Do you think Iran should have the right to develop Nuclear energy?

Why?

i'm not sure coz i dunno why they r developing it ...
for electricity...yes
for weapon ... no

For Nicobambi with love

Iran states the purpose of its nuclear programme is the generation of power and that any other use would be a violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (The treaty is often summarised as having three pillars: non-proliferation, disarmament, and the right to peacefully use nuclear technology). Iran claims that nuclear power is necessary for a booming population and rapidly industrialising nation. It points to the fact that Iran's population has more than doubled in 20 years, the country regularly imports gasoline and electricity, and that burning fossil fuel in large amounts harms Iran's environment drastically. Additionally, Iran questions why it shouldn't be allowed to diversify its sources of energy, especially when there are fears of its oil fields eventually being depleted. It continues to argue that its valuable oil should be used for high value products, not simple electricity generation. Iran also raises financial questions, claiming that developing the excess capacity in its oil industry would cost it $40 billion, let alone pay for the power plants. Harnessing nuclear power costs a fraction of this, considering Iran has abundant supplies of accessible uranium ore.

okayy thanx snooks :) so i'll say no

I don't see why the shouldn't have it! Why it's only the countries who already got it got the right to say what is right and what is wrong and rule the world the way they want! Unfair! They just worried that Israel would be in .... You know! :)

no, they worried about what Iran will do with the nuclear power ... like attack another country :)

Exactly! That country happenes to be Isreal!!:hyper:

Israel or another country... it doesnt change the fact that they will attack "someone" sooo ... again i'm saying NO to snooky's Q :)

Snooky asking the queastions...:mmhmm:


NicoBamabi is ..... :yell: well answering them giving his/her opinion!


sunmoon is bla bal bla about Isreal .....:hyper:

Iran is busy with thier big important projects....:hmm:

The world is watching...:yes:

There are some few angry people about it out there:yes:

What can they do about it? Personally I don't know!:no:

But the biggest loser to the West in the future is Israel:mushroom: Ta da!!!:XD:

It's gonna be very intersting to see where is this going:yes: :dev:

BTW the funniest thing about this thread is first time I saw it I didn't read right! It said Ibra and nuclear energy! HA ha ha ha:hyper: :XD:

The excessive use of smilies does not add any value or intelligence to your posts.

Whatever mate! :) ;) :p

Errr........ ok I asked this somewhere else but no one answered my q before, maybe it'll be answered here: does America have nuclear power?

Errr........ ok I asked this somewhere else but no one answered my q before, maybe it'll be answered here: does America have nuclear power?

Yes we do.

I think they should be allowed to use their nuclear energy. Israel said that if Iran makes any nuclear weapons, then America will take military action. If America doesn't, then Israel will.

Yes it should simply because knowledge is the right of everybody. And besides, it is being threatened by various nuclear powers.

It should for peaceful purposes not war

I think they should be allowed to use their nuclear energy. Israel said that if Iran makes any nuclear weapons, then America will take military action. If America doesn't, then Israel will.
WWIII is coming lol :p
i agree with what hitman said

"And besides, it is being threatened by various nuclear powers."

poor, poor innocent and perfect Iran

Why would a country sitting on some of the largest oil reserves in the world need nuclear technology for generating power ?

^ No one knows when the oil will finish, besides "and that burning fossil fuel in large amounts harms Iran's environment drastically". I think I read that Iran's oil will aproximately finish in 50 - 100 years. Now I dont beleive everything I read, but its still logical. More importantly, I think Iran knows whats best for them. Now, theyre wealthy enough to start such facilities. Keeping in mind, Iran signed the NPT, while Israel, India and Pakistan didn't, North Korea withdrew. So the project will be patroled regularly by th UN for security and all other sorts of checking.

Do you think Iran should have the right to develop Nuclear energy?

Why?

Yes. If the US, UK, France, Russia, Israel, India and Pakistan have the right, then the rest of the world have it, too.

