https://www.reuters.com/world/china/iaea-board-declares-iran-breach-non-proliferation-duties-diplomats-say-2025-06-12/

IAEA board declares Iran in breach of non-proliferation obligation

freediver wrote on Jun 19^th, 2025 at 9:37am:


Why do you repeatedly fail to provide the common courtesy of making your links active?

Is it because you're just lazy or is there some other reason?

Of course, if you ditched this archaic forum software and upgraded to something more modern it would do it automatically.

So why don't you?

Quote:


Your 'link' is from the 12th yet see what IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi said on the 17th (reply 2).

Quote:


Yes I see it. Are you saying the IAEA has changed it's mind over those few days, or can you figure out the difference between the two statements?

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/iaea-board-declares-iran-breach-non-proliferation-duties-diplomats-say-2025-06-12/

IAEA board declares Iran in breach of non-proliferation obligation

The Islamic apologists spouting utter nonsense again. 

I don't think anyone would say Iran is making nuclear weapons, they are refining uranium to be able to make nuclear bombs.

Jasin wrote on Jun 20^th, 2025 at 3:19pm:


The IDF is a terrorist organisation.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 20^th, 2025 at 5:12pm:


Sounds like she is actually on the same page as everyone else.

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/iaea-board-declares-iran-breach-non-proliferation-duties-diplomats-say-2025-06-12/

IAEA board declares Iran in breach of non-proliferation obligation

freediver wrote on Jun 20^th, 2025 at 5:28pm:


There is no civilian use for Uranium enriched to those levels.

freediver wrote on Jun 20^th, 2025 at 5:55pm:


The peaceful nuclear program Iran mentions is wiping out the jews for peace.
It's a bit of the double speak muslims are famous for.

freediver wrote on Jun 20^th, 2025 at 8:24am:


Didn't read your 'link'. Wanna know why?

See here, from the 19th:

The director says,

"We did not find in Iran any elements to indicate that there is an active systematic plan to build a nuclear weapon."

He then goes on to say that Iran was not providing clarity on many activities taking place there yet,      

"at the same time we have not seen elements to allow us as inspectors to affirm that there was a nuclear weapon that was being manufactured or produced somewhere in Iran."

https://www.aljazeera.com/video/talk-to-al-jazeera/2025/6/19/iaea-chief-no-evide...

So hardly enough evidence to conclude that Israel was under threat of imminent attack, which is the criteria needed to launch pre-emptive strikes, as required under international law.

But since when has Israel cared about that?

And can someone explain why Israel refuses to be a part of the nuclear NPT?

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 21^st, 2025 at 11:37pm:



We're not discussing India/Pak in this thread.

Anyone?

If Iran had no intention of developing nuclear weapons, why was it enriching uranium at 60 percent when only 5 percent is required for civilian use (electricity generation)?

You don't wait until AFTER they develop one, or the world ends up with a North Korea situation when it is too late.

Once a nation has them, they have them.

You don't wait until the first nuclear test happens, it is too late.

The IAEA the other day said Iran was enriching uranium at 60 percent, which is well above the 5 percent level required for a nuclear power reactor.

MattE wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2025 at 3:19pm:


Can you explain why Israel refuses to be a part of the NPT?

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2025 at 8:00am:


The term "imminent" in the context of nuclear weapons is intentionally vague and lacks a precise, universally agreed-upon definition. It's a subjective judgment, often based on a combination of factors and assessments, including the readiness of nuclear forces, political tensions, and intelligence information. However, it generally signifies a high probability of imminent use within a relatively short timeframe, often measured in days or even hours.

Here's a breakdown of what "imminent" might mean in this context:

1. Readiness of Nuclear Forces: This includes factors like the alert status of nuclear forces, the availability of launch platforms (missiles, bombers, submarines), and the time it takes to prepare and execute a launch sequence.

2. Political and Military Tensions: High levels of political tension, military buildup, and aggressive rhetoric from opposing sides can increase the likelihood of nuclear weapons use. The presence of a specific triggering event, like a military attack or escalation of conflict, can also be a factor.

