Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stuxnet sibling theory surges after Iran says nuke facility shut down

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 69 posts

Re: Stuxnet sibling theory surges after Iran says nuke facility shut down

#51

Post by sofixa »

ALittleLight wrote: post #21
michaelt wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most countries, if they could, would like to advance one narrative on the world stage and a separate one to their citizens. Perhaps this isn't aimed at us westerners - and instead it's aimed at Iranians. The message being "Yet more evidence that our country is under constant assault by the forces of evil who are threatened by our growing strength. They are the cause of any problems you see, support our homeland secur…

Except for the "evil" part, isn't that exactly what's happening?

Yep.

And "evil" is entirely subjective, one can easily say that Israel is evil for human rights and international law violations, and a similar argument can easily be made against the US, Turkey, UK, France, Saudi Arabia Iran as well.

Re: Stuxnet sibling theory surges after Iran says nuke facility shut down

#52

Post by fny »

tome wrote: post #40
ghostshell89 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its actually quite weird. Israel, France, the UK, and the USA all saying Iran cannot have nuclear weapons while all having nuclear weapons themselves (and the USA having used it on two civilian populations).

It's not weird at all. It is what Iran (and almost every country) voluntarily agreed to under the terms of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferatio...

So the US also signed the NPT where all the nuclear states also pledged to eliminate their arsenals... But we built a few more in '07. We also didn't sign the '17 treaty on prohibiting nuclear weapons.

Definitely not weird at all.

Re: Stuxnet sibling theory surges after Iran says nuke facility shut down

#53

Post by chefkoch »

tome wrote: post #40
ghostshell89 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its actually quite weird. Israel, France, the UK, and the USA all saying Iran cannot have nuclear weapons while all having nuclear weapons themselves (and the USA having used it on two civilian populations).

It's not weird at all. It is what Iran (and almost every country) voluntarily agreed to under the terms of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferatio...

And they can leave the treaty with 90 days notice.

Re: Stuxnet sibling theory surges after Iran says nuke facility shut down

#54

Post by sofixa »

tester34 wrote: post #37

Could some ELI5 what's going on with Iran over last like 3 decades? why they're described like a dangerous country? why there are fights 24/7?

You have to start earlier than that. In the 1950s, Iran became a brutal dictatorship under their Shah ( who got there with an Allied-sponsored coup during WW2) via a CIA and MI6 sponsored coup against the democratically elected PM, who wanted to nationalise British oil interests to fund social programs and improve Iran. The Shah brutally supresed opposition, until one day it became too much and in the 1970s a revolution by a communist and Islamist coalition overthrew the old regime ( the islamists came up ahead and Iran became an Islamic Republic). The US has been against them from that moment on, and Iran has hated them for enabling the Shah, and continuing meddling ever since. ( Bar a small and very illegal episode known as the Iran-Contra affair, where the US sold weapons and spare parts to Iran in exchange for off-books cash, which was funneled into the terrorist Contras in Nicaragua, to circumvent US Congress restrictions on help to the latter)

It's fascinating reading, i encourage you to look up the details yourself.

Re: Stuxnet sibling theory surges after Iran says nuke facility shut down

#55

Post by 0x_rs »

swarnie_ wrote: post #32
fny wrote: post #29

"Few nations like the idea of Iran enhancing its nuclear capabilities" Lol. No nation in over a decade likes this idea except for maybe North Korea. Sure Israel has always been the most vocal, but Iran having the bomb is an international liability. Even the Sunni Arabs stripes have changed. Common enemies make strange bedfellows. Also, the Iranians have been willing to flex against their neighbors more recently. See…

Why shouldn't Iran have access to nuclear power, or nuclear weapons for that matter?

It's particularly interesting considering Israel's ambiguous nuclear capabilities for which international entities have more than simply closed an eye; let alone the shallow, steady claims Iran would be in possession of nuclear weapons "within few years" since 1980s. Needless to say, it is within everyone's interests to keep another player from joining the nuclear club so that they will continue to have the advantage in negotiations, understandably so. This is not the first time and presumably not the last: when will Iran break?

Re: Stuxnet sibling theory surges after Iran says nuke facility shut down

#56

Post by miracle2k »

tome wrote: post #45
swarnie_ wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is not entitled to nuclear weapons But.... Why? Why do some nations with weapons get to decided who else should and shouldn't have them? If you subscribe to the MAD theory then every nation or organisation should have a stockpile and that would create world peace over night.

Iran voluntarily signed up to the treaty and received various benefits for doing so in return for agreeing not to pursuing nuclear weapons capability (same as every other non-nuclear weapons state signatory).

