3 ms·

There was an agreement the US pulled out of. Which part of that agreement talked about ballistic missiles? I think you are confusing two separate things. One i

There was an agreement the US pulled out of. Which part of that agreement talked about ballistic missiles? I think you are confusing two separate things. One is a nuclear capable Iran and the other is about the military projection of conventional weapons. Both are troubling but one is more acute than the other. The monitoring of Iran's nuclear program was working.

m0zg 7y ago
Ballistic missiles are not "conventional weapons". And Iran is quite a large country, so I wouldn't be so sure that "monitoring" was working either. Putting two and two together, _if_ Iran is still developing nuclear weapons in secret (probability of which is far above zero), they're closer than ever to "projecting" those weapons in the general direction of Israel and other allies in the region, and eventually at the US. All they'd need to do is swap out a dummy warhead with a real one.
- Udik 7y ago
  > they're closer than ever to "projecting" those weapons in the general direction of Israel I wish they did. There is serious need for some MAD in the area, especially with regards to Israel, that is way too happy to project its own overwhelming power with complete disregard for the legitimate interests of its neighbors. To be clear: I don't wish Israel harmed or victim of any attack. I wish it contained by a matching power. Which is exactly what Israel doesn't want, and the reason for its pressuring the US to attack Iran or strangle it with sanctions.
- SiempreViernes 7y ago
  They aren’t, all their nuclear material is accounted for by monitoring.
- r3bl 7y ago
  May I suggest a book called Countdown to Zero Day by Kim Zetter? Its main focus is to talk about Stuxnet, but it goes into quite some details to put that attack into context. Under the deal that the US pulled out of, IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) had the authority to walk into any space in Iran under any suspicion that they might be building a nuclear bomb there, overwriting any local law that might prohibit them from doing so. That deal is still in place, because other seven signatories weren't stupid enough to pull out of that agreement (including Iran).
- markdown 7y ago
  > _if_ Iran is still developing nuclear weapons in secret You mean like Israel? Pointing nuclear weapons at a nation that has had those nuclear weapons pointed at them for years seems only fair to me.
- nyolfen 7y ago
  > Ballistic missiles are not "conventional weapons". whether they are conventional or not is determined by their payload; eg, scuds loaded with HE are conventional ballistic missiles

m0zg 7y ago

Ballistic missiles are not "conventional weapons". And Iran is quite a large country, so I wouldn't be so sure that "monitoring" was working either. Putting two and two together, _if_ Iran is still developing nuclear weapons in secret (probability of which is far above zero), they're closer than ever to "projecting" those weapons in the general direction of Israel and other allies in the region, and eventually at the US. All they'd need to do is swap out a dummy warhead with a real one.

Udik 7y ago
> they're closer than ever to "projecting" those weapons in the general direction of Israel I wish they did. There is serious need for some MAD in the area, especially with regards to Israel, that is way too happy to project its own overwhelming power with complete disregard for the legitimate interests of its neighbors. To be clear: I don't wish Israel harmed or victim of any attack. I wish it contained by a matching power. Which is exactly what Israel doesn't want, and the reason for its pressuring the US to attack Iran or strangle it with sanctions.
SiempreViernes 7y ago
They aren’t, all their nuclear material is accounted for by monitoring.
r3bl 7y ago
May I suggest a book called Countdown to Zero Day by Kim Zetter? Its main focus is to talk about Stuxnet, but it goes into quite some details to put that attack into context. Under the deal that the US pulled out of, IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) had the authority to walk into any space in Iran under any suspicion that they might be building a nuclear bomb there, overwriting any local law that might prohibit them from doing so. That deal is still in place, because other seven signatories weren't stupid enough to pull out of that agreement (including Iran).
markdown 7y ago
> _if_ Iran is still developing nuclear weapons in secret You mean like Israel? Pointing nuclear weapons at a nation that has had those nuclear weapons pointed at them for years seems only fair to me.
nyolfen 7y ago
> Ballistic missiles are not "conventional weapons". whether they are conventional or not is determined by their payload; eg, scuds loaded with HE are conventional ballistic missiles