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.

 

WAR: Rumsfeld: Iran "Years Away" from Nuclear Weapon

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has indicated in an interview that Iran is years away from making a nuclear weapon. He further emphasized that the United States was committed to using diplomacy and not force to deal with the issue. Iran has indicated that it would respond to any attack and accelerate its plans to build a nuclear weapon.

 



story.news.yahoo.com
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Iran is believed to be years away from having a nuclear weapon and the United States has decided to use diplomacy, not military action, in dealing with the issue, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said on Sunday.

"It's fairly clear from the public statements of the Iranians that, that they are on a path of seeking a nuclear weapon and don't have it at the present time," Rumsfeld said in a taped interview with CNN's "Late Edition."

Iran's chief nuclear negotiator Hassan Rohani said in an interview with Reuters on Sunday that Iran would retaliate and accelerate its nuclear program if attacked.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


I think we are seeing a combination of several things. First our forces are stretched too thin to really invade Iran. if anybody thinks that out Army will roll through that country like they did Iraq is sorely mistaken. Also the failure to find weapons of mass destruction will also make anybody wary of any claims until proven beyond a reasonable doubt.




posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Iran has indicated that it would respond to any attack and accelerate its plans to build a nuclear weapon.


No, it said it would respond to an attack, well that is obvious. But in no way did Iran say it would accelerate it's plans to build a nuclear weapon, because they do not have such plans.


Iran's chief nuclear negotiator Hassan Rohani said in an interview with Reuters on Sunday that Iran would retaliate and accelerate its nuclear program if attacked.


Yes I read that in UK news. They would relaliate to an attack and then accelerate its goal to gain nuclear power. Eg. They would cease the suspension of Uranian enrichment. NO where does it mention WEAPONS.

This is starting to annoy me now.



[edit on 6-2-2005 by Kriz_4]



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Iran has practically admitted it is developing nuclear weapons technology and will not stop doing it, come on Kriz_4...how naive can you be?



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Iran has practically admitted it is developing nuclear weapons technology and will not stop doing it, come on Kriz_4...how naive can you be?


Obviously I am better aware of facts. They have never practically admitted that. How unimformed or led can you be?



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 04:35 PM
link   
And you claim to be so informed that you know they arent building nukes just because you read a lot of articles? Thats lame



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Just a thought,
Maybe the U.S. figures it can still bomb Iran....I mean what is Iran going to do?....shoot off missles?, easily shot down, remember Isreal just tested a brand new anti-missle system. Maybe the U.S. is going to play defense.Bomb Iran and let them attack Iraq..to get to the U.S.

Not like Iran can shoot missles at us...probably not even Isreal.

So why even attack Iran with troops..just bomb them.


Edit,
Forgot...Why is Rumsfeld saying that BS. We all know they have them.

[edit on 6-2-2005 by HardCore American]



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kriz_4
[But in no way did Iran say it would accelerate it's plans to build a nuclear weapon, because they do not have such plans.


Iran's chief nuclear negotiator Hassan Rohani said in an interview with Reuters on Sunday that Iran would retaliate and accelerate its nuclear program if attacked.



Um
they just said they would accelerate the program as you quoted above????



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 04:45 PM
link   
Rumsfeld does not know whats going on in his own house. I dont believe for one second that he knows what Iran has.

So Iraq had some but none was found. This is just a guess, but I would bet money Iran has some.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Yes they said their nuclear program, not their nuclear weapon program. They intend to get nuclear generated electricity.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpittinCobra
Rumsfeld does not know whats going on in his own house. I dont believe for one second that he knows what Iran has.

So Iraq had some but none was found. This is just a guess, but I would bet money Iran has some.


I have no doubt in my mind that Iraq had designs on WMD. What 3rd world dictator does not? However, the issue really is the scope of thier program and if they were activly producing versus researching such devices. Iran and NK are persuing or have aquired such devices.

Make no mistake, I am not commenting on the politics or the pro's and con's of a nuclear armed Iran, just the fact that they are persuing the weapons.

The rouge regimes of the world have seen the way North Korea gets the hands off treatment despite and no matter hor ridiculous Crazy Kims antics are and seeks the same.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 04:54 PM
link   



As I wrote on 29-11-2004 at 02:56 AM:


"...The corporate alliance has its eye on South America - the whole continent or just Brazil may be a target. Iran may prove to be a feint, or just the first thrust... "

Key to US Military Strategy



.

[edit on 6-2-2005 by soficrow]



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kriz_4
Yes they said their nuclear program, not their nuclear weapon program. They intend to get nuclear generated electricity.


Then why the weapons program. Really now, theres Naive and then there is Naive. If they want it for electrical reasons, why refuse the offers of a light water reactor and all the fuel you need?

Hmmmm, what else would they want enriched uranium for?



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Because they would have to buy the fuel of course, why buy it when you can make it yourself? The offers were not free as you seem to suggest.

Where exactley did they say they have a nuclear weapons program?

[edit on 6-2-2005 by Kriz_4]



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kriz_4
Because they would have to buy the fuel of course, why buy it when you can make it yourself? The offers were not free as you seem to suggest.


The offer the EU made to them in the process of thier negotiations included fuel. Plus the cost of building an enrichment infrastructure for a few reactors is hardly woth the cost of an occasional fuel rod purchase. '


But If I wanted to enrich uranium for bomb use, I can see and understand thier objections.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 05:07 PM
link   
The sale of fuel yes. Not free fuel.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kriz_4
The sale of fuel yes. Not free fuel.


Again, the cost of such fuel would be inmaterial to the cost of actually developing an infrastructure to do so themselves.

Given the regime in charge and thier priorities, no doubt they see the aquisition of an nuclear device is paramount.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Again, the cost of such fuel would be inmaterial to the cost of actually developing an infrastructure to do so themselves.


In the short term yes, Once the infrastructue is there, the costs over time would decrease and stay decreased.

Why buy products at inflated costs when you can make it at cost price?

Priorities? Please expand.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Exactly, plus you want the option to make a nuclear bomb if you choose so on your own terms.

Really the russians should know quite a deal about irans nuclear program as they were contracted for building a lot of stuff, some telephones to Putin were surely made by the american government to inform discretely...


[edit on 6-2-2005 by Countermeasures]



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Well you guys can argue about what Iran wants to do with it's uranium but Rumsfeld's comment scares the hell out of me. It's too much of a turnabout - we're gonna wake up one morning soon to find out we've already attacked Iran's nuclear facilities and be in the middle of another war.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 06:01 PM
link   
Rumsfeld is playing it safe by making the comment he has, simple as that.
It further gives Iran room to either solve this problem diplomatically or gives Iran enough rope to hang themselves, so to speak.
Its all about moves and political chess. Rumsfeld's comment is but a gambit move and is calculated.



seekerof



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join