Israel has at least 150 atomic weapons in its arsenal.

The Israelis have never confirmed they have nuclear weapons, but this has been widely assumed since a scientist leaked details in the 1980s.

Mr Carter made his comments on Israel's weapons at a press conference at the annual literary Hay Festival in Wales.

He also described Israeli treatment of Palestinians as "one of the greatest human rights crimes on earth".

Mr Carter gave the figure for the Israeli nuclear arsenal in response to a question on US policy on a possible nuclear-armed Iran, arguing that any country newly armed with atomic weapons faced overwhelming odds.

"The US has more than 12,000 nuclear weapons; the Soviet Union (sic) has about the same; Great Britain and France have several hundred, and Israel has 150 or more," he said.

Israel's Dimona reactor is understood to provide plutonium for the country's nuclear weapons

"We have a phalanx of enormous capabilities, not only of weaponry but also of rockets to deliver every one of those missiles on a pinpoint accuracy target."

Most experts estimate that Israel has between 100 and 200 nuclear warheads, largely based on information leaked to the Sunday Times newspaper in the 1980s by Mordechai Vanunu, a former worker at the country's Dimona nuclear reactor.

The US, a key ally of Israel, has in general followed the country's policy of "nuclear ambiguity", neither confirming or denying the existence of its assumed arsenal.

However, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert included Israel among a list of nuclear states in comments in December 2006, a week after US Defence Secretary Robert Gates used a similar form of words during a Senate hearing.

'Imprisonment'

During the press briefing, Mr Carter expressed his support for Israel as a country, but criticised its domestic and foreign policy.

"One of the greatest human rights crimes on earth is the starvation and imprisonment of 1.6m Palestinians," he said.

The former US president cited statistics which he said showed the nutritional intake of some Palestinian children was below that of children in Sub-Saharan Africa, as well as saying the European position on Israel could be best described as "supine".

Mr Carter, awarded a Nobel Peace Prize in 2002, brokered the 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty, the first between Israel and an Arab state.

In April he controversially held talks in the Syrian capital Damascus with Khaled Meshaal, leader of the militant Palestinian movement Hamas.

The former US president's Carter Center was unavailable for further comment.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/h...st/7420573.stm
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Ninth_Scribe
05-27-2008, 03:30 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
Israel 'has 150 nuclear weapons'

Ex-US President Jimmy Carter has said Israel has at least 150 atomic weapons in its arsenal.

The Israelis have never confirmed they have nuclear weapons, but this has been widely assumed since a scientist leaked details in the 1980s.

He also described Israeli treatment of Palestinians as "one of the greatest human rights crimes on earth".
People have said this for years, but the word of "people" doesn't count for chickens here in the U.S. unless it suits the current agenda ~ and all I can say is it's about time a political pitbull came forward with it. Besides, confession is good for the soul. I've about had it with all the double standards that have been applied in the name of... Israel. I pray for more leaders to come forward.

The Ninth Scribe
Reply

Air Jordan
05-27-2008, 11:43 PM
Jimmy Carter..."political pitbull"??? :laugh::laugh:

That was fun, thanks.

BTW..there is no "double standard". Israel is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. You don't want them to have nukes..go take them away from them.
Reply

north_malaysian
05-28-2008, 04:40 AM
Can a person be labelled as "Anti-Semitic" for this remarks?:X
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Intisar
05-28-2008, 11:43 AM
Keep it civil guys. :)
Reply

Fishman
05-28-2008, 11:46 AM
:sl:
This isn't really news, everybody knew Israel had nukes already, its just that the Israeli government won't admit to it.

Which is a bit worrying. If you are going to use nukes as a deterrant and not actually launch them, you would let everybody know you had them. You would only keep it secret if you were actually planning to use them.

