US helped Israel with H-bomb - 1980s report declassified

[fanger]

Muslims are unstable and irresponsible - Israel having nukes doesn't mean radicalized Islamic societies should and f!@#$ being fair.

War is the obvious answer. Does anyone really think they are going to talk Iran out of having one ? Israel wants war--let them have it.

Its not about 'talking' and it wasn't about talking with the Iranians 2 years ago, its about forcing them the disadvantage of having nukes at all cost since it is obvious they are heading to war and they having nukes is the game changer for them, its about not giving up and not signing a deal which will allow them nukes, the moment they possess one nuke we can no longer control them.

Why do you think you should "control" any other country?

 

[dilloduck]

Then Israel should use one of it's nukes and blow Iran off the map. That sounds rational don't you think ?

Sadly that is where we heading when Iran insists to have nukes, when they wish to take the 'possible ' upcoming war to a level of nukes it can end up with Israel nuking Iran, because otherwise we are in a huge defensive disadvantage as Jihadism can ignite a series of world scale nuking.

Well go ahead and get it over with. What is Israel waiting for ?

 

[Daniyel]

Muslims are unstable and irresponsible - Israel having nukes doesn't mean radicalized Islamic societies should and f!@#$ being fair.

War is the obvious answer. Does anyone really think they are going to talk Iran out of having one ? Israel wants war--let them have it.

Its not about 'talking' and it wasn't about talking with the Iranians 2 years ago, its about forcing them the disadvantage of having nukes at all cost since it is obvious they are heading to war and they having nukes is the game changer for them, its about not giving up and not signing a deal which will allow them nukes, the moment they possess one nuke we can no longer control them.

Why do you think you should "control" any other country?

Because that's the best alternative to neutralizing their threat by killing them - or surrendering and accepting a third world war involving nukes which is obviously not an option unless you are suffering a mental issue or you are a radical zealot.
The good guys are always the responsible guys with the bigger guns, otherwise there is just wars until there's the good guys.

 

[Daniyel]

Then Israel should use one of it's nukes and blow Iran off the map. That sounds rational don't you think ?

Sadly that is where we heading when Iran insists to have nukes, when they wish to take the 'possible ' upcoming war to a level of nukes it can end up with Israel nuking Iran, because otherwise we are in a huge defensive disadvantage as Jihadism can ignite a series of world scale nuking.

Well go ahead and get it over with. What is Israel waiting for ?

What's the rush? I assume you still disagree with me on some points so lets clarify them first.

 

[fanger]

Muslims are unstable and irresponsible - Israel having nukes doesn't mean radicalized Islamic societies should and f!@#$ being fair.

War is the obvious answer. Does anyone really think they are going to talk Iran out of having one ? Israel wants war--let them have it.

Its not about 'talking' and it wasn't about talking with the Iranians 2 years ago, its about forcing them the disadvantage of having nukes at all cost since it is obvious they are heading to war and they having nukes is the game changer for them, its about not giving up and not signing a deal which will allow them nukes, the moment they possess one nuke we can no longer control them.

Why do you think you should "control" any other country?

Because that's the best alternative to neutralizing their threat by killing them - or surrendering and accepting a third world war involving nukes which is obviously not an option unless you are suffering a mental issue or you are a radical zealot.
The good guys are always the responsible guys with the bigger guns, otherwise there is just wars until there's the good guys.

And you are under the illusion that israel are the good guys?

 

[Daniyel]

Muslims are unstable and irresponsible - Israel having nukes doesn't mean radicalized Islamic societies should and f!@#$ being fair.

War is the obvious answer. Does anyone really think they are going to talk Iran out of having one ? Israel wants war--let them have it.

Its not about 'talking' and it wasn't about talking with the Iranians 2 years ago, its about forcing them the disadvantage of having nukes at all cost since it is obvious they are heading to war and they having nukes is the game changer for them, its about not giving up and not signing a deal which will allow them nukes, the moment they possess one nuke we can no longer control them.

Why do you think you should "control" any other country?

Because that's the best alternative to neutralizing their threat by killing them - or surrendering and accepting a third world war involving nukes which is obviously not an option unless you are suffering a mental issue or you are a radical zealot.
The good guys are always the responsible guys with the bigger guns, otherwise there is just wars until there's the good guys.

And you are under the illusion that israel are the good guys?

Are you comfortable with the US having nukes?

 

[fanger]

I think The Nuclear non proliferation treaty should apply to israel too?

You remind me of israeli tourists abroad, loud, obnoxious, individuals who gather in groups and think normal rules of behavior do not apply to them

 

[Daniyel]

I think The Nuclear non proliferation treaty should apply to israel too?

