Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Odelya]

Here’s a link to the N-fatwa thing: https://www.princeton.edu/irandataportal/laws/supreme-leader/khamenei/review-of-khameneis-fatwa/index.xml

I am too lazy to find a Q&A-style entry in a fatwa database, however the N-fatwa is often repeated on his website, Iranian news agencies etc. But call it fatwa or political position (both revisable): A civil nuclear programme should be the right of any nation.

But any claims about reactors for peaceful purposes only is hilarious and not fooling anyone. You don't need to enrich nearly that much for civilian reactors, and you don need to enrich it underneath a mountain for civilian purposes, and you don't turn down others to buy reactor ready material either. 

“Normal countries” don’t need to enrich uranium underneath a mountain. But when you are under constant sanctions for 30+ years, saw the west supporting your Iraqi war enemy and turning and blind I on his use of chemical weapons, when you are constantly threatened with war and more sanctions, regime change and so on, how—regardless of who started it games—would you react to any suggestions of “why don’t you buy your uranium from us [as long as it pleases us]” and “enrich as we command [because it pleases us and you are evil]”?

[Lyn Farel]

A civil nuclear programme should be the right of any nation.

Damn right it should. Instead even first world countries are continuing to fuck up the planet with carbon energy (both coal and petrol).

Except for Japan of course. Those should be the ones exempt of nuclear power plants. That's just so fucking ironic.

[Silas Vitalia]

Here’s a link to the N-fatwa thing: https://www.princeton.edu/irandataportal/laws/supreme-leader/khamenei/review-of-khameneis-fatwa/index.xml

I am too lazy to find a Q&A-style entry in a fatwa database, however the N-fatwa is often repeated on his website, Iranian news agencies etc. But call it fatwa or political position (both revisable): A civil nuclear programme should be the right of any nation.

But any claims about reactors for peaceful purposes only is hilarious and not fooling anyone. You don't need to enrich nearly that much for civilian reactors, and you don need to enrich it underneath a mountain for civilian purposes, and you don't turn down others to buy reactor ready material either. 

“Normal countries” don’t need to enrich uranium underneath a mountain. But when you are under constant sanctions for 30+ years, saw the west supporting your Iraqi war enemy and turning and blind I on his use of chemical weapons, when you are constantly threatened with war and more sanctions, regime change and so on, how—regardless of who started it games—would you react to any suggestions of “why don’t you buy your uranium from us [as long as it pleases us]” and “enrich as we command [because it pleases us and you are evil]”?

No, not all countries should have the right to nuclear power. 

The Iranians have been offered many times by a host of different parties to supply them with civilian-grade plutonium and energy producing reactors.  If they were legitimately interested in such a thing then they would be pursuing this course. 

This isn't a case of a punitive squashing of a country's economy. 

It would take Iran about 3 seconds for sanctions to be lifted:  allow unrestricted inspections, dismantle the nuclear weapons program, etc.  Is that unfair, is that not nice? You better believe it.  That's the price to re-enter the world economy as a member nation.

The Iranians can unilaterally change their relationship with the West and the rest of the region at any point their dictatorship wishes to, it's absolutely and 100% that simple.   If they allowed free elections and took all of those previously mentioned steps they would absolutely be welcomed back into the international community.

I also absolutely separate the Iranian people from their terrible and repressive government.

[Laurentis Thiesant]

Lets make it very clear that the current Iranian government has been working incredibly hard with a whole host of major world powers to prove that is nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes. As part of the P5+1 talks, Iran has agreed to almost unprecedented access in recent history to IAEA inspectors and has opened up the possibility of signing the 'additional protocols' where sanctions will be lifted - further increasing the range and scope of IAEA inspections to incorporate other 'suspected' nuclear facilities, despite the obvious capability of that - from Iran's perspective - being used to 'spy' on Iranian military assets.