Mind you, there are probably a lot more countries that could make WMDs if they wanted to. Like Saudi Arabia, or Japan.
:w:
Reply

Izyan
05-28-2008, 01:28 PM
Originally Posted by Fishman
:sl:
This isn't really news, everybody knew Israel had nukes already, its just that the Israeli government won't admit to it.

Which is a bit worrying. If you are going to use nukes as a deterrant and not actually launch them, you would let everybody know you had them. You would only keep it secret if you were actually planning to use them.

Mind you, there are probably a lot more countries that could make WMDs if they wanted to. Like Saudi Arabia, or Japan.
:w:
No you keep them a secret as a deterrent. Let's say you have a neighbor you don't like. Now you really hate this neighbor and would like to get rid of him and you are willing to use violence to achieve this. You've heard rumors that he might have a big stick. Would you be more or less likely to attack him?
Reply

Fishman
05-28-2008, 02:01 PM
Originally Posted by Izyan
No you keep them a secret as a deterrent. Let's say you have a neighbor you don't like. Now you really hate this neighbor and would like to get rid of him and you are willing to use violence to achieve this. You've heard rumors that he might have a big stick. Would you be more or less likely to attack him?
:sl:
Why didn't the USA and the USSR do that then? Are rumors a better deterrent than facts?

There wouldn't have been any rumors anyway if that scientist hadn't given it all away to the British newspapers.
:w:
Reply

Izyan
05-28-2008, 02:10 PM
Originally Posted by Fishman
:sl:
Why didn't the USA and the USSR do that then? Are rumors a better deterrent than facts?

There wouldn't have been any rumors anyway if that scientist hadn't given it all away to the British newspapers.
:w:
Because it was kind of hard to hide having nuclear weapons when you destroyed 2 citiies. On top of that there wasn't an effective way to hide testing. Once you test your bomb then the cat is out of the bag. Post NPT the world is not gonna just "let" you have a nuke. Acknowledgement of having one is an invitation to have it taken away.
Reply

Air Jordan
05-28-2008, 02:33 PM
I would say Israel's strategy of keeping silent on nukes when it is generally agreed they do have nukes is working better than Hussein's strategy of pretending to have WMD's when he didn't anymore. :D

Of course, Israel would not want its enemies to know how many nukes they have, which is why they aren't likely to be happy with Jimmy. Even if Carter is using secret information he got from a briefing when he was President, it is probably a CIA estimate. We all know how accurate those can be :D

In fact, it is possible Carter is violating US law by releasing information of this type as the US doesn't want Israel to know how good their information is on the Israeli nuclear program (yes, the US spies on Israel and Israel spies on the US).
Reply

Izyan
05-28-2008, 02:36 PM
Originally Posted by Air Jordan
I would say Israel's strategy of keeping silent on nukes when it is generally agreed they do have nukes is working better than Hussein's strategy of pretending to have WMD's when he didn't anymore. :D

Of course, Israel would not want its enemies to know how many nukes they have, which is why they aren't likely to be happy with Jimmy. Even if Carter is using secret information he got from a briefing when he was President, it is probably a CIA estimate. We all know how accurate those can be :D

In fact, it is possible Carter is violating US law by releasing information of this type as the US doesn't want Israel to know how good their information is on the Israeli nuclear program (yes, the US spies on Israel and Israel spies on the US).
Carter hasn't been in office for over 20 years. Do you know how old that intel is? They could have 1000 nukes or they could have one. Saying Israel had 150 nukes was just plain dumb.
Reply

Air Jordan
05-28-2008, 02:41 PM
Originally Posted by Fishman
:sl:
Why didn't the USA and the USSR do that then? Are rumors a better deterrent than facts?

