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.

 

Iran has very deep tunnels to hide "Nukes"

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 05:53 AM
link   
Iran is said to build atom storage tunnels
The Associated Press
Friday, March 4, 2005


Facility would be resistant to an attack

VIENNA Iran is using reinforced materials and tunneling deep underground to store nuclear components - measures meant to make the facility resistant to "bunker busters" and other special weaponry in case of an attack, diplomats said Thursday.

The diplomats spoke as a 35-country meeting of the UN atomic agency ended more than three days of deliberations focusing on Iran and North Korea, another nation of nuclear concern.

An agency review read at the meeting faulted Tehran for starting work on the tunnel at Isfahan without informing the International Atomic Energy Agency beforehand.

The review said Iran, following prodding by the IAEA, has over the past few months provided "preliminary design information" on the tunnel in the central city that is home to the country's uranium enrichment program, and said construction began in September "to increase capacity, safety and security of nuclear material."

The IAEA also said Iran was ignoring calls to scrap plans for a heavy water reactor and continuing construction. Commenting on that Thursday, a diplomat said satellite imagery had revealed that work in the city of Arak had progressed to the point where crews "were pouring the foundations."

Spent fuel from heavy water reactors can yield significant amounts of bomb-grade plutonium.

Asked for details on the tunnel, a diplomat familiar with Iran's dossier said parts of it would run as deep as nearly one kilometer, or about half a mile, below ground and would be constructed of hardened concrete and other special materials meant to withstand severe air attacks.

Other diplomats said such moves were motivated by Iranian concerns of a strike by the United States or Israel; both countries accuse Iran of trying to secretly build nuclear weapons. All of the envoys spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Hundreds of bunker busters were used in U.S. airstrikes on hostile fortified underground command centers, living quarters and storage areas in Afghanistan and Iran.

Last year Israel said it was buying about 5,000 smart bombs from Washington, including 500 1-ton bunker busters capable of destroying concrete walls as thick as two meters, or six feet, fueling speculation of possible preparation for an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.

While not ruling out the possibility of a U.S. attack, Washington has toned down its rhetoric against Iran. Washington is awaiting the results of European negotiations aimed at getting Tehran to renounce all plans to enrich uranium in exchange for economic concessions and other forms of support - and is even considering backing such incentives.

Uranium enrichment is "dual use," which means it can generate fuel for nuclear power as well as form the core of warheads.

President George W. Bush said fears that Washington was preparing an attack were "ridiculous," but he also said last week that "all options are on the table."

Iran links its fear of an attack to a decision, made during a debate at the Vienna meeting, a gathering of the board of governors of the IAEA, to bar UN nuclear inspectors from some sensitive sites.

Suggesting that leaks could be exploited by Iran's enemies, a senior Iranian envoy, Sirous Nasseri, said Tehran's worries about "confidentiality of information" gathered on such visits "are more intense in view of potential threats of military strikes" against facilities visited by the agency.

www.iht.com.../articles/2005/03/03/news/iran.html

This is yet another development in the Iranian race to get nukes. The longer the world "debates" the issues the closer it gets to real nuclear war. Iran has one mission, "get the bomb".

Far to soon this planet will be ablaze, when that happens the blame will be solely on Europes shoulders.




posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 09:13 AM
link   


Far to soon this planet will be ablaze, when that happens the blame will be solely on Europes shoulders.

Just nuke us then. Kill the planet and let the US survive on its own. Keep up the appalling work DR, it's always good to read your most uneducated posts



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 09:17 AM
link   
Let's look at this sentance, "Kill the planet and let the US survive on its own". Well...the last globe I looked at put the US on earth, so I doubt it will survive. Being it would be the primary target to most nuke weilding countries.

The Us has deep tunnels also, they are called silo's.
Just Joking with you. It is disgusting how nuke happy / proud the americans (generalized) are of it.

The US is a bigger threat then any other country in my mind.

[edit on 4-3-2005 by e 2 e k 1 a 7]



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 09:27 AM
link   



Far to soon this planet will be ablaze, when that happens the blame will be solely on Europes shoulders.




With the exception of those in our current coalition, seems others are happy just to sit around talking about it. Burns me up



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 09:28 AM
link   
Says nothing about "nukes", just protecting components. Can't blame them with the US and Israel constant threats of violence.

If the world does become a blaze, it will be down to US aggression without a doubt.



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 09:34 AM
link   

If the world does become a blaze, it will be down to US aggression without a doubt.


US aggression? Ha!

Question:
If you were in a room with a hyperactive 6 year old who just happened to be waving a loaded gun around, would you try to get it away from him? Seems by your post that you'd be more likely to call up your friends for a meeting to discuss it! Get a clue and an education



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Partyof1

If the world does become a blaze, it will be down to US aggression without a doubt.


US aggression? Ha!

Question:
If you were in a room with a hyperactive 6 year old who just happened to be waving a loaded gun around, would you try to get it away from him? Seems by your post that you'd be more likely to call up your friends for a meeting to discuss it! Get a clue and an education



Ahahaha, you are comparing the Iranians to six year olds. You need an education, deny ignorance. My education likely makes yours look you are still in primary school, your attack on me with no intelligent contribution to the thread shows this in a fine way. Grow up.

Yes US aggression, when was the last time Iran attacked anyone. Feel the propaganda, suck it up.



