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 secretly produced thousands of ILLEGAL nuclear centrifuges…

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 07:59 PM
link   
I believe the Nukes are one of the few things that keeping Isreal from avoiding a middle eastern war.

Maybe a breeze of reality will change your mind. THeirs one alternative to rid ourselves of nukes, and that is to use them. Thats the life we live in today folks. So save the "we just want peace" hippie protest.

Not until Jesus himself comes down and wipes us all out into heaven or hell (you choose
). Then, perhaps then we will have peace.

But people please think outside the box when suggesting that Iran should be allowed to have nukes.




posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by C0le
Its a no win situation, Everyone hates the fact that the U.S supports isreal, denfing them against an arab, Isreali fight would only make matters worse in there eyes, Also its doesnt mater rather The U.S or the U.k will be there for them, the question is, will we be there for them intime.

Acutally I hear its more the US than the UK.....after some of the stories I've heard about the gaza strip....


Originally posted by evanfitz
I believe the Nukes are one of the few things that keeping Isreal from avoiding a middle eastern war.

So why dont they fight and get it over with?
In your mind war is necessary.


Maybe a breeze of reality will change your mind. THeirs one alternative to rid ourselves of nukes, and that is to use them. Thats the life we live in today folks. So save the "we just want peace" hippie protest.

BS, thats your opinion. Not mine.



Not until Jesus himself comes down and wipes us all out into heaven or hell (you choose
). Then, perhaps then we will have peace.

Or mabye if people stopped pointing guns at one another we might have peace but hey, we're all paraniod as hell .


But people please think outside the box when suggesting that Iran should be allowed to have nukes.

So china can have nukes but iran no?
NK= yes IRAN =no..
UK= yes iran =no?

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 08:07 PM
link   
COLE:

I agree with what your saying, and that is the crux of my position. Nukes, there is no time to help them, without nukes there is plenty of time to help them.

With a Nuke, it would end up being too late, by the time the US heard of it it has been done and no more Isreal.

Without a NUke, the chances are that Isreal could still hold there own against all the Arab nations and if not, would at least hold their own until help arrived.

I agree that many nations don't like that the US is Isreals cabana boy, but since when does it matter what other people feel - as long as no nukes are envolved, and the US is seen to be fairly fair - which it hasn't which could be the reason why many countries don't like the relationship between the US and ISreal in the first place - the worst that would have to be dealt with would be grumblings. That, IMO, is better than a mushroom cloud without warning.

I don't follow the ME that well so maybe I am missing something. Why exactly does Isreal get one rule while others get another? Isn't that, fundimentally, the reason they are disliked or is it that it was, in their eyes, an artificial state brought about by politic's?

Just wondering...maybe someone could U2U me the answer so as not to hijack the thread.. Thanks.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 08:30 PM
link   
Xphile,

My real point was on the legal/illegal portion of your post. My mistake.

So who determines legal/illegal? If it is the UN then take them to world court already.

America, even with their many boug......errr.........friends, cannot continue to police the world relying on our perception to make sane, safe, or moral decisions affecting people halfway round the world.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 08:46 PM
link   


So why dont they fight and get it over with?
In your mind war is necessary.

talk about contradiction, but I was lucky enough to get it in two sentences



BS, thats your opinion. Not mine.


care to expand on that?



So china can have nukes but iran no?
NK= yes IRAN =no..
UK= yes iran =no?


true, but is iran having nukes going to make the situation any better. Sounds more like your mind is set on war not mine.



Or mabye if people stopped pointing guns at one another we might have peace but hey, we're all paraniod as hell .


good idea, but it wont happen. Like I said, its reality. or according to you "BS"



[edit on 18-8-2005 by evanfitz]



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by evanfitz
true, but is iran having nukes going to make the situation any better. Sounds more like your mind is set on war not mine.



It will create balance. Sort of like M.A.D. So yes, in a very sick way both sides having Nukes does make the situation better.

Ofcourse neither side having them would be the best scenerio.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 10:02 PM
link   
Its becoming more and more apparent that munitions and fighters are jumping the Iran border and killing Americans in Iraq.

Being more and more bombs are going off INSIDE populated PUBLIC area's where no coalition forces are.. you can see which bombs are Iran's, and which are the supposid alqaeda figures..

If IRAN got far enough on a bomb... whats stopping them driving it to the gates of the GREENZONE and detonating?

They dont care how many Iraqi's die.. they care how many Americans die.


Sep

posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Its becoming more and more apparent that munitions and fighters are jumping the Iran border and killing Americans in Iraq.


How is this becoming "more and more apparent"? Last I checked the interior minister explained that the reports by the US and British governments about Iran delivering weapons to the insurgents was "exaggerated".

news.yahoo.com...

Further more, the Shias are the ones being killed. When bombs started exploding in Sunni areas killing Sunnis civilians then one can suspect Iran.