There wouldn't have been any rumors anyway if that scientist hadn't given it all away to the British newspapers.
:w:
Israel had a very strong incentive to keep it secret until their program was mature. The French certianly knew as they supplied them with the nuclear plant and the US would have been able to have suspicions from spy satellites (but they didn't get permission from us). Ditto the Russians at some point which means they likely told their Arab vassal states. Even the government of South Africa apparently knew as it appears the Israelis were allowed to test a nuke on South African soil, perhaps in exchange for technical know-how or plans (yes, the South African (white government) had a nuke program which has since been stopped)

The Israelis know they have a target on their forehead in the UN. Keeping a low profile is exactly the right option for them.
Reply

Air Jordan
05-28-2008, 02:42 PM
Originally Posted by Izyan
Carter hasn't been in office for over 20 years. Do you know how old that intel is? They could have 1000 nukes or they could have one. Saying Israel had 150 nukes was just plain dumb.

I quite agree. Consider the source.
Reply

Trumble
05-28-2008, 06:35 PM
Originally Posted by Fishman
This isn't really news, everybody knew Israel had nukes already, its just that the Israeli government won't admit to it.

Which is a bit worrying. If you are going to use nukes as a deterrant and not actually launch them, you would let everybody know you had them.
You've really answered your own point. As everybody did, indeed, know Israel had nukes already why suffer the unecessary political inconvenience of admitting it?
Reply

Ninth_Scribe
05-28-2008, 08:38 PM
Originally Posted by Air Jordan
Jimmy Carter..."political pitbull"??? :laugh::laugh:

That was fun, thanks.

BTW..there is no "double standard". Israel is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. You don't want them to have nukes..go take them away from them.
He has more standing than I do so yes, compared to me, he's a pitbull. And, excuse me, but if your statement about the "Non-proliferation Treaty" is correct - then why is America so peeved at Iran for having them?

Maybe the Bush Administration should just mind it's own business. I mean, four states have been wiped out by tornadoes this past week - yesterday's was the rare and infamous F-5... One heck of an air raid! I mean, we've got a "war zone" right here in our own back yard, and nowhere near the man-power we need to clean it up.

Well, just a thought. I'm off to my spinning class now.

The Ninth Scribe
Reply

Izyan
05-28-2008, 08:42 PM
Originally Posted by Ninth_Scribe
He has more standing than I do so yes, compared to me, he's a pitbull. And, excuse me, but if your statement about the "Non-proliferation Treaty" is correct - then why is America so peeved at Iran for having them?

Maybe the Bush Administration should just mind it's own business. I mean, four states have been wiped out by tornadoes this past week - yesterday's was the rare and infamous F-5... One heck of an air raid! I mean, we've got a "war zone" right here in our own back yard, and nowhere near the man-power we need to clean it up.

Well, just a thought. I'm off to my spinning class now.

The Ninth Scribe
Iran signed the NPT Treaty.
Reply

Ninth_Scribe
05-28-2008, 08:59 PM
Originally Posted by Fishman
Mind you, there are probably a lot more countries that could make WMDs if they wanted to. Like Saudi Arabia...
:w:
Yes, I sometimes wonder about Bush's motives. I mean, it's as if he wants an Armegheddon! Sure, let them all wipe each other out, and then the Christian right can claim the lands for themselves. Some people's minds.



The Ninth Scribe
Reply

Ninth_Scribe
05-28-2008, 09:53 PM
Originally Posted by Izyan
Iran signed the NPT Treaty.
I'm kind of fuzzy on the whole subject. I do know these facts:

1. The nuclear program of Iran was launched in the 1950s with the help of the United States as part of the Atoms for Peace program.

2. Iran ratified the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 1970, and since February 1992 has allowed the IAEA to inspect its nuclear facilities.

3. Iranian officials have little confidence in the international community because of its behavior during the 1980s Iran-Iraq war.

So, from what I can tell, we helped Iran build it. They agreed to sign the treaty in 1970. They got into an argument with us (1980s Iran-Iraq war). Then we decided they couldn't have it. Gee... sounds like we rule the whole world, lol. We did that to Saddam Hussein too, didn't we? We took his side in the Iran-Iraq war but when he didn't behave the way we wanted, we handed him over to be hung?

