Who is really in violation of the NPT, Iran or US

Iran, if they want to develope nuclear energy, needs to do so under close supervision of the IAEA, since they are not allowing the IAEA to monitor them they are in violation of the NPT's.
 
Cadet Seaman said:
I'm sure when Iran makes threats of wiping a whole country off the face of the earth they are good for it.
Click to expand...
But running your mouth and making threats does NOT violate any international law. You must actually DO something to break a law. So my question stands.
 
bulldogg said:
But running your mouth and making threats does NOT violate any international law. You must actually DO something to break a law. So my question stands.
Click to expand...

They are in danger of violating the NPT as the documents says the Middle East shall be a no nuclear zone. Since they as intel reports gather technology and equipment for potential being able to create a nuclear weapon it is reasonable to ask their intentions. However, if they leave the NPT they will not violate it - as questioned of doing in 2003.

I guess your question still stands....
 
Phoenix, you in fact were the one who posted on here that Iran was in violation of international law. Would you please do us the honour of enlightening us as to what international laws Iran has violated? A source would be nice too.
 
Some good responses

Before I respond I want to make clear that my post was not intended as a troll but I can't stop people perceiving that way or comming to the conclusion that I hate America (which I don't).

Thanks to the forum administrators for not throwing me out or deleting my posts.

A few posts have asked which articles of the NPT have either country violated, thats a good question. As far as I can see at this time I don't believe either country has offcially voilated the NPT. The IAEA is still investigating Irans case and I have asked them to provide me with details on any investigations they are conducting on the US.

I think we are all fairly clear on the case against Iran but in summary the US maintains Iran has had a secret Nulcear Weapons programme for 20 years and this breaches their commitment to the NPT. Interestingly I am not aware of the US accussing Iran of breaching Article 2 of the NPT which prohibits non-nuclear-weapon states from acquiring the materials or technology to create weapons, this might be because it will self incriminating, if anyone in the forum can confirm/deny this that would be great.

The case against the US is that it has proliferated Nuclear Weapons by transfering knowledge and materials to various states most notably Israel which is not a signatory of the NPT but ironically possibly to Iran . This breaches Article 1 of the NPT.

Iran also mainatains that the US by actively opposing its peaceful nuclear programme is in breach of article 4 for the NPT.

If you followed the link and James Risen is telling the truth the real irony is that both countrys would be in breach on the NPT! Although I guess it wont be all that surprising..
 
Uncle Sam said:
Before I respond I want to make clear that my post was not intended as a troll but I can't stop people perceiving that way or comming to the conclusion that I hate America (which I don't).

Thanks to the forum administrators for not throwing me out or deleting my posts.

A few posts have asked which articles of the NPT have either country violated, thats a good question. As far as I can see at this time I don't believe either country has offcially voilated the NPT. The IAEA is still investigating Irans case and I have asked them to provide me with details on any investigations they are conducting on the US.

I think we are all fairly clear on the case against Iran but in summary the US maintains Iran has had a secret Nulcear Weapons programme for 20 years and this breaches their commitment to the NPT. Interestingly I am not aware of the US accussing Iran of breaching Article 2 of the NPT which prohibits non-nuclear-weapon states from acquiring the materials or technology to create weapons, this might be because it will self incriminating, if anyone in the forum can confirm/deny this that would be great.

The case against the US is that it has proliferated Nuclear Weapons by transfering knowledge and materials to various states most notably Israel which is not a signatory of the NPT but ironically possibly to Iran . This breaches Article 1 of the NPT.

Iran also mainatains that the US by actively opposing its peaceful nuclear programme is in breach of article 4 for the NPT.

If you followed the link and James Risen is telling the truth the real irony is that both countrys would be in breach on the NPT! Although I guess it wont be all that surprising..
Click to expand...

LMAO

Now that you couldnt prove the US is in violation of NPT, you resort to this sort of tactic by saying that since the US transfered material to Israel (which it didnt at all) it has violated an international law.

I think you need to find a better case to bash the USA with
 
I wasn't trying to prove anything or bash the US, I was merely asking a question and responding to the posts of others.

I think you need to examine what your reading without imposing your preconseptions on the text, this way you will find you can hold a dialog more effectively and it whole experience is more rewarding.

I have learned a lot from the reactions from the people on this forum, on whole it has been a positive experience and helps me better understand the reasoning or emotions behind their responses, I try not tar someone as red neck or a mullah because they hold a different view point, I stopped doing that at about the age of six.
 
good for you! but your posts still sound like you like Mullahs policies more than Americans'
Click to expand...
No he has looked at the information and determiend one thing while you and I think it means another, that doesnt make him a mullah or even a supporter of the Iranian regeime.
 
LOL

You have totaly lost me, what policies are you talking about? As far as I was aware I was asking a question not putting forward a manifesto.

Are you responding to someone elses posts? Here, have a smiley on me :)
 
Rabs said:
No he has looked at the information and determiend one thing while you and I think it means another, that doesnt make him a mullah or even a supporter of the Iranian regeime.
Click to expand...

his post sounds like a mullahs' symapthizer to me!
 
That doesn't mean much, I guess anyone who disagrees with you falls into some kind of category, don't they?

As it happens I will going to Iran after short break in New York, I will be there for norouz. I will be there at about the same time Israel intends to strike if you believe the London Times. I'll send the mullahs your regards. I guess Irans loss is Canadas gain!

:offtopic:
 
You will be there as a human shield?

I dont really care about the destroyers of my homeland. Have fun there!
 
Uncle Sam's post don't sound anti or pro US to me, I have seen him start off another post with the exact same thing, he just has his opinions and they vary from topic to topic depending on the subject. He doesn't have to be Anti-American to disagree with American policies, he just has to have an opinion.

As for this talk about Israel attacking, I am pretty sure that Sharon's condition and probably imminent death will put a hold on those plans, if they even exist at all.
 
I don't intend to shield anything, anyway if you were to stick 100 rabbis in the busher nuclear facility I don't think the Israelis would think twice about attacking it.
 
Damien435 said:
Uncle Sam's post don't sound anti or pro US to me, I have seen him start off another post with the exact same thing, he just has his opinions and they vary from topic to topic depending on the subject. He doesn't have to be Anti-American to disagree with American policies, he just has to have an opinion.

As for this talk about Israel attacking, I am pretty sure that Sharon's condition and probably imminent death will put a hold on those plans, if they even exist at all.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ!

Sharon's death may put Israeli hardliners who favor an attack on Iran ahead in March 28th poll.
 
I think if you analyse the NPT under what it was intended for and not what it says then the current impasse makes more sense. It is my understanding that the NPT was a mechanism whereby the two superpowers, after several near misses through their proxies, decided they would under the auspices of benevolence prevent anyone else from holding the keys to the kingdom. In addition it was also to end the arms race. Now, ignore what the treaty SAYS and look at its intent, as I argue it, and see if it makes a little more sense as to the vagaries of who is violating what.

Also as a side note the US does have IAEA inspectors inspect American nuclear facilities, at least they did when I was last living near a certain facility in Kentucky. ;)
 
phoenix80 said:
I beg to differ!

Sharon's death may put Israeli hardliners who favor an attack on Iran ahead in March 28th poll.
Click to expand...

:offtopic:

March 28th? Well, that election falls on a day with great historical signifigance, it's my birthday and since I will one day dwarf the accomplishments of Alexander the Great it will in the near future be the greatest day in the history of mankind. Muwahahahaha!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top