Interesting facts about Iran...

originally posted by: Rosinitiate

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
reply to: TDawg61

And what is a webamite? Are you insulting me?

I'm pretty sure a webamite is an entity or mite that spins "webs" or singular a "weba" (hence its name), in a thread to distract from the actual topic. You see good sir, you are not allowed to make assertions that IS and Israel are the biggest threat without sources but it is ok to make the same assertions about Iran. The easy thing to do is just stop being a webamite. Ok?

Alright. Since 1947 Israel has been under attack. One might even argue since 1946 with the bombing of the King David Hotel.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
They don't have to use the bomb on anyone. They just have to make the damn thing and then give it to which ever group (Hezbollah, etc) they feel like.

If that happens, which these deals specifically prevent from happening in the first place (but our old policies conceded was the eventual endgame scenario) then the world will hold Iran responsible.

They "prevent" things for 15 years. While still allowing the centrifuges to spin, and allowing Iran to still operate it's hardened facility.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: the2ofusr1



They don't have to use the bomb on anyone. They just have to make the damn thing and then give it to which ever group (Hezbollah, etc) they feel like.

Funny that the US is the only country to have ever used nuclear bombs on another country....

Lets be honest,the only reason the only reason a nuclear Iran seem to be a treat is Israel saying so.....

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Rosinitiate

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
reply to: TDawg61

And what is a webamite? Are you insulting me?

I'm pretty sure a webamite is an entity or mite that spins "webs" or singular a "weba" (hence its name), in a thread to distract from the actual topic. You see good sir, you are not allowed to make assertions that IS and Israel are the biggest threat without sources but it is ok to make the same assertions about Iran. The easy thing to do is just stop being a webamite. Ok?

Alright. Since 1947 Israel has been under attack. One might even argue since 1946 with the bombing of the King David Hotel.

So? Israel attacked Israel via The King David Hotel and you consider that "them being under attack"?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

A recent report titled Measurement and Economic Analysis of Urban Poverty showed that between 44.5 percent and 55 percent of Iran's urban population lives below the poverty line

www.borgenmagazine.com...

In spite of the State secrecy and lack of official reliable data, FIDH and LDDHI are able to conclude from credible and domestic sources that more than 50% of the 75 million plus population live under the poverty line. Recent investigative reports have indicated that the population’s purchasing power has fallen by 72% over eight years from 2005 to 2013.

www.fidh.org...

Thank you for the excellent sources - I will look further into my referenced authors claims on the low poverty rate in Iran as I have no personal knowledge on the subject. These are excellent references that rebut his claims and I thank you for taking the time to find and share them with us.

And thank you for addressing the substance of the OP, my interest in two facts mentioned in an interview.

a reply to: wildapache

What amazes me is the complete denial of proliferation.

The fact of proliferation is undeniable. While it was probably impossible to block China's development, perhaps even India's, this could have and should have occurred with Pakistan.

Obviously, Pakistan developed due to India, India if fear of China(?), now it's Iran's turn.

Already, The Saudis have said if Iran develops 'nuclear capabilities', they will as well,if they haven't already. The Non-proliferation agreement is dead and buried. It has no force/consequence backing it up and if the international community fails to stop Iran's nuclear development, be that the U.S. or any other combination of nations, then a free-for-all will ensue.

All the arguments of "fairness" and "what abouts" supporting Iran pale beside the consequence of a nuclear powered middle east.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: wildapache

What amazes me is the complete denial of proliferation.

The fact of proliferation is undeniable. While it was probably impossible to block China's development, perhaps even India's, this could have and should have occurred with Pakistan.

Obviously, Pakistan developed due to India, India if fear of China(?), now it's Iran's turn.

Already, The Saudis have said if Iran develops 'nuclear capabilities', they will as well,if they haven't already. The Non-proliferation agreement is dead and buried. It has no force/consequence backing it up and if the international community fails to stop Iran's nuclear development, be that the U.S. or any other combination of nations, then a free-for-all will ensue.

All the arguments of "fairness" and "what abouts" supporting Iran pale beside the consequence of a nuclear powered middle east.

