It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by 27jd
It says Iran "is" to, implying that they have not yet, so they are allowing inspections at their convenience? Possible shell games, or are they just pushing it? How did that go anyway? I'm interested to know how those inspections went.
Originally posted by James the Lesser
Uh? And what dirt is in the base? I don't think there is to much dirt in a base. It usually concrete or wood.
Originally posted by DrRobertCamp
The "muslims" are not a peaceful nation and will never be apart of the world community.
You might not be aware of this but "muslims" are not a nation, they follow a religion, thought I let you inon the secret.
Originally posted by DrRobertCamp
Don't lecture me on these "muslims". I've seen their work on 9/11 and other past events. You "eurocrats" should continue to spread your liberal "idealogy" that America is the root of all evil, and the "mullahs" are practicing a religion of "peace".
What's with hate filled members choosing "Dr" as part of their name. It does nothing to bolster your credibility.
Originally posted by Sep
Do you hear yourself? There is not dirt in the facility, cause it is a millitary base. You show me a military base which is filled with dirt.
They will inspect it and take the samples from around tha facility and leave. They do this, even though they are not allowed in military bases. Iran is trying to build confidence in the world, but the world isnt making it easy.
Originally posted by DrRobertCamp
Don't lecture me on these "muslims". I've seen their work on 9/11 and other past events. You "eurocrats" should continue to spread your liberal "idealogy" that America is the root of all evil, and the "mullahs" are practicing a religion of "peace".
Originally posted by 27jd
It says they will be talking samples from AROUND the facility.
It says there will be no direct inspections OF the facility.
Oh, saying you can look around, but not in builds confidence?
Originally posted by Sep
Originally posted by 27jd
It says they will be talking samples from AROUND the facility.
Ok, I am trying not to point this out so you can keep face, but since you are pushing it, ok.
Find the word AROUND in the two articles I posted. Tell me the line.
They will inspect it and take the samples from around tha facility and leave.
First sentence of the site I provided: "Iran is to allow the United Nations' nuclear watchdog to carry out inspections at one of its most secret military sites."
Here is the first sentence of the second source I provided:
"A group of specialists of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) arrived on Wednesday in Tehran to take samples at the Parchin military facility."
It sounds like they are visting the site. No matter how much you try to twist the words, it says it clearly that they are inspecting and taking samples of the site.
A group of specialists of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) arrived on Wednesday in Tehran to take samples at the Parchin military facility.
"The delegation of Agency experts will be present in Iran for a week; the main aim of the visit is taking environment samples at Parchin to check them for radioactivity and, consequently, reveal violations of international agreements in the sphere of nuclear nonproliferation," RIA Novosti was told in the Iranian nuclear energy organization.
"There will be no direct inspections on the facility," said the source.
Oh and here is another link, it might clear up a few things:
www.abc.net.au...
Here is a few quotes:
"I confirm that a team of IAEA inspectors is today conducting an inspection at Parchin, including the taking of environmental samples," spokesman Mark Gwozedecky said in a statement released to the press by e-mail. "
"Tehran gave permission for inspectors to take environmental samples from the massive Parchin site, around 30 kilometres south-east of Tehran, in order to disprove US allegations of secret weapons-related activities."
"IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei announced last week that Iran had finally given the green light for his inspectors to probe Parchin after seeking access to the site since July."
Following revelations about its clandestine nuclear research in 2002, Iran pledged to allow UN inspections of the research facilities, then denied access to undeclared sites. In October 2003, Iran promised the trio of Britain, France and Germany that it would cease enriching uranium, only to resume enriching it less than a year later. Under another deal with the “European Three,” concluded in November 2004, Tehran again agreed to suspend uranium enrichment, while continuing to insist that any such activity would aim only at a peaceful nuclear program. The most recent deal has held so far, but Iran’s behavior has failed to allay international suspicions, particularly those of the United States.
Whether Iran’s nuclear program is strictly peaceful or intended for military purposes has not yet been established, but the program’s potential is beyond doubt. Why is Iran engaged in this apparently dogged pursuit of WMD concealed by an endless series of dodges, half-truths and quasi-concessions it fails to implement?
Where to from here? How the nuclear question plays out will depend in part on how the internal debate unfolds inside Iran. One option that should be given serious consideration is the idea of a “grand bargain,” whereby Iran would give up its nuclear weapons program, cease its military support of Palestinian and Lebanese militant groups, and desist from running interference in Iraq in exchange for international support for its peaceful nuclear industry, guarantees of protection from regime change and other hostile military endeavors, and full reintegration into the community of nations. The Bush administration, whose accusations about Iran’s nuclear weapons program are undermined by its track record of WMD claims in the run-up to the war in Iraq, would be prudent to work toward this goal before the nuclear genie successfully springs its confines.
Originally posted by DrRobertCamp
Don't lecture me on these "muslims". I've seen their work on 9/11 and other past events. You "eurocrats" should continue to spread your liberal "idealogy" that America is the root of all evil, and the "mullahs" are practicing a religion of "peace".
Originally posted by Rubber
I'm sorry, what do you call a civilised country? a country does not have to be democratically run to be civilzed it just has to be civil. following those terms it would count america out when idiots like the bushes are in power. no one has a right to police the world. right now we should be more concerned that weve done more harm to the world in 50 years of little war that we have in the 250 years before that.
Strategic analyst Steven Daskal recently offered a reminder of the peril posed by Iran: "While the Islamic Republic of Iran as a state is technically not at war with the U.S., Ayatollah Khomeini's fatwa calling for total war by all Shi'ites, regardless of citizenship, against the 'Great Satan America' remains in effect — it has never been rescinded, and in fact was expanded to include killing Americans as being a necessary part of a defensive jihad to make the world safe for Islam. Khomeini's pioneering pseudo-theology was later picked up by Sunni extremists, including Osama bin Laden."
In a thoughtful article in the August 23rd New York Post, Amir Taheri recounted how Khomeini and his successors have translated that fatwa into a twenty-five-year-long war against the United States — waged asymmetrically, both directly (for example, in attacks against U.S. embassies and personnel) and indirectly (through terrorist proxies like Hezbollah in Lebanon, Muqtada al-Sadr in Iraq and Shi'ite warlords in Afghanistan).
Taheri correctly observes that "the Khomeinist revolution defines itself in opposition to a vision of the world that it regards as an American imposition....With or without nuclear weapons, the Islamic Republic, in its present shape, represents a clear and present threat to the kind of Middle East that President Bush says he wants to shape."
Therefore, for the United States, stopping the Islamist government in Tehran before it obtains the means to carry out threats to attack Americans forces in Iraq and elsewhere should be an urgent priority. For Israel, however, denying the ruling Iranian mullahs nuclear arms is literally a matter of national life and death.
the war in Iraq was to remove saddam hussein. it was a good idea but it wasnt pulled off right. what the US should have done instead of instating a pathetic democracy would have been to put the Islam priests in charge. religion promotes human rights and, since Iraq was meant to be an Islamic nation, everyone in the country would have had some common ground.
there shouldn't be restrictions on the production of nuclear weapons as long as the country producing them follows the UNs guidelines and makes sure the UN is informed.
Also Islam goes back far longer than the US's history.
Need I also say that most modern culture springs from what we call the third world?