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.

 

Nuclear attack on Iran

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Looking at other internet sites i have noticed that a pre- emtive nuclear strike on Iran has been seen as a possibility. This becomes possible after a major incident in the USA , perhaps a nuclear device being let off. Is this a possibility? or scaremongering on conspiracy theory sites? Links www.friendsofliberty.com... and larouchepub.com...




posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 11:26 PM
link   
I have noticed a disturbing trend in this area.

It started with reports of overflights in Iran using UMAV's and has gone on with demonizing Iran in the press.
This reminds me very much of how we prepared the public for the attack of Iraq. (I I know what the problem is, the US does not like countries that stat with I :lol

Certainly the US/allies/Isreal can attack Iran and distroy it's reactor and refining plants-no problem. The problem occurs when Iran decides to retailiate against the US interests in the are-our troops in Iraq or Isreal.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 12:06 AM
link   
Of course the psy/ops machine is in overdrive trying to demonise Iran (as if they needed any help). Rumour has it that a couple US cities will be hit with suitcase nukes in August. That will be the given pretext to do Iran. Anyone who falls for it, should that play out, doesn't have the brain of a mouse. I hope all the talk is just BS, tho.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 01:28 AM
link   
Well Iran is defenetly developing nuclear weapons - my personal opinion.

There either doing it to gain power, or too make money selling it to other countries or "groups", if there is a WMD attack on the US or UK. Theres going to be a retaliation. There negative reactions towards the offers from the EU, is enough to warrant some suspicion. Retaliating with our WMD's may anger many major powers though. If anything happens is going to be rough.

Did anyone remember the senate bill proposed to nuke the top 10 or 25 muslim cities if the US is hit? I remember reading that a while back??

Vorta



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vorta
Well Iran is defenetly developing nuclear weapons - my personal opinion.


Ok, so that's your personal opinion... do you actually have any proof to back up your contention? If so, let's see it.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 02:03 AM
link   
No, I do not.

Thats why expressed it as my opinon. Im sure im not the only one who wished they had proof as to whether they do or do not. I hope they don't.

It's just some simple observations, I didn't mean to provoke a debate or offend anyone. Apologies.

Vorta



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 02:08 AM
link   
Well if you listen to Iran, they WERE working on enriching materials for a nuclear bomb, but stopped to see if the EU could work out a deal where they wouldn't produce anymore. They had until today to reach a deal, otherwise Iran would start attempting a limited enrichment program again. I personally think that they have small amounts of nuclear material, but that's just the first step in making a bomb. The WANT to produce one, but I personally think it's going to take them awhile to get it right. The tolerances in making one are EXACT. My understanding is that if you are off even by a few milimeters, when it comes to the explosives needed to start the reaction, you get a "fizzle".



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Well if you listen to Iran, they WERE working on enriching materials for a nuclear bomb, but stopped to see if the EU could work out a deal where they wouldn't produce anymore. They had until today to reach a deal, otherwise Iran would start attempting a limited enrichment program again. I personally think that they have small amounts of nuclear material, but that's just the first step in making a bomb. The WANT to produce one, but I personally think it's going to take them awhile to get it right. The tolerances in making one are EXACT. My understanding is that if you are off even by a few milimeters, when it comes to the explosives needed to start the reaction, you get a "fizzle".



Thats one of the many things that sways me to believe they may have, or are producing nuclear weapons. Just bugs me why won't they co-operate in that particular way with other nations? From what I read the EU, has offered them many incentives that they refuse to take. I hope to god there just sabre rattling.

Vorta



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 03:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vorta

There either doing it to gain power, or too make money selling it to other countries or "groups", if there is a WMD attack on the US or UK. Theres going to be a retaliation. There negative reactions towards the offers from the EU, is enough to warrant some suspicion. Retaliating with our WMD's may anger many major powers though. If anything happens is going to be rough.

Vorta


There's no way they would be making a nuke to sell, it's worth more to them as a defense than any price a rouge Terrorist group could come up with.
Plus, any foreign country to get a nuke will basically be blamed on Islam/Iran with what ever link can be found which would turn Iran into the next target instantly, another reason not to sell them if they could make them.

I think Iran wants a nuke as purely a defense measure since Isreal and US have both stated they will go hell for leather when and if they choose, in which case if you were Iran i'm sure you'd want the 1 measure that can keep invading forces out of your country. That's why countries with nukes don't get invaded.

