Report: US could allow limited Iranian uranium enrichment

[IRN34]

Right now Bibi and Barak (and Gantz, as well) are preparing the public opinion to unilateral Israeli strike, and some other players rush to condemn it, because they also know that it is just a matter of time until unilateral Israeli strike will follow these still born negotiations.

do you have any sort of intelligence connections to know about these stuff ? please share it with the MP members

[JGXL836]

Maybe yes maybe not, facts will tell us how it is and how will be.
Its all a game do not forget that.

In this game, if Bibi and Barak don't strike - they lose.

[scttgillies]

And if they do strike, everybody loses. I really hope that they talk about this. Neither side seems to want to back down here, that is a recipie for disaster, but what do i know, im just a citizen of earth.
Now before anyone here abuses me for saying this, bear with me, Why shouldn't iran be allowed nuclear energy, as long as it is controlled and overseen by a country that both parties agree with. IIRC, they have signed the relevent non proliferation treaty, to which India, Pakistan and Israel hasn't.
Can you see my logic here. Surely there is more reasons to sanction the nations who havent signed than one who has and wants nuclear power.

[GB_FXST]

And if they do strike, everybody loses. I really hope that they talk about this. Neither side seems to want to back down here, that is a recipie for disaster, but what do i know, im just a citizen of earth.
Now before anyone here abuses me for saying this, bear with me, Why shouldn't iran be allowed nuclear energy, as long as it is controlled and overseen by a country that both parties agree with. IIRC, they have signed the relevent non proliferation treaty, to which India, Pakistan and Israel hasn't.
Can you see my logic here. Surely there is more reasons to sanction the nations who havent signed than one who has and wants nuclear power.

Except for the fact that the NPT is non-binding on non-signatories.

In regards to Iran, non-compliance with the NPT is only part of the equation. There is also the matter of their threats against a fellow UN member state.

[EITAN88]

And if they do strike, everybody loses. I really hope that they talk about this. Neither side seems to want to back down here, that is a recipie for disaster, but what do i know, im just a citizen of earth.
Now before anyone here abuses me for saying this, bear with me, Why shouldn't iran be allowed nuclear energy, as long as it is controlled and overseen by a country that both parties agree with. IIRC, they have signed the relevent non proliferation treaty, to which India, Pakistan and Israel hasn't.
Can you see my logic here. Surely there is more reasons to sanction the nations who havent signed than one who has and wants nuclear power.

Regardless of Iran being a signatory of the NPT there is a wide consensus that it is developing a nuclear weapons program.

This is the obvious reason for the current standoff and the sever sanctions against Iran. Any reasonable person would prefer a peaceful solution to this, and this is especially true for the people who live in Israel but to cancel out a military option isn't something that Israel can afford to do.

[JGXL836]

And if they do strike, everybody loses. I really hope that they talk about this. Neither side seems to want to back down here, that is a recipie for disaster, but what do i know, im just a citizen of earth.
Now before anyone here abuses me for saying this, bear with me, Why shouldn't iran be allowed nuclear energy, as long as it is controlled and overseen by a country that both parties agree with. IIRC, they have signed the relevent non proliferation treaty, to which India, Pakistan and Israel hasn't.
Can you see my logic here. Surely there is more reasons to sanction the nations who havent signed than one who has and wants nuclear power.

Israel carried out preemptive strikes many times, and won.

I don't see any overseeing body and methods of overseeing that both parties agree with.

[Climber]

In this game, if Bibi and Barak don't strike - they lose.

They are politicians, they only care for themselves, as all of them..............

And if they do strike, everybody loses. I really hope that they talk about this. Neither side seems to want to back down here, that is a recipie for disaster, but what do i know, im just a citizen of earth.
Now before anyone here abuses me for saying this, bear with me, Why shouldn't iran be allowed nuclear energy, as long as it is controlled and overseen by a country that both parties agree with. IIRC, they have signed the relevent non proliferation treaty, to which India, Pakistan and Israel hasn't.
Can you see my logic here. Surely there is more reasons to sanction the nations who havent signed than one who has and wants nuclear power.

Really? so you go everywhere without passports and visas?

And I think you, as many here in the forum, "play the thing by the ear" like we say in Spanish, you talk about a thing without factual and real knowledge of the subject.

[Nizark]

I'm waiting for the Arabs to take care of their own backyard for ONCE in their existence. Sadly enough, the closest thing to that was Bin Laden when he offered up AQ to defend saudi arabia from Saddam's Iraq - the whole ME wants the US to take out the Iranian nuke program so they don't need to. They will talk massive trash in public, then toast to us in their Palaces when it's done. Maybe all the friggin planes, trains and automobiles that the UAE and saudi are buying from us can be used against iran instead of the US going in. The US isn't permanently there, the Arabs are - their neighborhood, their mess.

