The media source claims the Iran is engaged in the creation of nuclear weapons and the USA wants answers. This article is completely biased towards the USA. The author of the article subtly shows his contempt for Iran. I feel that the article does not look at Iran’s point of view and makes accusations against the country.

The author also makes a generalization on how the Iran has always ‘defended its right to continue its nuclear program’ supporting this statement with only one instance. This bias can be looked at from the author’s point of view by saying that USA and Iran have ha certain issues in the past since the Iranian Revolution. However this does not give the author the right to only talk about the Iran’s failure to address the nuclear issue. This article is like propaganda to turn its readers against Iran. The author has only used confirmation bias to support his accusation on Iran.

However through evidence in the article, I can say that Iran is using vague language to delay or evade the talk about the nuclear deal. Due to this Hillary Clinton seems to show some agitation and frustration and wants a ‘head on’ answer from Tehran. Iran is clearly evading the question put forth by the USA on the nuclear deal by saying that it wants to discuss about certain issues but does not mention about the nuclear deal. The USA has taken up this issue with the United Nations so that they get an answer but at the same time telling the world to be scared of Iran. I feel the USA is trying to divide the world just like it did in the Cold War. But doing this however there is a lot of potential for another outbreak for war and could be known as World War 3.

Nuclear energy should be used for creation of power and not war. It was the USA who had originally built the destructive weapon and used it on Japan. From that time on, countries have been stock piling such weapons as if preparing for another world war. The issue for accumulation of weapons has been a major cause for countries. War does not only kill people and damage property but also cause economic decline in the countries. This issue is a very important and is it rational and ethical to stockpile such weapons. Is there really need for armies to protect us? Such matters need to be discussed to earth as whole and not with certain countries. Science has turned from being used to advance mankind into a one-way ticket for mankind to be bombed back to the stoneage.