As the U.S. Congress prepares to vote next month on the landmark Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which was agreed on July 14 between the world’s leading powers and Iran, and has been approved by the U.N. Security Council, eminent nuclear non-proliferation experts are mobilising international support for its immediate implementation.
If these talks result in a '"net plus" for nuclear non-proliferation worldwide,"' show us the calculus for how Obama's born again nuclear arms race and his born again nuclear power plant race fit into the "net plus" for "non-proliferation." Because without the calculus, how do we see the net plus, if not a net double plus for nuclear proliferation against nature as well as against the peasants now pooping over the planet?
One can conclude that those against the Iranian nuclear deal are for nuclear proliferation. What would one expect from the politicians of the leading nuclear power?
Los Alamos Labs are busy building 40->80 "pits" per year which are the atomic bomb triggers for the much more powerful hydrogen bomb, as well as dialable kiloton and targetable nuclear weapons.
Hell no we don't want a nuclear free Middle East, or nuclear free world.
Anyone remember 1962? Well, if you weren't there it's hard to conger the fear and " worst case scenarios " imagined by hundreds of millions of people. Way before the intertubes. " The only good war is a gas war ". That was suppose to be sarcastic, back then, back in the day. Now, not so much, eh?
No "net plus" with Israel the only ME country possessing nukes.
Stating the obvious, the US has not invaded, occupied, or otherwise bombed the $#!+ out of any country possessing nukes.
Pakistan, anyone? Pakistan supports and/or harbors "terrorists!" (Pakistan's been droned but not occupied, like Iraq.) But Iran sits on more oil than Pakistan!
Inter-Services Intelligence (Pakistan)
"...Other senior international officials, however, maintain that senior Al Qaeda leaders such as Osama Bin Laden have been hidden by the ISI in major settled areas of Pakistan with the full knowledge of the Pakistani military leadership.
"The Taliban regime is widely accepted to have been supported by the ISI and Pakistani military from 1994 to 2001, which Pakistan officially denied during that time...
"A new report by the London School of Economics (LSE) claimed to provide the most concrete evidence yet that the ISI is providing funding, training and sanctuary to the Taliban insurgency on a scale much larger than previously thought."
If they wanted to be consistent, they should disarm Pakistan (and India, too), etc.