[EITAN88]

I'm waiting for the Arabs to take care of their own backyard for ONCE in their existence. Sadly enough, the closest thing to that was Bin Laden when he offered up AQ to defend saudi arabia from Saddam's Iraq - the whole ME wants the US to take out the Iranian nuke program so they don't need to. They will talk massive trash in public, then toast to us in their Palaces when it's done. Maybe all the friggin planes, trains and automobiles that the UAE and saudi are buying from us can be used against iran instead of the US going in. The US isn't permanently there, the Arabs are - their neighborhood, their mess.

I can`t stress how much I share your thoughts on this matter.

However there`s one key factor in all of this that you didn`t mention and I`m sure you are well aware of... OIL.

[KoTeMoRe]

Regardless of Iran being a signatory of the NPT there is a wide consensus that it is developing a nuclear weapons program.

This is the obvious reason for the current standoff and the sever sanctions against Iran. Any reasonable person would prefer a peaceful solution to this, and this is especially true for the people who live in Israel but to cancel out a military option isn't something that Israel can afford to do.

Wide consensus? That's why the matter was rushed at the UNSC (15 countries) by the IAEA DB with 14 abstentions on the 35 parties? Is that a wide consensus? Please, tell me who has actually provided evidence for your allegation. Lemme ease you that part. The NCRI and the US. A terrorist organisation and the nation that had Iran surrounded for the last 8 years or so. The funny thing is that every evidence deemed of "concern" has not been made public by the IAEA DB.

On the 5% level, it is still inconsistent with the NPT and IAEA. The safeguards are to be set by the IAEA after complete inspections, not by the POTUS.

[ragnarok]

I'm waiting for the Arabs to take care of their own backyard for ONCE in their existence. Sadly enough, the closest thing to that was Bin Laden when he offered up AQ to defend saudi arabia from Saddam's Iraq - the whole ME wants the US to take out the Iranian nuke program so they don't need to. They will talk massive trash in public, then toast to us in their Palaces when it's done. Maybe all the friggin planes, trains and automobiles that the UAE and saudi are buying from us can be used against iran instead of the US going in. The US isn't permanently there, the Arabs are - their neighborhood, their mess.

I, along with alot of people on this site, share that similar view with you sir.

[EITAN88]

Wide consensus? That's why the matter was rushed at the UNSC (15 countries) by the IAEA DB with 14 abstentions on the 35 parties? Is that a wide consensus? Please, tell me who has actually provided evidence for your allegation. Lemme ease you that part. The NCRI and the US. A terrorist organisation and the nation that had Iran surrounded for the last 8 years or so. The funny thing is that every evidence deemed of "concern" has not been made public by the IAEA DB.

The US and the EU are both cooperating on this matter, so yeah... that would be a wide enough consensus IMHO. You can keep on believing that Iran is interested in a nuclear program for peaceful purposes.

[geolocator]

up to a 5% purity

- doubtful that it's enough to really produce fuel for a production NPP. Around 20% and further downgrade. And if they really want own nuclear program they need more then 5% enrichment for learning curve.

[KoTeMoRe]

The US and the EU are both cooperating on this matter, so yeah... that would be a wide enough consensus IMHO. You can keep on believing that Iran is interested in a nuclear program for peaceful purposes.

That still doesn't make a wide consensus. We've had countless discussions about this. The treatment Iran recieves on this is disgraceful, not because Iran is a peaceful and responsible NPT member, but because we do not play by our own NPT rules. It's simply a political gamble we're having on Iran. Just another tool to hit a regime we dislike. This however should not discard any criticism regarding the hypocrisy related to the Iranian case.

BTW Iran is surely interested in a civilian nuclear program, not only is it interested, but it has the right to a civilian nuclear program as per the NPT. All the rest is simply hard-hitting politics. In yet another Iran thread, I said that if Iran wanted a bomb, they had the possibility through the DPRK and the Khan network to at least obtain processes and blueprints. Yet they did not made that choice (Unlike Libya for intstance). Please do explain why?

[EITAN88]

That still doesn't make a wide consensus. We've had countless discussions about this. The treatment Iran recieves on this is disgraceful, not because Iran is a peaceful and responsible NPT member, but because we do not play by our own NPT rules. It's simply a political gamble we're having on Iran. Just another tool to hit a regime we dislike. This however should not discard any criticism regarding the hypocrisy related to the Iranian case.

BTW Iran is surely interested in a civilian nuclear program, not only is it interested, but it has the right to a civilian nuclear program as per the NPT. All the rest is simply hard-hitting politics. In yet another Iran thread, I said that if Iran wanted a bomb, they had the possibility through the DPRK and the Khan network to at least obtain processes and blueprints. Yet they did not made that choice (Unlike Libya for intstance). Please do explain why?

I'll be honest here and let you know up front that I'm not intending to venture on another endless discussion on this matter.

You don't believe there's a wide enough consensus? Good for you.

You believe that the US and the EU are out to get Iran? Good for you once again.

History will judge if Iran is as innocent as you claim it to be and until then lets agree to disagree.