Netflix should make this into a movie or series. Plenty of good material to draw from: this heist, assassinating Iranian scientists with magnetic bombs on motorcycles [1][2] and Stuxnet [3].<p>[1] <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jan/11/iran-nuclear-scientist-killed" rel="nofollow">https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jan/11/iran-nuclear-s...</a><p>[2] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Iranian_nuclear_scientists" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Iranian_nucle...</a><p>[3] <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/world/middleeast/16stuxnet.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/world/middleeast/16stuxne...</a>
I don't really get it. If all they had to show were 15 year old documents, so dating before the Iranian nuclear accord, wouldn't this indicate that Iran did in fact fulfill its side of the agreement ? The main argument seems to be that if they kept the archives then it must mean that they want to resume their research program at some point in the future. I'm sure if Israel had any clear and direct evidence showing that Iran violated the deal they would have shown it.
> But if sanctions resume, and more Western companies leave Iran, it is possible that Iranian leaders will decide to resume nuclear fuel production.<p>and<p>> By the time the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Yukiya Amano, was finally permitted to visit the site in 2015, it was empty, though the agency’s report indicated that it looked as if equipment had been removed.<p>I don't understand the authors conclusion. He is saying that without a nuclear deal Iran will try to develop the bomb. Later he shows that even with a deal Iran tries to make a bomb and not report it. My intuition says that the solution is to create a new deal. One that makes it harder for Iran to hide nuclear bomb making facilities and doesn't involve sending them $1.7 billion dollars in cash [1]<p>[1] <a href="http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-iran-payment-cash-20160907-snap-story.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-iran-payment-c...</a>
> Netanyahu...proved Iranian...intent to resume bomb production<p>Israel has dozens, if not hundreds, of nuclear bombs. Why should Iran not have nuclear bombs as well? The US and US industry was pushing for Iran to turn more towards nuclear production in the 1970s.<p>Iran also has made offers for a nuclear-free Middle East agreement - offers Israel has always rejected. What is the line - Arab and Muslim states in the Middle East are not allowed to have nuclear bombs, but Jewish ones can?<p>Some people might say Iran has theocratic and undemocratic elements. But the US and Israel had little problem with the Shah's lack of democracy. Also the US and England backed the conservative, fundamentalist mullahs in Iran from the 1950s to the 1970s against democratic republicans like Mossadegh. The US only turned against conservative fundamentalist mullahs in Iran at the very end of the 1970s who wanted US (and USSR) interference with Iran's internal affairs ended.
The leaders of Iran have called for the destruction of Israel many times, so of course Israel will do what it can to thwart the nuclear weapons program of Iran.