As part of these talks, which aren't completed yet, Iran has also signed on to an interim agreement restraining their enrichment programme and downblending existing stocks. Again, IAEA inspections have shown a continued adherence (it seems eve isn't the only one with the ISIS problem atm) to this agreement - with notable and respectable progress having been made every time they came to check things out.

I'd also note that Iran hasn't developed its civilian nuclear programme in isolation either, the Russian state nuclear energy corporation has been a key part of Iranian nuclear development, pretty much overseeing some of the largest constructions. They've also reached out to the international market for acquiring the fuel to make sure that their medical isotopes programmes remains sustainable - a move which has been blocked by major powers.

President Rouhani has taken nuclear dialogue a long way - and I believe that now is the time for some good faith dealing before that opportunity is lost to insofar speculative guesses that Iran is developing nuclear weapons technology in contradiction to the very foundations of their Shi'a theocratic system of government.

Also, it's suggested by the Iranian government that heavy water development only began after sanctions and mountains and so on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqyd7SJDjDU

Of course that's a national PR piece so please do take it with the appropriate salt.

In Summary: Speculation around Iran's nuclear programme is as much about 'best guess' as it is actual fact. We know how that turned out in Iraq. We also know that every Iranian overture and action within the interim agreement (the 'joint declaration') of the P5+1 talks has been performed in good faith, with Iran doing quite a deal of 'damage' to their civilian nuclear progress for only limited sanction relief.

If they weren't committed to a long term resolution within the framework of their rights under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty then all this wouldn't be worthwhile for them.

[Silas Vitalia]

Lets make it very clear that the current Iranian government has been working incredibly hard with a whole host of major world powers to prove that is nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes. As part of the P5+1 talks, Iran has agreed to almost unprecedented access in recent history to IAEA inspectors and has opened up the possibility of signing the 'additional protocols' where sanctions will be lifted - further increasing the range and scope of IAEA inspections to incorporate other 'suspected' nuclear facilities, despite the obvious capability of that - from Iran's perspective - being used to 'spy' on Iranian military assets.

As part of these talks, which aren't completed yet, Iran has also signed on to an interim agreement restraining their enrichment programme and downblending existing stocks. Again, IAEA inspections have shown a continued adherence (it seems eve isn't the only one with the ISIS problem atm) to this agreement - with notable and respectable progress having been made every time they came to check things out.

I'd also note that Iran hasn't developed its civilian nuclear programme in isolation either, the Russian state nuclear energy corporation has been a key part of Iranian nuclear development, pretty much overseeing some of the largest constructions. They've also reached out to the international market for acquiring the fuel to make sure that their medical isotopes programmes remains sustainable - a move which has been blocked by major powers.

President Rouhani has taken nuclear dialogue a long way - and I believe that now is the time for some good faith dealing before that opportunity is lost to insofar speculative guesses that Iran is developing nuclear weapons technology in contradiction to the very foundations of their Shi'a theocratic system of government.

Also, it's suggested by the Iranian government that heavy water development only began after sanctions and mountains and so on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqyd7SJDjDU

Of course that's a national PR piece so please do take it with the appropriate salt.

In Summary: Speculation around Iran's nuclear programme is as much about 'best guess' as it is actual fact. We know how that turned out in Iraq. We also know that every Iranian overture and action within the interim agreement (the 'joint declaration') of the P5+1 talks has been performed in good faith, with Iran doing quite a deal of 'damage' to their civilian nuclear progress for only limited sanction relief.

If they weren't committed to a long term resolution within the framework of their rights under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty then all this wouldn't be worthwhile for them.

I absolutely grant the current public administration has been making some big strides lately in a more positive direction, I think most people can agree on that.

Iran's is a difficult power structure to follow, however, with the public face often acting only at the behest of the supreme leader, and the real power structure having no public oversight or need to show their cards, so to speak.   There are plenty who assume this latest round of easing of tensions and cooperation is merely a stalling tactic. 

Again many people question the need for any secrecy or hidden installations and military controlled production sites for a 'civilian' nuclear program.  A country with ridiculous oil wealth sure picks an interesting time to try and go alternative energy, yes?

