Students at the University have grown up in a world plagued by unrest in the Middle East, and now they face a new conflict emerging between Iran and Israel over the former’s insistence of enriching uranium.

Since its birth as a Jewish State in 1948, Israel has faced a multitude of threats from its neighbors. Israel found an ally in Egypt with the signing of the Camp David Accords in 1978, and the following Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty of 1979.

With the recent Arab Spring revolutionizing and changing the Egyptian government, there are many questions about whether the Accords will continue to be upheld.

In the 1950s , Iran launched its first nuclear program with the help of the American government. America pulled out of the program in 1979 when a regime change occurred in Tehran.

Though Iran claims its use of enriched uranium is for research purposes only, many now worry Iran has began to weaponize uranium by enriching it to 90 percent, effectively gaining a nuclear weapon.

“The Israelis have reached a point where they believe the Iranians are on the verge of what the Israelis refer to as the ‘zone of immunity,'” Robert Moog , associate professor in public and international affairs, said.

The zone of immunity refers to the point in which, if Israelis choose to strike rather than be struck, they will no longer be able to significantly delay the weaponization of Iran’s nuclear program.

According to Moog ,  if the Israelis were to strike, even the Israeli government has acknowledged they wouldn’t be able to destroy the program, but only set them back a few years.

Moog said because of this, Iran has begun to move its research and their program as far underground as possible. This shortens Israel’s zone of immunity, as they lack what he calls ‘bunker busters,’ or missiles that can reach far underground and damage the program.

“America has these weapons and we have greater capabilities to do damage to the Iranian program through a military strike,” Moog said. “Our zone of immunity is different from Israel’s.”

The question of whether Iran is actually trying to create a nuclear weapon is still being debated.

“The Iranians are unwilling to allow a thorough investigation by the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency], who are supposed to go to nuclear sites and make sure there are no violations,” Moog said. “Sometimes IAEA inspectors go in [to the Iranian nuclear sites], but they never get the full scope. That adds to the suspicion, and Israel sees it as an existential threat to them.”

The news does worry some, like Chante Thompson, a junior in history education.

“Nuclear weapons is a scary thought,” Thompson said.

Thompson said she would support a war to defend Israel because of the possible consequences.

“I’d support that,” Thompson said. “It isn’t really our responsibility, but I’d support this war. Israel is important.”

Others are more optimistic than Thompson.

“As a Pakistani woman, Iran possessing uranium bothers me a little, but not terribly so,” Niwal Sheikh, freshman in international studies, said.

“I feel like in these sorts of cases, it is so easy to assume and jump to conclusions about what Iran as a political system would do with the uranium, as opposed to what Iran as a country would actually do. I don’t particularly like Ahmadinejad , but the worst thing to do would be to draw conclusions.”

Moog insists that would only occur if the Iranian regime were “suicidal.”

“[And] there is absolutely no indication of that,” Moog said. “If they ever attempted to use a weapon on Israel, Iran would be obliterated, for all practical purposes.”

With the presidential election coming up, the debate over whether America should go to war with Iran over nuclear weapons has been a hot topic. But with a current exit of Iraq and plans to disengage the military from Afghanistan, Moog believes the GOP candidates call for arms is just inflated.