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kriz_4
Says nothing about "nukes", just protecting components. Can't blame them with the US and Israel constant threats of violence.

If the world does become a blaze, it will be down to US aggression without a doubt.


Ok let get simple here.........
You have a neighbor down the street that has threatened to burn down yours and another neighbors house. He keep buying gas cans and storing them in his garage. Next he buys a bunch of matches. The only thing he is missing is the gasoline. Now he makes a deal to buy gasoline from the guy down the street. You call the police, who say they will investigate. But the cops just ignore you. Do you call the fire department, before or after the fire starts?



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 09:44 AM
link   



Ahahaha, you are comparing the Iranians to six year olds. You need an education, deny ignorance. My education likely makes yours look you are still in primary school, your attack on me with no intelligent contribution to the thread shows this in a fine way. Grow up.

Yes US aggression, when was the last time Iran attacked anyone. Feel the propaganda, suck it up.

Nah, I won't bite this time. No need to defend my opinions here. I stand by my post. We obviously won't agree - that's all.



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 09:45 AM
link   
I think you should sit on your porch in with loaded 12. gauge, but you do not rush into his house and take him down. Just because he is a threat, it is cowardice. You wait till hes walking towards your house with the gas cans, then you let him have it.



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by e 2 e k 1 a 7
I think you should sit on your porch in with loaded 12. gauge, but you do not rush into his house and take him down. Just because he is a threat, it is cowardice. You wait till hes walking towards your house with the gas cans, then you let him have it.


Ok so the US should wait until Iran launches its nukes before they strike? wait until Iran can hold the entire mideast hostage, is that what you mean?



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 10:01 AM
link   
What I mean is, the US just likes to jump into things, just because the other side is a threat. Everyone thinks, OH NO there gonna fire they're nukes at us, GET THEM NOW.....have you ever thought that maybe the only reason they have nukes in the first place is so their citizens dont have to be afraid of you?

Nukes are an empty threat, no one will use them, because there will be no victory, just 2 desimated countries. Americans...do you guys really have the time to breathe when your just shoveling and swallowing the propaganda?

Its like 2 men about to fight, 1 has a sword, the other is unarmed...what is the thought of the unarmed man? Oh snaps, we better find ourselves a sword. atleast 1.

[edit on 4-3-2005 by e 2 e k 1 a 7]



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Let's take the perspective of the Iranian side. The Zionists are next door in Iraq/Afghan within miles of your country's boarder. If anyone is being overly aggressive (like always) it's the United States of America.

So put away your neighbor gasoline buying analogy, unless you care to mention the out-of-town Zionist tourist thriving to own the whole block! I'm not suggesting the world go easy on Iran's nuclear ambitions, however our ambitions to "secure" the middle east situation is clearly provoking Armageddon.



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Good point, trying to secure the Middle east, is like pushing a wild animal into a smaller and smaller corner. You better start backing up, or that animal is going to strike eventually.

Why do alot of people think that the US will always be the victor? Everyone thinks it is a good idea, the US will have some casualties but will win. Someday soon the US is going to get a dose of there own medicine and reap it.



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Yes, Iran nuking the US, only way to do this is if they strap one on the back of a nutcase and have him swim across the atlantic. Bush may have you afraid of the boogymen, but the people who are based in reality and facts and science know not to worry. Unless a Olympic Gold Medalist swimmer joins Iran, we have nothing to worry about. Well, except Bush finding out Canada has oil, then sorry friendly neighbors to the north, welcome to America.



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 10:23 AM
link   
But Canada does have oil...not as much as the middle east, but enough. Canada sold Alaska to the US because we were scared of the russians...the irony...alaska was found to have a large oil deposit under it. Kind of a kick in the ___ to Canada. We should have looked under ground first.



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Yes, Iran nuking the US, only way to do this is if they strap one on the back of a nutcase and have him swim across the atlantic. Bush may have you afraid of the boogymen, but the people who are based in reality and facts and science know not to worry. Unless a Olympic Gold Medalist swimmer joins Iran, we have nothing to worry about. Well, except Bush finding out Canada has oil, then sorry friendly neighbors to the north, welcome to America.


You need to get out more there lesserboy.........

Iran is developing the Shahab 4,5and 6 that can go deep into europe and the US west coast maybe even New Mexico

www.fas.org...



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 01:58 PM
link   
sorry there, but canada didnt sell alaska to the usa it was russia long time ago and it was a steal..



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 02:13 PM
link   
oh come on where the proof there making holes.just becuase the media think there are some does not mean anything.they like to make up stories to sell newspapers.



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 04:02 PM
link   
This is all bull$hit.

No links, no gimmicks, just check it out:

The US went into Iraq because of WMD. Didnt find jack.
North Korea all the while has been flashing "the nuke" under the US' nose.

Iran suddenly has caught the WMD bug and might be next on the radar.

North Korea all the while has been flashing "the nuke" under the US nose.

Iran is a pretty cool place.... they havent attacked anyone latley. At least its people are not starving like the people of another country. Ummm whats that country called?..... oh yeah right North Korea.

Let me say this man. I'm not antisemetic so save it. But this all boils down to Isreal.
Why dosent Iran have the right to have a nuke? It's a f>cking nation with its own goverment. It feels threatened by Israel.... how do we know that Israel wont launch a missle at Iran without notice? Why is Israel allowed to be the only country in that region with Nukes?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join