What is likely happening is much more of a nuanced game with the interior factions; I don't doubt there are genuinely some factions within the government who think the cost of pursuing nuclear weapons is far too high, and potentially destabilizing to their country to be pursued. 

How much weight those factions actually have vs the hardliners remains to be seen.

The left hand might not even know what the right hand is doing, so to speak.

[Aldrith Shutaq]

http://globalvoicesonline.org/2014/07/31/warning-graphic-video-from-gaza-documents-the-killing-of-journalist-ramy-ryan-by-israeli-missiles/

The IDF sure does know how to show journalists and first-responders what's what.

[Nmaro Makari]

In case anyone missed it:

When Genocide is Permissible

From the Times of Israel.

Hastily taken down soon after publication.

The writer continues to defend himself on twitter.

[Vizage]

In case anyone missed it:

When Genocide is Permissible

From the Times of Israel.

Hastily taken down soon after publication.

The writer continues to defend himself on twitter.

He's actually deleted both his twitter and facebook account.

I'm not surprised...

Edit: The writer in question has had his blog discontinued, and he issued a public apology ( http://5tjt.com/apology-from-yochanan-gordon/ )

[Nmaro Makari]

In case anyone missed it:

When Genocide is Permissible

From the Times of Israel.

Hastily taken down soon after publication.

The writer continues to defend himself on twitter.

He's actually deleted both his twitter and facebook account.

I'm not surprised...

Edit: The writer in question has had his blog discontinued, and he issued a public apology ( http://5tjt.com/apology-from-yochanan-gordon/ )

Quite a reversal.

Editorial thumbscrews work miracles.

[Esna Pitoojee]

Everyone has crazies. News at 10.


I think the last few days have illustrated the Catch-22 in the region quite effectively. When a "ceasefire" is called, it is promptly broken and Israel attack. When Israel attacks, they don't hold back from striking even when human/humanitarian shields are used. Either way, people suffer.

[Nmaro Makari]

Yes, everyone has crazies, but the difference is one is the oppressor and the other the oppressee, i.e. only one of those sides is actually capable of committing said genocide, and one side is actually cultivating these crazies.

Since Israel often receives praise a "the only democracy in the middle east" I don't think it's a high bar to say "no genocide". Sure, it was an article written by one guy who was swiftly taken down. But things to consider:
1) The writer was not some fringe skinhead but an educated man.
2) He actually felt confident enough to write and publish it.
3) Judging by the twitter reaction and other reports from the country he is far from alone.

In fact this is what has really pushed me off the fence in this debate, the sheer unbridled racism that is permeating to the core the state of Israel, the absolute hatred of the "Arabs", not just "cuz Hamas", but just reasons of pure and simple racism, belief in the purity of the Israeli state and the  evil of the Arab world.

Perhaps I would not be so bothered if the State, the Prime Minister, the Knesset, actually said something like "racism is bad, yo" but they don't, not even pretending to. In fact, the institutes of state are downright encouraging this sort of behaviour, hand in hand with the Israeli media. If you're an Israeli and don't agree with the war or the racism? Ha, buckle up. Death threats, arson, beatings, all the tools of state-passively-permitted mob have been visited upon dissenters, to such a point that many of these individuals who have dared speak out have already prepared "escape plans" in case of even worse violence.

"But wait!" I hear you say, "it's still only a few crazies actually doing this". Well, yes, 2 out of 5 is still a minority, but considering the majority seem at least passive to the minority, it's a moot point. You don't get groups of Israelis singing "No teaching in Gaza tomorrow, there's no children left!", or cheering as they see the missiles flying into Gaze without there having been an atmosphere that cultivates them. These are not isolated incidents.