You know, far be it for me to decide on these issues, but I have to agree with Osama bin Laden here when it comes to U.S. involvement in the Middle East because the United States is really schizophrenic. They NEVER really help. So, let me see if I have their argument squared here. They think that because a government that no longer exists signed a treaty, the new government has to keep it? But Israel doesn't because they would never sign it? And they're America's favorite??? Hahahahahahaha! Man, do I hate my government!

The Ninth Scribe
Reply

Abdul Fattah
05-28-2008, 10:20 PM
Originally Posted by Air Jordan
Jimmy Carter..."political pitbull"??? :laugh::laugh:

That was fun, thanks.

BTW..there is no "double standard". Israel is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. You don't want them to have nukes..go take them away from them.
But they did bomb Iraq's nuclear development program in the 80's (which was in violation of several other treaties). So they think it's OK for them to have 'm but not for others, I'd say that's a double standard after all.
Reply

Al-Muntaqim
05-28-2008, 10:50 PM
Will we ever see real peace in our lifetime? :cry:
Reply

aadil77
05-28-2008, 11:20 PM
I swear I posted this a week ago

edit: yep, but two days ago http://www.islamicboard.com/world-af...r-weapons.html
Reply

Layla454
05-28-2008, 11:26 PM
Its more like over 200
Reply

aadil77
05-28-2008, 11:29 PM
Originally Posted by Air Jordan
I would say Israel's strategy of keeping silent on nukes when it is generally agreed they do have nukes is working better than Hussein's strategy of pretending to have WMD's when he didn't anymore. :D

Of course, Israel would not want its enemies to know how many nukes they have, which is why they aren't likely to be happy with Jimmy. Even if Carter is using secret information he got from a briefing when he was President, it is probably a CIA estimate. We all know how accurate those can be :D

In fact, it is possible Carter is violating US law by releasing information of this type as the US doesn't want Israel to know how good their information is on the Israeli nuclear program (yes, the US spies on Israel and Israel spies on the US).
Why would israel keep it a secret from the U.S? they must have told em theirselves, they haven't got nothing to hide , as all israeli weapons are american anyway
Reply

Keltoi
05-28-2008, 11:30 PM
Large nuclear stockpiles are built primarily in the case of large nuclear exchanges. The countries most likely to face such an incident are the U.S., Great Britain, Russia, or China. I suppose Israel is preparing for some possible exchange with China or Russia.
Reply

Keltoi
05-28-2008, 11:31 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
Why would israel keep it a secret from the U.S? they must have told em theirselves, they haven't got nothing to hide , as all israeli weapons are american anyway
Most Israeli weapons are made in Israel, the most obvious example being their tank design, which in many ways outclasses U.S. tank designs.
Reply

MTAFFI
05-28-2008, 11:38 PM
Originally Posted by Al-Muntaqim
Will we ever see real peace in our lifetime? :cry:
when we die..
Reply

aadil77
05-28-2008, 11:38 PM
Originally Posted by Keltoi
Most Israeli weapons are made in Israel, the most obvious example being their tank design, which in many ways outclasses U.S. tank designs.
What about all the fighter jets f16's f15's, and guns, all those m16's, m4 carbs, same rocket launchers etc

they look like a another american army
Reply

Air Jordan
05-29-2008, 12:50 AM
Originally Posted by Ninth_Scribe
I'm kind of fuzzy on the whole subject. I do know these facts:
Yes to the first part...no to the second.

1. The nuclear program of Iran was launched in the 1950s with the help of the United States as part of the Atoms for Peace program.
That is a stretch. The US built a toy 5 megawat reactor (enough for about 50,000 lightbulbs):) Not big enough to produce plutonium and supplied only with Uranium from the US. This reactor is no longer operational.

2. Iran ratified the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 1970, and since February 1992 has allowed the IAEA to inspect its nuclear facilities.
Sort of. Iran built secret uranium enrichement facilities (clearly against the NPT), concealed them from the IAEA, then the IAEA found out (probably from an Iranian insider). Oops.

