The administration's condemnation of Iran...why?

D

Danzig

New member
It has been drawn to my attention that Iran's current nuclear program is completely legal under international law and convention....laws to which the United States supposedly adheres and has signed.

If that is the case, if what Iran is doing is lawful, then any aggression toward Iran on the part of The United States would be unquestioningly illegal.

Can anyone here comment on the legality of Iran's nuclear program?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Iran's program as stated is legal. However, they have far more Stuff than is needed to refine reactor fuel. They are capable of refining weapons grade uranium and extracting weapons grade plutonium. To manufacture that stuff is not legal under international laws. They is no good reason to go to the expence they did just to make secondary reactor fuel.
 
I believe the UN had a popular vote to allow Iran to complete Nuclear 'ENERGY' research for reasons of supplying the country with nuclear power.

Bush and Co. disagree with this and have deemed Iran a "threat" if they are allowed to proceed on this course. They claim that Iran is hiding WMD reasearch with this Energy reasearch ploy.

Given the sources...beit Bush and Co. or Ahmadinejad and his country, as well as the whack muslim extremists...I don't know who to believe.

I do believe the muslim extremists pose a real threat to our country and our lifestyle. But, I don't believe everything Bush and Co. are throwing at us is 100% honest and true...maybe not even 50%.

Does Iran pose a threat to Israel? Likely. Does Iran pose a threat to the United States? Maybe. Do I feel threatened enough to justify a military attack on Iran? Not at this time.

Legalities are global, local, federal, international. Many laws here, there, everywhere conflict with laws elsewhere.

At this point, what Iran is doing IS legal considering our laws, justice system and rules of engagement.

I was listening to Glenn Beck today. I agree with alot of what he says...but something got to me today. He had a guest talking about Iran. He agreed with this guest when the guest said (paraphrasing): "If we don't do something about Iran now, they may have a nuclear bomb in 10 years."

Well, hell...someone MIGHT kill someone in 10, 15, 20, 30, 60 years...does that mean we have the right to arrest and prosecute them NOW? I DON'T THINK SO? What was that movie with Tom Cruise where they had the 3 chicks who could see a possible future, and the justice system based their arrests and prosecutions upon these premenitions? It is kind of like that, and it is just wrong, in my opinion.
 
Who says that Iran has more than what is "necessary"? And who is to say what is necessary anyway? "Necessary" is far to subjective a standard.

This information isn't coming from the same organizations that told us that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, the materials used for building nukes, or materials used for making biological and chemical weapons is it?
 
If that is the case, if what Iran is doing is lawful, then any aggression toward Iran on the part of The United States would be unquestioningly illegal.
Click to expand...

I think the general consensus opinion of the current administration regarding that statement is "So What". You could argue that the last war we fought legally was WWII.
 
You could argue that the last war we fought legally was WWII.
Click to expand...

And is also the last war we actually really won. :eek:

But, to put a new perspective on this...the "War" or "Conflict" in Iraq is not a "War" for War was never declared. For 6 -1/2 years, we have been fighting an executive order.
 
Legality? This means little in the state of nature that exists between sovereign nations. People who think there is or should be some international institution that can impose international law haven't thought things through very well.
 
It has been drawn to my attention that Iran's current nuclear program is completely legal under international law and convention....laws to which the United States supposedly adheres and has signed.
Click to expand...

Iran's stated use is legal, however they have purchased and brought on-line thousands of centrifuges to refine "fuel' for their "reactors". Not much as been mentioned of how many reactors they're supposedly going to build and supply, but the last "official' word I had was that they only had 3 new reactors in construction. Iran sits on an ocean of oil which can be used to generate electricity fairly cleanly with modern technology and much cheaper than nuclear investments.

The real issue is oversight and inspections. Iran objects to allowing any foreign, non-muslim inpectors observe their processing and they refuse to open records of their production facilities to inspectors.
 
Putting nuclear weapons in the hands of 7th century barbarians is the worst thing that can happen.
The question is ludicrous.

Martyn
 
Yeah a dictatorship in a Muslim country with the kinds of extremists who might hide Osama can't be allowed to have nuclear weapons. Uh, unless it's Pakistan.
 
So, is it OK that because one bunch of lunatics has nuclear weapons, another bunch of lunatics should be allowed to have them too?
I don't think so.

Martyn
 
The point I was making is that stopping it may not be possible, as it wasn't in other places. People say our military is stretched kind of thin, and we've spent something like half a trillion dollars in Iraq. Others say we should invade Iran and do some more nation building there. I don't think we should do that, nor am I even sure we can.
 