"Hold up" I hear you say again "well sure it's sour, but if you'd had your attempts at peacemaking thrown back at you, you'd feel the same" Yes! But that's assuming the Israeli's have tried to make peace. Spoiler alert, when Israel was carved out, the settlers didn't sing Kumbaya and invite the neighbours in for tea, they pretty much just took whatever land they could grab and then keep pushing the Palestinians out (all with British passive acceptance). Name me a truly defensive war where the defender pushes not just their borders, but their people, their cultural influence far beyond their own borders with the intent of staying permanently. Now who would agree with the idea of kicking people who don't look like you or worship your god out while continually building your settlements on their land? Well I'll give you a clue, there's a charming band of people in South Africa who have a similar idea called a Boer Volkstaat.

Until this recent spat, I was pretty content to sit upon the fence, tut disapprovingly and say "Well you both have some points..." and not really come down on a side. But this open and vile imperialistic, "manifest destiny" racism fuelling the Israeli war machine has just torn it for me, especially since we in the "West" permit it and enable it to happen! We sell them arms, we protect them diplomatically, we sing their praises as "the only democracy in the Middle East!" It's a bad joke. So in this fucked up situation, with these fucked up sides, all I can say is I disapprove of one much more than I disapprove of the other. Fucking breakthrough.

http://www.vice.com/read/israeli-racism-gaza-kleinfeld-511

[Silas Vitalia]

Most societies have a conservative faction telling them they are gods specialist, bestest, most special people, bit in this particular case they have state approval and weapons to make their vision a real thing. 

I'm ashamed of my country's continued blind support with money, weapons, and ammunition.  We continue to blindly bend over to Bibi, he knows he can tell us whatever he wants and we'll keep the money flowing.  Dispicable.

[orange]

[Esna Pitoojee]

Actually, said writer has been fired from his job and roundly denounced. Looking at social media to see if he is viewed as popular is going to leave you with a hefty dose of confirmation bias, which is why (barring a few singular events) it is rarely a valuable tool when examining politics, especially foreign politics.

Here's my problem with this hubbub: When an Israeli says something like, it creates a massive hue and cry which is taken as an example that all Israeli society is inherently racist. Even the post here presents it as

LOOK AT THIS BIG BAD THING THE ISRAELIS DID NOW!

When similar statements are not merely enshrined in Hamas' charter but taught in classrooms and state-sponsored textbooks, the response is an apparent shrug.

Racism is a serious problem for both sides. You'll notice that one of my points in the post a couple pages back is that Israel needs to get its crazies under control as well. But, if you are going to focus on this issue, you need to keep in mind that Hamas is ten steps beyond anything that goes on in Israel, and react accordingly. If they want to be accepted as a legitimate, peaceful government interested in co-existing with Israel, they damn well need to start acting like it. So far, I've not seen much to convince me of that.

[Lyn Farel]

Heh, that's right, and that's also telling that this guy omits (out of mistake, or out of intent ?) the case of South Africa and the greatest sham of a saint figure there ever was, and all the deaths that go with it.

I find that a bit hypocritical of him.

Edit : also, i'm not sure if that's so true, I mean, either it's just me but I'm pretty sure most of those issues were denounced in the media. Not like it is for Gaza of course, though. Especially all the obscure things that occur in Africa.

Here's my problem with this hubbub: When an Israeli says something like, it creates a massive hue and cry which is taken as an example that all Israeli society is inherently racist. Even the post here presents it as

With the oversized victim complex surrounding Jews these days and how every fingers is ready to point at antisemitism for whatever reason there is, I think it is not really surprising the see the exact opposite and extreme reaction to arise, much like it is in the case of femen, lgbt, or even more old and deep rooted, good old anti black racism.

There is something almost newtonian in this, akin to laws on momentum and all...

When similar statements are not merely enshrined in Hamas' charter but taught in classrooms and state-sponsored textbooks, the response is an apparent shrug.

Generally speaking, you don't expect better from terrorist organizations like the Hamas. You should expect better of countries and governments, which may be actually a good sign no ? I mean, if everyone was deaf and indifferent to what Israel does, it would be rather worrying, seen that way. It means people still hold them above mere terrorists like the Hamas and are offended to see them respond in kind (or even more).