3. Iranian officials have little confidence in the international community because of its behavior during the 1980s Iran-Iraq war.
I think that pretty much goes both ways. :)

So, from what I can tell, we helped Iran build it.
Nope. Absolutely not. Iran signed a contract for the Germans to build the Busheir reactor. At the time of the Revolution, the Germans stopped building the reactor and the French refused to supply uranium.

Later, the Iranians contracted with the Russians to build one of their design inside the containment dome started by the Germans. I believe that Busheir one is now operating intermittently but there is now a problem with the uranium supply as the Russians insisted they supply the uranium fuel and take all the spent fuel back to Russia as a security precaution.

They agreed to sign the treaty in 1970. They got into an argument with us (1980s Iran-Iraq war). Then we decided they couldn't have it. Gee... sounds like we rule the whole world, lol. We did that to Saddam Hussein too, didn't we? We took his side in the Iran-Iraq war but when he didn't behave the way we wanted, we handed him over to be hung?
I would say taking over an embassy and keeping the diplomatic personal hostage for more than 1 1/2 yrs is a bit more than an "argument". The French and the Germans, who were the planned suppliers to Busheir backed out. They too could see the crazy writing on the wall. Even the Russians, who walk around London putting Polonium in people's tea, have decided the mullahs are a little kooky. Real shame about Hussein, though, the good, they die young.

You know, far be it for me to decide on these issues, but I have to agree with Osama bin Laden here when it comes to U.S. involvement in the Middle East because the United States is really schizophrenic. They NEVER really help. So, let me see if I have their argument squared here. They think that because a government that no longer exists signed a treaty, the new government has to keep it? But Israel doesn't because they would never sign it? And they're America's favorite??? Hahahahahahaha! Man, do I hate my government!

The Ninth Scribe
Well, it seems you hate every US government going back 50 years, Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative. Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Carter (he suspended all trade with Iran), certainly Reagan and most definitely Bush. In fact, you hate such a broad array of US governments, one might deduce that what you really hate is the US itself.

BTW, the whole idea of the NPT is to permit nuclear power plants in signatory nations in exchange for lifetime inspection to prevent diversion of spent fuel for weapons. That is what "Non-Prolferation" means. If every nation could simply expunge their NPT treaty obligations willy nilly then it wouldn't work very well would it?

Israel did not ask permission. Neither did Pakistan or India, BTW.
Reply

Air Jordan
05-29-2008, 12:59 AM
Originally Posted by Abdul Fattah
But they did bomb Iraq's nuclear development program in the 80's (which was in violation of several other treaties). So they think it's OK for them to have 'm but not for others, I'd say that's a double standard after all.
I am not sure about this but quite possibly a formal state of war still existed between Iraq and Israel at the time. Iraqi tank units attacked Israel in the Yom Kippur war and I dont think there was ever a formal peace treaty as with Egypt.

And, yes, Israel desires that Arab states which have tried to erase it from the map a few times not have nukes. That is called national defence. Like I said, you want to take away their nukes, you are free to try. I couldn't care less. Just leave me out of it. Good luck to you. You will need it.

Wow...I just realized I have a negative reputation. That hurts. That hurts real bad.
Reply

Trumble
05-29-2008, 06:30 AM
Originally Posted by aadil77
they look like a another american army
Israel is now the world's fourth largest weapons exporter and make far more of their own kit than most other countries. But never let the facts get in the way of a good argument, hmm?
Reply

Ayoub
05-29-2008, 06:45 AM
Originally Posted by Trumble
Israel is now the world's fourth largest weapons exporter and make far more of their own kit than most other countries. But never let the facts get in the way of a good argument, hmm?
Got some proof to back that up? :statisfie
Reply

Izyan
05-29-2008, 12:54 PM
Originally Posted by Ninth_Scribe
I'm kind of fuzzy on the whole subject. I do know these facts:

1. The nuclear program of Iran was launched in the 1950s with the help of the United States as part of the Atoms for Peace program.

