China-Iran Connection

Now. After you signed the NPT, you increased your stockpiles.

We did the best that we could. No one who is reasonable expects any more than that.

Which avoids why it increased (for defence), which avoids the hypocrisy.

It's odd that Iran should fear invasion by the U.S. Given that, they have every right to look for ways to protect themselves from such invasion.

Bank robbers think that it's hypocritical that it's illegal for them to shoot at police officers while it's perfectly legal for police officers to shoot at them.

We made a good faith effort to comply with the treaty, and we did the best that any reasonable person would expect of us.

That's not at all comparable to Iran making a bad faith effort to violate the treaty.

Sorry, America is not a police man, and Iran is not robbing a bank.

Iran is a sovereign nation. Every country has the right to self defence. The same reason the US will have used for it's breach in spirit of the NPT.

And as a sovereign nation, it also has every right to violate a treaty that doesn't do it any favours. On the other side, other countries that disagree, have every right to impose sanctions.

That is incorrect. On both counts.



The US did not breach the spirit of the NPT in any way.



That is incorrect. Iran does not have the right to violate the NPT.



Sanctions are good. Airstrikes work too.

To everything prior to the below comment, What can I say, but that we disagree.

'If you want to have a defense system that includes the same weapons we have, we will attack you'...

If you the U.S. got rid of all it's nuclear weapons, it'd have a leg to stand on. And that's the problem. No one pays attention to the US on this if they are prepared to face the sanctions, because no matter the justifications behind it, in the end, everyone understands there is a rank hypocrisy in demanding other nations never develop nuclear weapons, while keeping theirs.

By the way - I don't particularly care for Iran getting a hold of Nuclear weapons, just as Pakistan is a worry, because of the potential for religious extremists getting a hold of them (because religious extremists may not care about the threat of mutually assured destruction).

Thus the value of air strikes as an option.


During the 1991 Iraq war, the US developed 5000-pound bunker busters that allow conventional weapons to destroy deep bunkers.

During his first couple years in office (I forget the exact date), Obama had this idea that he would kick start the Middle East peace process by forcing Israel to stop settlement construction. He quickly found that he didn't have the power to make Israel do anything though, and had to fall back on a plan to ask Israel to temporarily halt settlement construction for a year in exchange for a couple hundred of these 5000-pound bunker busters.

Israel agreed and halted settlement construction for a year. The peace process went nowhere of course, because the settlements were never the problem. And now Israel has weaponry sufficient to destroy Iran's underground enrichment facilities.

Are all conservatives warmongers hoping for armageddon, or is it just you?

What armageddon?

If Israel bombs Iran's illegal nuclear sites, progressives will wail and blubber on behalf of their terrorist buddies for awhile. That's hardly armageddon.

Dident answer my question. Slipped around it with some b s about justification for more of Israel's illegal acts.

It's not illegal for Jews to defend themselves from people who are trying to murder them.

Your mistake is equating self defense with wilfull murder.

oralloy delights in the slaughter of millions of innocents killed by successive usa governments.

Wrong again. It's not a crime for Jews to defend themselves from people who are trying to harm them.

No one can trust what you say, oralloy, when you support usa governments murdering 2,997 folks on 9-11 just to gain support for their illegal invasions.

I'm pretty sure I've never seen Oralloy say he even believes such.

oralloy knows full well that elements of the usa government murdered 2, 976 people when they blew up the towers.

How about you provide evidence that he 'knows full well'.

And to be clear - your conspiracy theory 'proving' to you such occurred, does not equate to another person 'knowing full well' (ie. buying it)

[quoteHow about you provide evidence that he 'knows full well'.][/quote]

I have. But science and evidence means squat to people like you and oralloy.