Either everyone gets the right, or no one does. My friend told me another thing I really liked: The US opinion should be discarded, because they were the ones who used nuclear power to attack another country mercylessly. And that they should stop giving gifts to Israel if they don't want others to make their own gifts.

originally posted by Snooky
The US opinion should be discarded, because they were the ones who used nuclear power to attack another country mercylessly. And that they should stop giving gifts to Israel if they don't want others to make their own gifts.

exactly..

Sadly everyone seem to care about what The US has to say

If you have a gun, does it mean that everyone around you should have a gun ? Would you give a gun to say, the local drug dealer or local bully or local criminal ?

In other words, don't you think behaving responsibly and owning a dangerous weapon need to go hand in hand ?

I'm sure you know about the NPT and IAEA procedures. Who said anything weapons? Or said anything until now atleast? XD

You cannot compare Iran to the bad guy. Although I like your question, only have to rephrase it, the other countries, not Iran own guns when theyre most probably to fire first. I'm talking about Israel not the US. Israel is very clear about its position and its owning of massive weapons. If any nuclear sparks between Israel and Iran were to take place, Israel is the one most probably to attack, simply because Iran won't have any weapons, but Nuclear Electricity.

I still stand for my opinion, id Iran shouldnt be allowed, all others as well, shouldnt.

Has Israel EVER threatened to 'wipe any country' off the face of the earth ?

Do you know that Iran is not co-operating with the IAEA ?

wouldn't you kill the fly if it landed on your food??

or at least shoo it away? :rolleyes:

IAEA and Iran
In February 2003 Mohamed ElBaradei traveled to Iran with a team of inspectors to investigate Iran's nuclear program. By November, Dr. ElBaradei stated that there was "no evidence" that Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons. On December 18, 2003 Iran signed the Additional Protocol at the IAEA headquarters in Vienna, and acted in accord with its provisions pending completion of ratification of the protocol. [1].

On January 9, 2006 Iran resumed certain aspects of nuclear energy research and development in spite of international displeasure and pressure from the United States, the European Union and Russia. [2]

On February 4, 2006 the Board of the International Atomic Energy Agency decided ("resolved") to request the IAEA director-general, Mohamed ElBaradei, to make a report concerning Iran to the United Nations Security Council following the March 2006 meeting of the IAEA Board. This resolution was decided by a vote of 27-3 (27 member nations voted for the resolution, 3, Cuba, Syria and Venezuela, voted against the resolution, and the remaining 5, Algeria, Libya, Indonesia, South Africa and Belarus, abstained). [3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Atomic_Energy_Agency#IAEA_and_Iran

Now they might not like Iran, but it least Iranians tried with peaceful approches, and thats enough.

Why not go directly to the source ? Why not look at something more recent, like the September 2006 report of the IAEA ?


Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran
The implementation of the NPT safeguards agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran has been on the agenda of the Board for more than three years, and lately also on the agenda of the United Nations Security Council. On 31 July 2006, the Security Council adopted resolution 1696, in which it called upon Iran to take the steps required by the Board in its resolution of 4 February 2006. These steps included the necessity of the Agency continuing its work to clarify all outstanding issues relating to Iran´s nuclear programme, and the re-establishment by Iran of full and sustained suspension of all its enrichment related and reprocessing activities. In my report of 31 August to the Board and to the Security Council, regarding Iran´s fulfillment of the requirements of that resolution, I stated that Iran had not suspended its enrichment related activities, nor was the Agency able to make progress on resolving the outstanding issues, due to the absence of the necessary transparency on the part of Iran.

As I have indicated in the past, all the nuclear material declared by Iran to the Agency has been accounted for - and, apart from the small quantities previously reported to the Board, there have been no further findings of undeclared nuclear material in Iran.