2. Iran ratified the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 1970, and since February 1992 has allowed the IAEA to inspect its nuclear facilities.

3. Iranian officials have little confidence in the international community because of its behavior during the 1980s Iran-Iraq war.

So, from what I can tell, we helped Iran build it. They agreed to sign the treaty in 1970. They got into an argument with us (1980s Iran-Iraq war). Then we decided they couldn't have it. Gee... sounds like we rule the whole world, lol. We did that to Saddam Hussein too, didn't we? We took his side in the Iran-Iraq war but when he didn't behave the way we wanted, we handed him over to be hung?

You know, far be it for me to decide on these issues, but I have to agree with Osama bin Laden here when it comes to U.S. involvement in the Middle East because the United States is really schizophrenic. They NEVER really help. So, let me see if I have their argument squared here. They think that because a government that no longer exists signed a treaty, the new government has to keep it? But Israel doesn't because they would never sign it? And they're America's favorite??? Hahahahahahaha! Man, do I hate my government!

The Ninth Scribe
We took both sides in Iran-Iraq war. The philosophy the US had at the time that if they destroyed each other it would have been a good thing. I don't agree with this policy. As for the NPT, you are right the program was started in the 50's and scrapped when the Shah was kicked out. The US is under no obligation to help anyone but itself. The problem Iran has is that it was developing a nuclear program without inspection as specified in the NPT for a number of years. To this day the IAEA says that Iran is not turning over all the documents and are blocking them from important sites. Read the report that was put out a couple of days ago. Pakistan didn't sign the NPT either should we forcibly remove their nukes too? I mean if we are gonna take them away from Israel they should go in Pakistan right?
Reply

Izyan
05-29-2008, 01:05 PM
Originally Posted by Ayoub
Got some proof to back that up? :statisfie
Galil
Tavor TAR-21
Uzi submachine gun
Micro Uzi
Negev
Baby Eagle/Jericho 941
Merkava Mk II
Merkava Mk III
Merkava Mk IV
MDT David
Saar 4
Saar 4.5
Saar 5

Amongst others are all Israeli developed and made and exported all over the word. The Galil is one of the best rifles made in the world.
Reply

Trumble
05-29-2008, 01:12 PM
Originally Posted by Ayoub
Got some proof to back that up? :statisfie
Yes


"ISRAEL has become the world's fourth largest weapons exporter, shipping out arms worth more than $US4 billion ($4.58 billion) so far this year, the defence ministry says.
Only the United States, Russia and France export more arms than Israel, said the ministry's director general Pinchas Bucharis.

New legislation to come into effect by the end of December will tighten control of Israeli companies and agents that sell arms or security-related equipment.
Israel's defence ministry is bombarded with around 5000 requests for export authorisation each year, and around 70,000 requests to renew permits to export weapons or security-related material, Bucharis said.


The United States is the biggest buyer of Israeli arms, followed by Asian countries, Europe and Latin America."
Reply

Air Jordan
05-29-2008, 03:17 PM
The United States is the biggest buyer of Israeli arms, followed by Asian countries, Europe and Latin America.

Hey. You guys had it backward all this time. You need to start agitating for Israel to stop supporting the US. Then, when that happens, you can expand out from Dearborn, perhaps even take back Detroit.
Reply