You remind me of israeli tourists abroad, loud, obnoxious, individuals who gather in groups and think normal rules of behavior do not apply to them

You little douche evade the question and I get the feeling you didn't quote me because you probably not even planning to answer that - lets try again, are you comfortable knowing the US have nuclear weapons?

 

[fanger]

Well the US has declared it has Nuclear weapons, and even used them, israel has not declared them but seems to have them, but doesn't want to admit it, and wants to stop Iran from developing Nuclear energy for domestic consumption Iran has stated not for weapon use and has signed up for NNPT inspections, something israel refuses to do. are you comfortable knowing israel has undeclared nuclear weapons?
Morito

 

[RoccoR]

fanger, et al,

This is interest.

I think The Nuclear non proliferation treaty should apply to Israel too?

(COMMENT)

You cannot unilaterally apply a Treaty to a State (Israel) that has not expressed a consent to be bound. Nor can the application of a treaty be forced upon a state through coercion (threats, sanctions, . [1969 VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES]

(QUESTION)

Why do you think that the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) should apply to Israel?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

Iran has not attacked anyone for the past 200 years. Instead, they were attacked by Iraq and lost thousands of soldiers defending themselves. Israel, on the other hand, has been attacking other countries and occupying them for more than half a century. Then there is the Samson option in which Israel has threatened to nuke European capitals, including Rome.

 

[fanger]

fanger, et al,

This is interest.

I think The Nuclear non proliferation treaty should apply to Israel too?

(COMMENT)

You cannot unilaterally apply a Treaty to a State (Israel) that has not expressed a consent to be bound. Nor can the application of a treaty be forced upon a state through coercion (threats, sanctions, . [1969 VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES]

(QUESTION)

Why do you think that the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) should apply to Israel?

Most Respectfully,
R

The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 was amended by the Symington Amendment (Section 669 of the FAA) in 1976. It banned U.S. economic, and military assistance, and export credits to countries that deliver or receive, acquire or transfer nuclear enrichment technology when they do not comply with IAEA regulations and inspections. This provision, as amended, is now contained in Section 101 of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA).

The Glenn Amendment (Section 670) was later adopted in 1977, and provided the same sanctions against countries that acquire or transfer nuclear reprocessing technology or explode or transfer a nuclear device. This provision, as amended, is now contained in Section 102 of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA).
Symington Amendment - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[RoccoR]

fanger, et al,

What report of any IAEA Violation (even one) has Israel been the subject.

When did Israel acquire or transfer nuclear reprocessing technology or explode or transfer a nuclear device.

fanger, et al,

This is interest.

I think The Nuclear non proliferation treaty should apply to Israel too?

(COMMENT)

You cannot unilaterally apply a Treaty to a State (Israel) that has not expressed a consent to be bound. Nor can the application of a treaty be forced upon a state through coercion (threats, sanctions, . [1969 VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES]

(QUESTION)

Why do you think that the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) should apply to Israel?

Most Respectfully,
R

The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 was amended by the Symington Amendment (Section 669 of the FAA) in 1976. It banned U.S. economic, and military assistance, and export credits to countries that deliver or receive, acquire or transfer nuclear enrichment technology when they do not comply with IAEA regulations and inspections. This provision, as amended, is now contained in Section 101 of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA).

The Glenn Amendment (Section 670) was later adopted in 1977, and provided the same sanctions against countries that acquire or transfer nuclear reprocessing technology or explode or transfer a nuclear device. This provision, as amended, is now contained in Section 102 of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA).
Symington Amendment - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

(COMMENT)

I do not think there is any reports that present a prima facie case for violation.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[fanger]

When a country signs up for the Nuclear Non proliferation treaty and subjects itself to IAEA inspections (in this case Iran) it gives certain obligations also some rights,
Iran has the right to pursue Nuclear technology for domestic use

 

[fanger]

Revealed: how Israel offered to sell South Africa nuclear weapons




Secret South African documents reveal that Israel offered to sell nuclear warheads to the apartheid regime, providing the first official documentary evidence of the state's possession of nuclear weapons.

The "top secret" minutes of meetings between senior officials from the two countries in 1975 show that South Africa's defence minister, PW Botha, asked for the warheads and Shimon Peres, then Israel's defence minister and now its president, responded by offering them "in three sizes". The two men also signed a broad-ranging agreement governing military ties between the two countries that included a clause declaring that "the very existence of this agreement" was to remain secret.

The documents, uncovered by an American academic, Sasha Polakow-Suransky, in research for a book on the close relationship between the two countries, provide evidence that Israel has nuclear weapons despite its policy of "ambiguity" in neither confirming nor denying their existence.
Revealed how Israel offered to sell South Africa nuclear weapons World news The Guardian

 

[RoccoR]

fanger, et al,

This is the case of getting it backwards.