Worldwide proliferation has nothing to do with Iran unless you believe that Iran is (or has been and will be) creating a nuclear weapons - which evidence from intelligence sources around the world denies. See and read some of the above references.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

A recent report titled Measurement and Economic Analysis of Urban Poverty showed that between 44.5 percent and 55 percent of Iran's urban population lives below the poverty line

www.borgenmagazine.com...

In spite of the State secrecy and lack of official reliable data, FIDH and LDDHI are able to conclude from credible and domestic sources that more than 50% of the 75 million plus population live under the poverty line. Recent investigative reports have indicated that the population’s purchasing power has fallen by 72% over eight years from 2005 to 2013.

www.fidh.org...

Thank you for the excellent sources - I will look further into my referenced authors claims on the low poverty rate in Iran as I have no personal knowledge on the subject. These are excellent references that rebut his claims and I thank you for taking the time to find and share them with us.

And thank you for addressing the substance of the OP, my interest in two facts mentioned in an interview.

I found the source for the author's statement on poverty:

www.worldbank.org...

In 2005, poverty was 1.45% in Iran using a poverty line of US$1.25 per day (PPP). World Bank projections estimate that only 0.7% of the population (or half a million people) lived under this poverty line in 2010, although a large proportion of people are living close to it.

I assume this is his source as he did mention this world bank report findings on his GDP numbers.

It's a decent overview:

Iran ranks second in the world in natural gas reserves and fourth in proven crude oil reserves. Aggregate GDP and government revenues still depend to a large extent on oil revenues and are therefore intrinsically volatile.

originally posted by: MrSpad

And the US has not given up the idea of Regime change they are just going about in a new way. Iran's isolation helped keep the Ayatollahs in power. They will not last the decade now.

Yes Iran's time is up. Iran has fallen into a trap here. They are screwed whatever they do. One false move restricting access to nuke inspectors and it's Iraqification time. If I lived in Iran and could get out I' do so. If the Yanks don't get them the Israelis and Saudis will. The technological miltary gap is two generations apart. The trap is set.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
They "prevent" things for 15 years. While still allowing the centrifuges to spin, and allowing Iran to still operate it's hardened facility.

Operating it doesn't matter because any system that can reduce the quality of fuel for use in a nuclear reactor can also increase it's purity. That's why they're still spinning. But we get inspections to ensure they're not stockpiling weapons grade material and are instead creating reactor fuel.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
Already, The Saudis have said if Iran develops 'nuclear capabilities', they will as well,if they haven't already. The Non-proliferation agreement is dead and buried. It has no force/consequence backing it up and if the international community fails to stop Iran's nuclear development, be that the U.S. or any other combination of nations, then a free-for-all will ensue.

The NPT has a clause in it that it encourages peaceful uses of nuclear power with signatories or non signatories to it. This treaty includes safeguards to prevent using their nuclear program for weapons. It follows exactly what the NPT says nations are supposed to encourage and prevent.

Here's the relevant text from the treaty
www.un.org...

Affirming the principle that the benefits of peaceful applications of nuclear technology, including any technological by-products which may be derived by nuclear-weapon States from the development of nuclear explosive devices, should be available for peaceful purposes to all Parties to the Treaty, whether nuclear-weapon or non-nuclear-weapon States,

Convinced that, in furtherance of this principle, all Parties to the Treaty are entitled to participate in the fullest possible exchange of scientific information for, and to contribute alone or in co-operation with other States to, the further development of the applications of atomic energy for peaceful purposes

a reply to: Aazadan

Ok. That's what it says.

Assuming Iran develops nukes, and I suspect anyone who doesn't think that's, at the least, a possibility if not a given is in some degree of denial, then does the rest of the remaining nations who are mulling the own development of nukes won't feel empowered by Iran's actions?

Neighbors of Iran being most likely to counter that development?

I have little knowledge or problem with the document, itself, merely that without consequence of violation, signatory or not, that it moves into the useless realm.

Now that I think of it, much of the international politics strikes as similar to pre-WWII. Much appeasement, no one taking the lead in assuring consequence for expansion etc., the U.S. in or moving toward an isolationist mode...