3. Intelligence and Assessment: Intelligence agencies play a crucial role in assessing the likelihood of nuclear use. Their analysis of an adversary's intentions, capabilities, and decision-making processes helps determine the imminence of a nuclear attack.

4. Lack of Precise Timeframe: While "imminent" suggests a short timeframe, it's not typically defined in terms of a specific number of hours or days. It's more of a qualitative judgment based on the overall situation and available information.

5. Examples in History: The Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, is a stark example of a situation where the risk of nuclear war was perceived as high and potentially imminent, but ultimately averted.

6. Subjectivity and Context: Ultimately, the judgment of whether nuclear weapons are "imminent" is subjective and depends on the specific context of the situation.

wombatwoody wrote on Jun 24^th, 2025 at 7:01am:

wombatwoody wrote on Jun 25^th, 2025 at 6:37am:


They live together peacefully in Israel right now.

But everywhere else in the middle east and north africa, there are almost zero Jews left, after all those centuries of "peace".

Muslims will tolerate Jews being alive in the middle east, to some extent. It is the lack of Islamic theocracy to oppress them and the fact that the Jews appear to be in charge that makes them foam at the mouth.

Quote:


Wow. You are gullible. You think the Jewish conspiracy is so grand it encompasses genocide of the Jews from almost all of the middle east and north africa.

Quote:


If that were true they would object to every other country in the middle east and north africa. They only object to Israel. Because of the Jews.

Quote:


Israel is already great. But you are right, there is no reason it cannot be improved.

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2025 at 6:47pm:


Wow. You are dense. Doesn't anything sink in with you?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1749169338/5#5

And here:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1749169338/7#7

And more from Israeli historian Avi Shlaim here, where he's interviewed by Chris Hedges:

Avi Shlaim: When I started work on my autobiography I came across two sources of evidence which implicate Israel in the bombings. In three out of the five bombs, one source was Yaakov Karkoukli, an elderly Iraqi friend of my mother, who was an activist in the Zionist underground, and he told me in great detail about their activities, about the bribes they paid, about the documents they forged... I now have both oral history and hard evidence and together they are incontrovertible evidence that Israel had a hand in the bombs that were intended to frighten the Jews and precipitate the exodus from Iraq to Israel.



Quote:


Which other country in the region was established by ethnically cleansing over 700,000 innocent people?

Which other country in the region has carried out massacres like this?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1745840322/8#8

Quote:


Don't you know what the term Eretz Yisrael means?

Genesis 15:18 : To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the River Euphrates.

In his Complete Diaries, Vol. II. p. 711, Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism, says that the area of the Jewish State stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.”

Rabbi Fischmann, member of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, declared in his testimony to the U.N. Special Committee of Enquiry on 9 July 1947: “The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt up to the Euphrates, it includes parts of Syria and Lebanon.”

freediver wrote on Jun 27^th, 2025 at 6:51am:


Are you too lazy to do a little reading? Or couldn't you comprehend what was presented?

Anyone else finding it difficult to understand the motive for those false flags?

Jasin wrote on Jul 1^st, 2025 at 10:47pm:


Change the record.

freediver wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2025 at 8:54am:


Then how come you didn't see this from that link?



I write this article
for the same reason I wrote my book:
to tell the American people,
and especially American Jews,
that Jews from Islamic lands did not emigrate
willingly to Israel; that, to force them to leave,
Jews killed Jews; and that,
to buy time to confiscate ever more Arab lands,
Jews on numerous occasions
rejected genuine peace initiatives
from their Arab neighbors.
I write about what the first prime minister of Israel called "cruel Zionism."
I write about it because I was part of it.

Or this?

Avi Shlaim:  I now have both oral history and hard evidence and together they are incontrovertible evidence that Israel had a hand in the bombs that were intended to frighten the Jews and precipitate the exodus from Iraq to Israel.

Or are you calling both of them 'lunatic fringe conspiracy theorists'?