"Meanwhile the "neo cons" go on with their war propaganda, recycling the same lying script they used to start the Iraq war."

And you go on recycling the same script. America bad. Israel bad.

John

P.S. - I thought the name was: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
 
I don't want Iran lunies to have a nuclear bomb as much ast the next guy. But, Bush and Co. has lied to us before numerous times. I SURE AS HELL am not going to believe them now.

That's what you get for crying wolf Mr. Bush.
 
Anyone foolish enough to not see

1. Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons.
2. Iran regularly stating it wishes to remove Isreal from the map.
3. Iran calling for world wide fundamentalistic Islam

cannot be reasoned with so it is better not to even try. No amount of evidence will convince them because they will not believe it.

Isreal WILL attack Iran at the first sign a weapon is being constructed. If Iran gets a weapon they WILL use it on Tel Aviv first. Isreal knows this. We can sit back and watch this play out or we can try to do something about it now.

FYI, Isreal just took out a nuke site in Syria. Notice Syria has hardly said two words on the matter. They didn't seem to need to bother with occupation, regime change or any of that garbage. Why can't we be smart enough to do the same if needed?
 
Yeah a dictatorship in a Muslim country with the kinds of extremists who might hide Osama can't be allowed to have nuclear weapons. Uh, unless it's Pakistan.
Click to expand...

Secular Dictatorship which came about because of rampant corruption and the very real possiblity of the religious fanatics taking over if he did not. Sometimes there are no good choices, only better ones. Musharref is the better choice for Pakistan than anything else out there which has the potential to take over. They have nukes as does India. You can't put the genie back in the bottle. If we are stuck with a nuclear Pakistan who would you like to have run the nation? Mind you, the person/gov't you pick must actually be able to run the nation. Saying we are going to magically create western styled democracy is not a solution. That if anything is the problem we have in Iraq.
 
Isreal WILL attack Iran at the first sign a weapon is being constructed. If Iran gets a weapon they WILL use it on Tel Aviv first. Isreal knows this. We can sit back and watch this play out or we can try to do something about it now.
Click to expand...

Israel has nukes. If the Iranians are nuts enough to nuke Tel Aviv, you can be sure that there'll be a bunch of glass parking lots popping up all over Iran within the same hour.

FYI, Isreal just took out a nuke site in Syria. Notice Syria has hardly said two words on the matter. They didn't seem to need to bother with occupation, regime change or any of that garbage. Why can't we be smart enough to do the same if needed?
Click to expand...

See? Looks like the Israelis can take care of themselves. Why do we need to stick our noses in there, if Israel is both willing and able to do whatever it takes?

The primary responsibility to keep Israel safe lies with Israel, and it looks like they're doing a pretty good job at it. I'd rather not have our government chuck another three quarter trillion dollars into yet another hole in the sand over there, thank you very much.
 
Isreal will not wait for Tel Aviv to be hit. If it is hit they have already failed and can only retaliate, which they will. Iran though probably doesn't care since their leadership will be safe and the people will die martyrs.

We also have an interest in stability in the region. We get a lot of oil from there that we really need.

Personally I think we should drill the snot out of our own reserves and build nuke plants like no tommorrow to get away from forgien oil. We then need to develop alternate fuels and technologies. Leaving the US energy policy completely dependent on these religious fanatics is treasonous activity by every President, Congressman and Senator who has done so.
 
We also have an interest in stability in the region. We get a lot of oil from there that we really need.
Click to expand...

That, sir, is BULLCRAP.

There is 800 BILLION barrels of oil beneath the Colorado region. This is shale oil, which is very clean to extract and harvest as well as done fairly easily.

800 BILLION. That is about 3-times over the amount of reserves found beneath Saudi Arabia at this time. There is about 1-billion barrels per acre, spread over thousands of acres, mostly in Colorado.

Some have put the number at more than a trillion barrels.

We need the middle east for oil like we need an outbreak of untreatable illness.

The existence of this oil has been known for quite a few years, yet NO ONE has really talked about it. There are oil companies moving in here though...I have seen it.
 
No it is not bullcrap. We need that oil from the Mid East NOW. We will continue to need it as long as short sighted and corrupt politicians prevent the development of our own resources and alternative sources.

Read on and you will see that is just what I advised.

If would like nothing more than to say to the whole Mid East "Goodbye!" They only matter for two reasons. Mythological religious sites and oil. I have no use for mythology and would love not to use their oil.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top