That is of course true, but also a legalistic take, as Iran not signing on to the NPT, or indeed leaving it, would not make Western powers go "oh ok, so it's fine now".

The reality is that most of the non-nuclear states are largely happy with the arrangement of living within the US nuclear umbrella and acknowledge that more nuclear weapon states do not benefit the common good, the nuclear weapon states have no interest in losing their monopoly (and are arguably breaking the treaty by failing to pursue disarmament).

The difference between Iran and North Korea is that the political system in Iran is much more nuanced, and makes it much harder for them to pursue a "lets acquire a nuke at all costs" policy, so they have to play it smart, and acquire the ability to build a weapon without actually doing it.

The difference between Iran and say India is that both the US and Israel justifiably see Iran as an antagonist, and in addition Israel is able to command significant political capital in Washington.

- Israel justifiably sees Iran as an antagonist, and they have a significant influen

Re: Stuxnet sibling theory surges after Iran says nuke facility shut down

#57

Post by totalZero »

ALittleLight wrote: post #21
michaelt wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most countries, if they could, would like to advance one narrative on the world stage and a separate one to their citizens. Perhaps this isn't aimed at us westerners - and instead it's aimed at Iranians. The message being "Yet more evidence that our country is under constant assault by the forces of evil who are threatened by our growing strength. They are the cause of any problems you see, support our homeland secur…

Except for the "evil" part, isn't that exactly what's happening?

I mean, the "growing strength" part and the "cause of any problems" part would be pretty farfetched in any serious conversation. Iran has been on its back foot ever since Obama left the picture because US policy got far more hawkish, and the fact that Iran shot down a passenger plane and tried to lie about it was a self-own. The Iranian people don't seem to blame foreign governments, they blame the Islamic regime. Oil prices have bumped back up but their crash was damaging to Iran's revenue expectations. The country was hit very hard by the virus and it's hard to blame the West for something that came from Wuhan.

The government there doesn't choose its narrative based on what's true or believable. When you think of it as a mafia that controls the country and presents a caricature of representative government while stealing and killing, things start to make more sense.

Re: Stuxnet sibling theory surges after Iran says nuke facility shut down

#58

Post by chefkoch »

redis_mlc wrote: post #26
chefkoch wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the end of the day the would like to have their sanctions removed in exchange for shutting down their nuclear program. And it also feeds the narrative of beeing the victim of the other states beeing the aggressors.

> they would like to have their sanctions removed in exchange for shutting down their nuclear program. They would like to have their sanctions removed while keeping their nuclear program - there is no scenario where Iran will stop short of having ICBMs.

Exept that there was no evidence that they broke the nuclear agreement when all signature states where still adhering it.

Re: Stuxnet sibling theory surges after Iran says nuke facility shut down

#59

Post by totalZero »

laurent92 wrote: post #12
effie wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't secret at all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natanz#Nuclear_facility

Stupid question, but why isn’t it bombed (or all trucks coming/leaving targeted)? As far as I know, it is “illegal” (whatever the international equivalent is) to attempt to acquire the nuclear bomb. Which triggers the question, how did France obtain leniency from international powers when it gave the nuclear bomb to Israel in the 1960ies? Who decides what is legal? And who decides that Iran’s facility is not “slated…

WMD was the casus belli for the Iraq War, and look how that worked out. Israel has performed one-off airstrikes in the past (look up the Osirak reactor project).

Re: Stuxnet sibling theory surges after Iran says nuke facility shut down

#60

Post by thought12342 »

swarnie_ wrote: post #32
fny wrote: post #29

"Few nations like the idea of Iran enhancing its nuclear capabilities" Lol. No nation in over a decade likes this idea except for maybe North Korea. Sure Israel has always been the most vocal, but Iran having the bomb is an international liability. Even the Sunni Arabs stripes have changed. Common enemies make strange bedfellows. Also, the Iranians have been willing to flex against their neighbors more recently. See…

Why shouldn't Iran have access to nuclear power, or nuclear weapons for that matter?

Some people and country may hate America for its foreign policy but underlying principle of America is liberty and democracy. Its for this reason other countries willingly at best or grudgingly approve the status of America as super power.

But Iran or any other middle east countries are too religious and follow Islam which is violent in its fundamental principle. Even if exceptional leaders emerge and manage to make progress in women rights, individual libery etc(Example saudi arabia for providing driving license to women) it will short lived as in the case of Turkey. The reason is state can not be separated from the religion according to Islam. For this fundamental reason Islamic countries possessing nuclear weapons is very dangerous to entire world and non muslim country should approve.

Post reply on HN