Netflix should make this into a movie or series. Plenty of good material to draw from: this heist, assassinating Iranian scientists with magnetic bombs on motorcycles [1][2] and Stuxnet [3].
Given that there will be people insisting that the main objective of the program was nuclear power, not weapons, a show like that would be risky. Does Netflix want their shows accused of glorifying murder? I'm aware that there is the argument, perhaps with evidence, that Israel was halting weapons research aimed at them, but Netflix may not want to take the risk that the debate goes against them.
I don't really get it. If all they had to show were 15 year old documents, so dating before the Iranian nuclear accord, wouldn't this indicate that Iran did in fact fulfill its side of the agreement ? The main argument seems to be that if they kept the archives then it must mean that they want to resume their research program at some point in the future. I'm sure if Israel had any clear and direct evidence showing that Iran violated the deal they would have shown it.
I've heard responses from former Obama appointees that the documents in general were not surprising. They believed that Iran had an active nuclear program, was lying about it, and was hiding it. So they tried to create a deal that would not require countries to trust that Iran was complying. Overall it looks like Iran was complying with the deal, even if we can't assume good faith. So Netanyahu's speech came across as overtly political.
from a purely diplomatic standpoint, Im not so sure Iran was wrong to keep these documents. as its been proven the US is somewhat of a fair-weather friend with its treaties lately.
Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968 and ratified it in 1970. To date, Iran has never built a single nuclear bomb but only proven it can through enrichment should it choose to.
Israel's only real power in this case has been extrajudicial state-sponsored targeted assassinations. Its something that generally lands countries like Libya on the US terrorist embargo list, but Israel not so much.
I doubt this was the author’s intent, and it was certainly not the Israeli governent’s intent, but for me the most interesting parts of the article were the details of modern day intelligence techniques, and the overt descriptions of numerous (Israeli?) assassinations of people in Iran’s nuclear program, which was apprently justified by extremly flimsy evidence that Iran’s done anything to violate the treaty.
The article says Iran was hiding and saving these documents so that when the 15 year ban on nuclear material expired, Iran could startup it's nuclear program from where it left off.
Part of the issue, w/ respect to the U.S. pulling out of the deal appears to hinge on the Saudi's nuclear plans.
As the story was told at a D.C. forum (sorry can't remember which one, but it was w/i the last year):
1a) not only was U.S. representation excluded from bidding on their project(s), but the Chinese and the Russians were allowed to.;
1b) if the U.S. was excluded from bidding, and therefore uninvolved in the project(s), it would not be able to "monitor" it;
2) the Saudis were supposedly citing Iran's ability to enrich uranium, and saying that that therefore allowed them (the Saudis) to do so, too, because their program was also "only for peaceful purposes."
> But if sanctions resume, and more Western companies leave Iran, it is possible that Iranian leaders will decide to resume nuclear fuel production.
and
> By the time the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Yukiya Amano, was finally permitted to visit the site in 2015, it was empty, though the agency’s report indicated that it looked as if equipment had been removed.
I don't understand the authors conclusion. He is saying that without a nuclear deal Iran will try to develop the bomb. Later he shows that even with a deal Iran tries to make a bomb and not report it. My intuition says that the solution is to create a new deal. One that makes it harder for Iran to hide nuclear bomb making facilities and doesn't involve sending them $1.7 billion dollars in cash [1]
> Netanyahu...proved Iranian...intent to resume bomb production
Israel has dozens, if not hundreds, of nuclear bombs. Why should Iran not have nuclear bombs as well? The US and US industry was pushing for Iran to turn more towards nuclear production in the 1970s.
Iran also has made offers for a nuclear-free Middle East agreement - offers Israel has always rejected. What is the line - Arab and Muslim states in the Middle East are not allowed to have nuclear bombs, but Jewish ones can?
Some people might say Iran has theocratic and undemocratic elements. But the US and Israel had little problem with the Shah's lack of democracy. Also the US and England backed the conservative, fundamentalist mullahs in Iran from the 1950s to the 1970s against democratic republicans like Mossadegh. The US only turned against conservative fundamentalist mullahs in Iran at the very end of the 1970s who wanted US (and USSR) interference with Iran's internal affairs ended.
There's a non- Jewish-vs-Muslim argument: no country that does not today have nukes should be allowed to develop them. Hold the line. It may not be "fair", but it's safer for the world.
The leaders of Iran have called for the destruction of Israel many times, so of course Israel will do what it can to thwart the nuclear weapons program of Iran.
This is a simpleton's way of looking at an issue as complex as this. It's intellectual laziness to try to water down geopolitical/historical motivations by claiming that "ooooh they did it for the oil!".
[+] [-] IBM|7 years ago|reply
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jan/11/iran-nuclear-s...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Iranian_nucle...
[3] https://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/world/middleeast/16stuxne...
[+] [-] mirimir|7 years ago|reply
Or about Israelis stealing from the US.[1]
0) https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/spies-who-spilled-ato...
1) https://consortiumnews.com/2016/09/11/how-israel-stole-the-b...
[+] [-] Area12|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ajnin|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chris11|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nimbius|7 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Ac...
Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968 and ratified it in 1970. To date, Iran has never built a single nuclear bomb but only proven it can through enrichment should it choose to.
Israel's only real power in this case has been extrajudicial state-sponsored targeted assassinations. Its something that generally lands countries like Libya on the US terrorist embargo list, but Israel not so much.
[+] [-] hedora|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kss238|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jsoc815|7 years ago|reply
As the story was told at a D.C. forum (sorry can't remember which one, but it was w/i the last year):
1a) not only was U.S. representation excluded from bidding on their project(s), but the Chinese and the Russians were allowed to.;
1b) if the U.S. was excluded from bidding, and therefore uninvolved in the project(s), it would not be able to "monitor" it;
2) the Saudis were supposedly citing Iran's ability to enrich uranium, and saying that that therefore allowed them (the Saudis) to do so, too, because their program was also "only for peaceful purposes."
[+] [-] unknown|7 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] firic|7 years ago|reply
and
> By the time the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Yukiya Amano, was finally permitted to visit the site in 2015, it was empty, though the agency’s report indicated that it looked as if equipment had been removed.
I don't understand the authors conclusion. He is saying that without a nuclear deal Iran will try to develop the bomb. Later he shows that even with a deal Iran tries to make a bomb and not report it. My intuition says that the solution is to create a new deal. One that makes it harder for Iran to hide nuclear bomb making facilities and doesn't involve sending them $1.7 billion dollars in cash [1]
[1] http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-iran-payment-c...
[+] [-] pknerd|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] touristtam|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] exabrial|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] imbokodo|7 years ago|reply
Israel has dozens, if not hundreds, of nuclear bombs. Why should Iran not have nuclear bombs as well? The US and US industry was pushing for Iran to turn more towards nuclear production in the 1970s.
Iran also has made offers for a nuclear-free Middle East agreement - offers Israel has always rejected. What is the line - Arab and Muslim states in the Middle East are not allowed to have nuclear bombs, but Jewish ones can?
Some people might say Iran has theocratic and undemocratic elements. But the US and Israel had little problem with the Shah's lack of democracy. Also the US and England backed the conservative, fundamentalist mullahs in Iran from the 1950s to the 1970s against democratic republicans like Mossadegh. The US only turned against conservative fundamentalist mullahs in Iran at the very end of the 1970s who wanted US (and USSR) interference with Iran's internal affairs ended.
[+] [-] khazhou|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jonhendry18|7 years ago|reply
So does nuclear Pakistan.
[+] [-] gonvaled|7 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] poster123|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aqibgatoo|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throwaway8879|7 years ago|reply