I wouldn't be threatened at all with Iran getting a nuke, it should actually calm things down a bit as it levels the field out a bit, kind of like a stail mate. The fear mongering and the 'blame it on terrorists' attitude is doing more damage than anything else because it's promoting a legit reason to use nuclear weapons when there shouldn't be one.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 04:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vorta
Well Iran is defenetly developing nuclear weapons - my personal opinion.


OMG. When will it end. What was it first ? The taliban. Then Saddam and now Iran. You know, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to do the math.

My reasons?

- They're not allowed to, thats why the UN has inspectors. These inspectors have in their power the greatest technology of seek and destroy, so to speak. If Iran makes a weapon, it will be because they have allowed it. Be that on or off the record. Would they allow it ?

- The Irani government is very different than what they're portrayed to be. If they were the Madmen they're portrayed to be then it does hold some logic that they're doing some pretty waco things. I mean, it would only profit America. If they were caught red handed that would mean an invasion for sure. But, scince I don't believe half of what I watch, in my opinion, they've actually got some brains, hence, even the thought of making such weapon is absurd. I think their agenda is merely survival. They've got enough on their hands already to be thinking of making nukes.



[edit on 1-8-2005 by joyouslyhumored]



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:04 AM
link   
the Islamic state of Iran has always been the real problem for the west, it sponsers suicide bombers and has a hate for all western infidel nations, they want nuclear material to use against Isreal and the US/UK coalition, we are entering a very dangerous period of tension right now. If Iran obtains Nuke's this would not in my opinion calm things down .Islamic fundi's do not have the same mindset as westerners they are happy to die for Allah if this means our destruction, at least we hold Iraq just now



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:15 AM
link   
Bulldog,

The way I see it.
American Hiroshima

If there's one of those then Iran and many more will go down. Here are some quotes in that thread that caught my attention.




they obviously want to kiss the middle east goodbye then their home land?? cause thats what would happen if terrorist nuked usa...

if this scenerio plays out, the white gloves will come off and our "birds" will launch. Than and only than will the Muslim world will realize (too late) that they have pulled tha tail of Tiger once too often and they shoulda went after the exrtremist a long time ago. After Iran and Syria get vaporized, The remaining Muslims will drop to their knees begging for America's forgivness. because once America gets angry, No One can stop us....

You have no idea what would come of the US getting nuked, nor do you grasp the violence and revenge driven culture...


There's alot more but that's the main attitude, I percieve. Not only here, I think that's how most americans feel... If america gets hit, Muslims will take the heat. My question is, if america gets hit and the Islamic middleastern millitary facillities are then destroyed, as well as much of their country, be that by nuclear power or not, which would lead to devastating outcomes, socially and economically, Who stands to gain ?

I mean when you do something (terror attack), you normally think of the outcome. So, if the muslim and american world collide, who wins ? The same people that run the media frenzy?

Gee, I hope I don't get banned for saying that one.


[edit on 1-8-2005 by joyouslyhumored]



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by joyouslyhumored

I mean when you do something (terror attack), you normally think of the outcome. So, if the muslim and american world collide, who wins ? The same people that run the media frenzy?

[edit on 1-8-2005 by joyouslyhumored]


To me one only has to look as far as the oft stated goal of the Islamic Fundies of sparking a global jihad to realize that allowing any country with them near or at the helm to proceed with any nuclear program of any kind - it is pure folly for which a very high price indeed will be paid.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by avro
the Islamic state of Iran has always been the real problem for the west, it sponsers suicide bombers and has a hate for all western infidel nations, they want nuclear material to use against Isreal and the US/UK coalition, we are entering a very dangerous period of tension right now. If Iran obtains Nuke's this would not in my opinion calm things down .Islamic fundi's do not have the same mindset as westerners they are happy to die for Allah if this means our destruction, at least we hold Iraq just now


for a country that sponsers terrorist groups the US would be at the top
since most of the groups that are attacking are US sponserd org.


back to topic
this is very doutfull and i have said this many times
no country would be stupid enough ( this includes the arabs )
to launch a pretive nuclear strike

nucs are only good as a detturent

and alll those who say iran would give them to terrorists i repeat the same question why havent they armed them with chemical weapons
since they are easier to manifacture and release?

i have read to many sites that promote this rubbish from both sides
and just sweap it out as its trash as thats all it pro0motes


dom

posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phoenix

To me one only has to look as far as the oft stated goal of the Islamic Fundies of sparking a global jihad to realize that allowing any country with them near or at the helm to proceed with any nuclear program of any kind - it is pure folly for which a very high price indeed will be paid.


Just like allowing those damn commies to get nukes, after all that'd lead to the end of the world wouldn't it? Oh, actually, no it didn't...