It was South Africa's military chief of staff, General RF Armstrong, asking Israel for warheads on the Jericho missiles. Not Israel offering to sell them.

Revealed: how Israel offered to sell South Africa nuclear weapons

Secret South African documents reveal that Israel offered to sell nuclear warheads to the apartheid regime, providing the first official documentary evidence of the state's possession of nuclear weapons.

The "top secret" minutes of meetings between senior officials from the two countries in 1975 show that South Africa's defence minister, PW Botha, asked for the warheads and Shimon Peres, then Israel's defence minister and now its president, responded by offering them "in three sizes". The two men also signed a broad-ranging agreement governing military ties between the two countries that included a clause declaring that "the very existence of this agreement" was to remain secret.

The documents, uncovered by an American academic, Sasha Polakow-Suransky, in research for a book on the close relationship between the two countries, provide evidence that Israel has nuclear weapons despite its policy of "ambiguity" in neither confirming nor denying their existence.
Revealed how Israel offered to sell South Africa nuclear weapons World news The Guardian

(COMMENT)

Both article make the claim but clearly state that "the memo, marked "top secret" and dated the same day as the meeting with the Israelis, has previously been revealed but its context was not fully understood because it was not known to be directly linked to the Israeli offer on the same day and that it was the basis for a direct request to Israel." The memo does not actually mention nuclear weapons. Nor does it connect Israel to any nuclear weapons. It does mention a direct request to Israel from the SA Chief of Staff; which is ambiguous.

Again, in these 1975 documents (4 decades old) are poor source document for this magic leap. The articles make a huge jump to a conclusion that is not held in the evidence they present. Believe me when I say, that if this author had unambiguous language of a proliferation event, they would have shown that, instead of the cover page.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

The evidence clearly confirms that Israel offered to sell nuclear weapons and/or technology to South Africa. But this has been known for decades. I don't know why you are trying to deny the facts.

 

[50_RiaL]

Read the report, did not find the passage of the U.S. helping Israel in its nuclear weapons program. Would appreciate if you can direct me to the page.

 

[fanger]

fanger, et al,

This is interest.

I think The Nuclear non proliferation treaty should apply to Israel too?

(COMMENT)

You cannot unilaterally apply a Treaty to a State (Israel) that has not expressed a consent to be bound. Nor can the application of a treaty be forced upon a state through coercion (threats, sanctions, . [1969 VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES]

(QUESTION)

Why do you think that the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) should apply to Israel?

Most Respectfully,
R

Why does the UN?

The United Nations General Assembly overwhelmingly passed a resolution on Tuesday demanding that Israel “renounce possession of nuclear weapons” and open its arms to global regulation.

The measure, which is non-binding, was approved 161 to 5, with the United States, Canada, Palau, Micronesia, and Israel voting “no” and 18 countries abstaining.

Israel is the only Middle Eastern country that refuses to sign the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, with India, Pakistan, and North Korea also declining.

While Israel does not publicly acknowledge its nuclear arsenal, its existence is widely known. A reportreleased by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute this summer found that Israel unlawfully owns 80 nuclear warheads, making it the only Middle Eastern nuclear power.


/QUOTE]
UN Calls for Israel To Renounce Nuclear Weapons

 

[RoccoR]

fanger, et al,

Yes, the US Senate does the same kind-a thing; toothless "Sense of the Senate Resolution." An example of one was
S/Res/524 - A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding global climate change.

fanger, et al,

This is interest.

I think The Nuclear non proliferation treaty should apply to Israel too?

(COMMENT)

You cannot unilaterally apply a Treaty to a State (Israel) that has not expressed a consent to be bound. Nor can the application of a treaty be forced upon a state through coercion (threats, sanctions, . [1969 VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES]

(QUESTION)

Why do you think that the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) should apply to Israel?

Most Respectfully,
R

Why does the UN?

The United Nations General Assembly overwhelmingly passed a resolution on Tuesday demanding that Israel “renounce possession of nuclear weapons” and open its arms to global regulation.

The measure, which is non-binding, was approved 161 to 5, with the United States, Canada, Palau, Micronesia, and Israel voting “no” and 18 countries abstaining.

Israel is the only Middle Eastern country that refuses to sign the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, with India, Pakistan, and North Korea also declining.

While Israel does not publicly acknowledge its nuclear arsenal, its existence is widely known. A reportreleased by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute this summer found that Israel unlawfully owns 80 nuclear warheads, making it the only Middle Eastern nuclear power.

UN Calls for Israel To Renounce Nuclear Weapons

(COMMENT)

Just for show.

Most Respectfully,
R