Ninth_Scribe
05-29-2008, 03:27 PM
Originally Posted by Izyan
We took both sides in Iran-Iraq war. The philosophy the US had at the time that if they destroyed each other it would have been a good thing. I don't agree with this policy. As for the NPT, you are right the program was started in the 50's and scrapped when the Shah was kicked out. The US is under no obligation to help anyone but itself. The problem Iran has is that it was developing a nuclear program without inspection as specified in the NPT for a number of years. To this day the IAEA says that Iran is not turning over all the documents and are blocking them from important sites. Read the report that was put out a couple of days ago. Pakistan didn't sign the NPT either should we forcibly remove their nukes too? I mean if we are gonna take them away from Israel they should go in Pakistan right?
Thank you for clearing that up for me. I had often speculated that the U.S. were behaving like war lords in that they seemed to be profiting from weapons sales and to more than one party, but it's encouraging to hear that I'm not the only person on the planet that has noticed that. I'll study the report, but I wasn't suggesting that these countries should disban their weapons. I was merely saying that I see a major contradiction in how the U.S. determines who should or shouldn't have them.

Do you think it would help if Iran openly denounces the treaty that was signed by the last government?

The Ninth Scribe
Reply

Izyan
05-29-2008, 03:58 PM
Originally Posted by Ninth_Scribe
Thank you for clearing that up for me. I had often speculated that the U.S. were behaving like war lords in that they seemed to be profiting from weapons sales and to more than one party, but it's encouraging to hear that I'm not the only person on the planet that has noticed that. I'll study the report, but I wasn't suggesting that these countries should disban their weapons. I was merely saying that I see a major contradiction in how the U.S. determines who should or shouldn't have them.

Do you think it would help if Iran openly denounces the treaty that was signed by the last government?

The Ninth Scribe
Iran can opt out of the treaty at anytime like North Korea did. By the way it's not a muslim thing because the US has never raised a fuss about Pakistan having nukes. It kinda makes you nervous when a country that chants "Death to America" is trying to make mukes.
Reply

MTAFFI
05-29-2008, 04:01 PM
Originally Posted by Ninth_Scribe
Thank you for clearing that up for me. I had often speculated that the U.S. were behaving like war lords in that they seemed to be profiting from weapons sales and to more than one party, but it's encouraging to hear that I'm not the only person on the planet that has noticed that. I'll study the report, but I wasn't suggesting that these countries should disban their weapons. I was merely saying that I see a major contradiction in how the U.S. determines who should or shouldn't have them.

Do you think it would help if Iran openly denounces the treaty that was signed by the last government?

The Ninth Scribe
they could certainly withdrawal from the treaty... however they would then lose support from China and Russia for material... Personally I believe eventually they will withdrawal, but not until they have received all necessary material from those they are currently relying on. When they do, they will be condemned by the international committee and a war from somewhere is all but definite, I personally believe it will be Israel attacks all POI
Reply

Ninth_Scribe
05-29-2008, 04:01 PM
Originally Posted by Izyan
Iran can opt out of the treaty at anytime like North Korea did. By the way it's not a muslim thing because the US has never raised a fuss about Pakistan having nukes. It kinda makes you nervous when a country that chants "Death to America" is trying to make mukes.
Yes, but likewise, it must make Muslims nervous to see Israel having Nukes. Israel doesn't come right out and say it, but they have more than demonstrated a "my way or the highway" attitude.

The Ninth Scribe
Reply

Ninth_Scribe
05-29-2008, 04:05 PM
Originally Posted by MTAFFI
When they do, they will be condemned by the international committee and a war from somewhere is all but definite, I personally believe it will be Israel attacks all POI
Yes, I tend to agree especially after their attack on Syria. What annoys me is that every nation in the world minds it's own business when Israel does this, but they jump on the other middle eastern countries whenever they express the slightest hostility towards precious Israel, even if the hostility is tantamount to: I'm sick of their s--t.

The Ninth Scribe
Reply

MTAFFI
05-29-2008, 04:13 PM
Originally Posted by Ninth_Scribe
Yes, I tend to agree especially after their attack on Syria. What annoys me is that every nation in the world minds it's own business when Israel does this, but they jump on the other middle eastern countries whenever they express the slightest hostility towards precious Israel, even if the hostility is tantamount to: I'm sick of their s--t.