I can't see why anyone really believes that Iran would commit mass suicide by giving nuclear weapons to terrorists. It would be a policy of insanity with predictable results.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by dom
I can't see why anyone really believes that Iran would commit mass suicide by giving nuclear weapons to terrorists. It would be a policy of insanity with predictable results.


because most people are narrow minded and believe anything that is shown on Fox



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vorta
Did anyone remember the senate bill proposed to nuke the top 10 or 25 Muslim cities if the US is hit? I remember reading that a while back??


Even bush isn't that stupid! No sane person (US or otherwise) will ever use nuclear weapons. The outcome is complete devastation for both the country hit and financial destruction for the country using them. The entire world would turn against the US all 6 billions of them if you even nuked one Islamic country let alone 10/25.

Let me make this very clear...

You would radicalize every single Muslim and probably a lot of non-Muslims into jihad against the US.

No one would buy American goods and would completely boycott you and as little as you want to admit it you would be financially destroyed by this one action.

The US would find it very difficult to have any kind of diplomatic relations with any other country and all your former friends will be reluctant to be associated with you.

Nuclear weapon are a weapon that was never intended to be used, they serve no more purpose than to prevent your enemies using nukes against you as they would destroy you too.

Just as a matter of interest, how many times have I read on this site that whatever city will be nuked by suitcase nukes on such a date, it comes and nothing happens so they put it back a couple of months and so on and on and on. It's like that group (can't remember the name?) who say that the world will end a couple of times a year and have been for years and still continue to do so. Pointless, have we actually got any proof that these things exist? They must be some of the oldest nukes on the planet and been passed round every bogeyman going in the last 15 years. They're so old would they actually work?

edit: my bad spelling


[edit on 1-8-2005 by arnold_vosloo]



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Well if you listen to Iran, they WERE working on enriching materials for a nuclear bomb, but stopped to see if the EU could work out a deal where they wouldn't produce anymore. They had until today to reach a deal, otherwise Iran would start attempting a limited enrichment program again. I personally think that they have small amounts of nuclear material, but that's just the first step in making a bomb. The WANT to produce one, but I personally think it's going to take them awhile to get it right. The tolerances in making one are EXACT. My understanding is that if you are off even by a few milimeters, when it comes to the explosives needed to start the reaction, you get a "fizzle".


Well for starters, Alarmist statements like THIS precisely, is what causes
concern unnecessarily..they WERE working on enriching nuclear material
YES, but to say they WERE working on enriching materials for a nuclear bomb is an extremely irresponsible statement. This is exactly the core of the debate, and to proclaim THAT when people "in the know" cant even say it, is why those who dont know, should just remain silent about it.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by arnold_vosloo
Even bush isn't that stupid! No sane person (US or otherwise) will ever use nuclear weapons.


Hiroshima.. Nagasaki?

Sane person.. I guess that's the caveat.

As for Iran.. you people ever heard of NUCLEAR ENERGY? It sure would suck for the war party and everyone who runs breathlessly after them to suddenly figure out, they're trying to make nuclear power plants.

After the Bu# that was fed to the US and the world regarding Iraq and WMD, how can anyone trust anything these thugs say at this point?



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by arnold_vosloo

Originally posted by Vorta
Did anyone remember the senate bill proposed to nuke the top 10 or 25 Muslim cities if the US is hit? I remember reading that a while back??


Even bush isn't that stupid! No sane person (US or otherwise) will ever use nuclear weapons. The outcome is complete devastation for both the country hit and financial destruction for the country using them. The entire world would turn against the US all 6 billions of them if you even nuked one Islamic country let alone 10/25.


Someone actually proposed that about 6months ago...

I believe it got far, but was then scrapped.
-----

joyouslyhumored

Maybe not? Since when did Iran have a permanent presence on Irans goverment?

BBC News - Iran 'misled UN on nuclear work'


- The Irani government is very different than what they're portrayed to be.


See link above.


The primary reason for devloping weapons, would be preventive. Im sure they feel threatened as they are right in the middle of "the war on terror", we occupy Afganistahn and Iraq, who's in the middle Iran...

Another reason may I repeat this again...

The EU, is basically offering everything they need to begin developing power plants, without enriching uranium, but no? They consider the European talks a waste of time and are re-assuming uranium enrichment. That is enough cause for concern and alot of concern, as a thread I read earlier even dennmark
, has expressed concern. It is a real matter.

Todays Iran News brings us:
Iran will reopen nuclear facility
Last Updated: Monday, 1 August 2005, 11:36 GMT 12:36 UK


Vorta



[edit on 1-8-2005 by Vorta]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join