So now, we've gone from NO evidence of a nuclear weapons program to the evidence does not indicate a desire for nuclear weapons to now guilty with an explanation.
You're shifting your goal post each and every time here.
Now, the tough question is why should you allow a state that obviously lied, broke her own word, stated an entire people lied, and whether true or not about saying he wanted to destroy Israel, did not come out and explicitly denied such allegations ANY chance at nuclear weapons?
North Korea at least withdrew from the NPT before setting off her nuke. Why should we demand any less of Iran?
States have the right to make war, individuals do not, again international jurisprudence, everything you cite applies to individuals, not states.
Got anything else, or you just gonna make the same old unsubstantiated claims?
Pssst: Just so you know where to look, here's a hint: state sponsorship of terrorism.
Socialism is simply the Collective denial of responsibility.
Fact: There is NO evidence for a nuclear weapons program. None. It doesn't exist. If we accept the Khan-blueprint thing as fact, that is not proof of a weapons program. It simply doesn't follow. Although if it is true, and I'm inclined to think it is, it does constitute a breach of the NPT.
I'm all for the NPT. I think it is an important piece of legislation. Major nuclear powers like the US and UK are in breach of it, so should they be allowed to act as judge, jury and executioner when it comes to Iran?
(Source : Legal report, quoted in full here: : In the News - Renewal of US-UK Nuclear Cooperation 'in Breach of NPT' say Eminent Lawyers)
So can we be constructive? What would our advice to Iran be? They live in a world where the strongest nations do not observe the same treaties we are demanding they observe. They live in a world where the strongest nations commit acts of terrorism against Iran's neighbours. What would our advice be?
AQ Khan is the smoking gun.
What we're saying is this - There is absolutely no proof, whatsoever, that there is an Iranian weapons program. Being in violation of the NPT, and having a weapons program, are 2 very, VERY different things.
As always, could you also substantiate the above claim regarding the US Supreme court and their refusal to hear it. And the same for our non-existent supreme court. I'm not trying to catch you out. I've already learned a lot on this board, and I'm still learning. Long may it continue.
As for the US Supreme Court, I've found no motion submitted to them on the above.
The fact remains that obtaining materials that could be preparatory to starting a nuclear weapons program is a breach.
Starting a nuclear weapons program is a breach, albeit in a different way.
But they are VERY different things.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)