The Ninth Scribe
it does become a bit monotonous doesn't it
Reply

Ninth_Scribe
05-29-2008, 04:32 PM
Originally Posted by MTAFFI
it does become a bit monotonous doesn't it
Yes, it does... one reason why I love your sig: War does not determine who is right - only who is left.

The Ninth Scribe
Reply

Trumble
05-29-2008, 05:06 PM
Originally Posted by Ninth_Scribe
Do you think it would help if Iran openly denounces the treaty that was signed by the last government?

They don't need to 'denounce' it, they can just withdraw from it. Although, as has been said, they will need to accept the consequences. The fact it was signed by a previous government is pretty much irrelevant; if that represented a reason in itself for abandoning treaties international diplomacy would collapse uncer its own weight of constant re-negotiation.

it must make Muslims nervous to see Israel having Nukes
It make those living in nearby countries nervous, whatever religion they happen to be.
Reply

MTAFFI
05-29-2008, 05:24 PM
Originally Posted by Ninth_Scribe
Yes, it does... one reason why I love your sig: War does not determine who is right - only who is left.

The Ninth Scribe
maybe you might like these then

"I think the human race needs to think about killing. How much evil must we do
to do good?"
-Robert McNamara

"The real and lasting victories are those of peace, and not of war."
-Ralph Waldo Emmerson

"All warfare is based on deception."
-Sun Tzu

"The indefinite combination of human fallibility and nuclear weapons will
lead to the destruction of nations."
-Robert McNamara
Reply

Ninth_Scribe
05-29-2008, 05:30 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
The fact it was signed by a previous government is pretty much irrelevant; if that represented a reason in itself for abandoning treaties international diplomacy would collapse uncer its own weight of constant re-negotiation.
I think that's exactly what's happening now... a collapse.

The Ninth Scribe
Reply

Fishman
05-29-2008, 05:32 PM
Originally Posted by MTAFFI
maybe you might like these then

"I think the human race needs to think about killing. How much evil must we do
to do good?"
-Robert McNamara

"The real and lasting victories are those of peace, and not of war."
-Ralph Waldo Emmerson

"All warfare is based on deception."
-Sun Tzu

"The indefinite combination of human fallibility and nuclear weapons will
lead to the destruction of nations."
-Robert McNamara
:sl:
Aren't those all just quotes from Call of Duty when you die?
:w:
Reply

Ninth_Scribe
05-29-2008, 05:33 PM
Originally Posted by MTAFFI
maybe you might like these then

"I think the human race needs to think about killing. How much evil must we do
to do good?"
-Robert McNamara

"The real and lasting victories are those of peace, and not of war."
-Ralph Waldo Emmerson

"All warfare is based on deception."
-Sun Tzu

"The indefinite combination of human fallibility and nuclear weapons will
lead to the destruction of nations."
-Robert McNamara
OMG! I'm going to copy these to my blog!! Thanks!!!

War is caused by a conflict of thought, that became a conflict of words, that became a conflict of deeds.

The Ninth Scribe
Reply

MTAFFI
05-29-2008, 05:34 PM
Originally Posted by Fishman
:sl:
Aren't those all just quotes from Call of Duty when you die?
:w:
yes indeedy they are, so are the ones on my sig... Those games probably have some of the best war quotes of all time
Reply

MTAFFI
05-29-2008, 05:35 PM
Originally Posted by Ninth_Scribe
OMG! I'm going to copy these to my blog!! Thanks!!!

War is caused by a conflict of thought, that became a conflict of words, that became a conflict of deeds.

The Ninth Scribe
here are tons more for your reading pleasure

http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/dos...e/921995/39564

http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/xbox...e/928655/45824

http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/xbox...e/939213/50716
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-16-2010, 11:50 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-26-2008, 05:35 PM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-14-2007, 02:23 AM
  4. Replies: 62
    Last Post: 01-22-2007, 07:35 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-01-2006, 12:51 PM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!