But as I have just stated, because of the inability of the Agency to make progress in resolving the outstanding issues relevant to the scope and nature of Iran´s current and past centrifuge enrichment programme, the Agency cannot make any further progress in its efforts to provide assurances about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran. This continues to be a matter of serious concern.

In addition to the Agency´s current verification activities in Iran, I remain hopeful that, through the ongoing dialogue between Iran and its European and other partners, the conditions will be created to engage in a long overdue negotiation that aims to achieve a comprehensive settlement that, on the one hand, would address the international community´s concerns about the peaceful nature of Iran´s nuclear programme, while on the other hand addressing Iran´s economic, political and security concerns.

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2006/ebsp2006n014.html#iran

we all know that Iran has consistently denied it is working on a weapons program plus the IAEA has found no evidence on one !

Moreover, the IAEA has disputed U.S congressional report sayin that Iran is already producin' weapons-grade uranium.

i guess they have full right of havin' nuke power, no matter what for !

HOw about israel ? dont they have nuclear weapons ?

what's iRan doin now is just exactly what Isreal did back late 1950s n 1960s when it was pursuing its own program in term of secrecy, concealment, ambiguity, double talk n denial....and all their attitude was : let the world guess !

we all know that Iran has consistently denied it is working on a weapons program plus the IAEA has found no evidence on one !

Moreover, the IAEA has disputed U.S congressional report sayin that Iran is already producin' weapons-grade uranium.

i guess they have full right of havin' nuke power, no matter what for !

HOw about israel ? dont they have nuclear weapons ?

what's iRan doin now is just exactly what Isreal did back late 1950s n 1960s when it was pursuing its own program in term of secrecy, concealment, ambiguity, double talk n denial....and all their attitude was : let the world guess !

Big difference. Israel was not running its mouth about destroying the recognized state of Iran or other ME countries. That crazy bearded fellow that is president of Iran says that they will push Israel into the sea. How do you suppose they will do this? A nuke maybe?

Big difference. Israel was not running its mouth about destroying the recognized state of Iran or other ME countries. That crazy bearded fellow that is president of Iran says that they will push Israel into the sea. How do you suppose they will do this? A nuke maybe?

well, u know why big difference,, coz back in 50s n 60s when Israel was workin' on their nuclear prog, there were no nuke threat by any ME country , so it would be so stupid of them to run their mouth and talk about threatenin' n' destroyin other countries! despite their well known intent !

but with Iran now , itz diff , they have to do it this way coz of the prevailin' circumstances and conditions.

Your argument has no legs.

Iran is a signatory to the NPT and since it has voluntarily signed up, it is expected to follows the rules of the organization.

It has not.

well, i guess nobody's doin' the expected nowadays !

so u have just to expect the unexpected !

ya for sure it has all the rights to do n use thier land as they want n as lots of countries do have the oil n they use it n sale it as they want n what i c there is no reason why they want Iran to stop what they r doing

Errr ok so America is trying to ban Iran from using nuclear power for anything, when in fact they are the ones who have the greatest precedent for killing and obliterating entire cities using nuclear power?

The answer was so obvious I thought it couldn't possibly be true. America simply doesn't want anybody to be as powerful as they are.

There are no ifs and buts. Why is America supposed to be the moral compass in this situation? Would you vote for a drug-dealer to be the president or chairman of a rehabilitation center?

Also the NPT is an absolutely ridiculous treaty. Giving five states the right to own nuclear weapons and the rest of the world not to? And only allowing them to use these weapons against rogue states? What if one of those five becomes the rogue state? The loopholes in the treaty are perfectly fabricated for the nuclear weapon states to do exactly as they please, under whatever pretext is allowed. China might wake up one morning, for example, bomb Oman with nuclear power, and say that they believed Oman to be a rogue state with nuclear weapons.

And anyways, if the USA starts bombing away like they did in Japan, with no valid reason, is a flimsy paper going to get in the way of an atomic bomb and bring it safely back to its launch pad (or wherever it is that bombs come from :p)?