Originally posted by Agit8dChopIf IRAN got far enough on a bomb... whats stopping them driving it to the gates of the GREENZONE and detonating?

They dont care how many Iraqi's die.. they care how many Americans die.


What is stopping Iran from using chemical weapons inside the green zone? How about biological weapons? Iran has been making Chemical weapons for a few decades now and if they really wanted to explode something inside the green zone they have the capability to do so easily but they choose not to.



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 01:40 AM
link   
Yeah I've never understood that.
If they're so untrustworthy with weapons of mass destruction you'd think they would be using the one's they've had for over twenty years. You'd think that scores of soldiers would be dying from nerve agent exposure on a daily basis thanks to Iranian interference.



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 01:41 AM
link   
Well, being that shipments are being picked up more and more crossing the IRANIAN border says to me Irans sending in bombs.

Being the bombs have been well documented as being LARGE and SHAPED compared to the very CRUDE IED's Iraqi's are using says to me they are being made OUTSIDE the freedom fighter refuge's.

Iran wouldnt just send in some Gas warheads.. whats the point? one Iran will be OBLITERATED..

If Iran could put togetehr a crude nuke,
Hand it over to the IRAQI freedom fighters, then its a whle different story.

But Honestly, neither you or I have ANY clue abotu the FACTS coming uot of IRAQ..
The Americans have failed to do 1 thing this entire war, and thats be honest.

But Iran wouldnt just sit by especially when they were mentioned as an Axis, especially when your enemy is camped right at your door step.

Untrustworthy? who said they were untrustworth?

making a bomb and delivering it to the Iraqi's isnt untrustworthy, its playing your cards right.
Deny it.. hey the insurgents got it from an unknown source..
when it turns out the Radiation matches Russian Uranium they cant go blaming Iran can they?




[edit on 19-8-2005 by Agit8dChop]

[edit on 19-8-2005 by Agit8dChop]



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 07:19 AM
link   
Why are they illegal?

Is the US the only country thats allowed to ignore international laws?


Sep

posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Well, being that shipments are being picked up more and more crossing the IRANIAN border says to me Irans sending in bombs.

Being the bombs have been well documented as being LARGE and SHAPED compared to the very CRUDE IED's Iraqi's are using says to me they are being made OUTSIDE the freedom fighter refuge's.


The current elected Iraqi government believes that Iran is not helping the insurgency. They in my opinion would be the most trusted people when it comes to their country's security as they do not have external agendas. This is not the case when the US speaks of Iran helping the insurgency.


Originally posted by Agit8dChopIran wouldnt just send in some Gas warheads.. whats the point? one Iran will be OBLITERATED..

If Iran could put togetehr a crude nuke,
Hand it over to the IRAQI freedom fighters, then its a whle different story.


Why would it be whole different story? Both the weapons can be positively linked with Iran and this would cause a great retaliation from the US and its allies.



Originally posted by Agit8dChopBut Honestly, neither you or I have ANY clue abotu the FACTS coming uot of IRAQ..
The Americans have failed to do 1 thing this entire war, and thats be honest.

But Iran wouldnt just sit by especially when they were mentioned as an Axis, especially when your enemy is camped right at your door step.


No one said they were just sitting idly by. They are creating some powerful allies all over the world and inside Iraq and are strengthening their position through diplomacy and new trade deals.



Originally posted by Agit8dChopUntrustworthy? who said they were untrustworth?

making a bomb and delivering it to the Iraqi's isnt untrustworthy, its playing your cards right.


That would be very stupid on Iran's part as they would lose the powerful allies in the new Iraqi government, which they funded and helped for over 20 years. It would be stupid to attack a potential future ally.


Originally posted by Agit8dChopDeny it.. hey the insurgents got it from an unknown source..
when it turns out the Radiation matches Russian Uranium they cant go blaming Iran can they?


Well at the moment they cant because Iran hasn’t taken delivery of Russian uranium.



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 09:59 AM
link   
.
Our actions in Iraq have emboldened the Iranian mulahs and weakened the Iranian people's movement towards democracy.

Instead of being able to have a unified international alliance against Iran, The US damaged relations with most longer term allies and has lost face around the world.

Instead of the fair and honest broker of military might around the world we have shown that our leadership will resort to lies and self delusions and completely wrong intelligence and kill hundreds of thousands of people for no constructive purpose.

Instead of treating all people with some basic level of respect Abu Graib has shown we are only very marginally better than those we portray as moral degenerate political leadership.

Iraq has shown the world the US is not to be trusted,
either ethically or in terms of logistical competence.

Now as a last resort, since we cannot possibly threaten Iran with a military completely bogged down in Iraq, talk of bombing Irans production sites has been raised.

The whole world saw Israel bomb Iraqs first attempt at a Nuclear facility.
Iran's mulahs form a very calculatingly evil theocracy. Their facilities are disbursed, and deeply burried and shrouded in as deep an offuscation and secrecy as is possible.

While we have been futzing around in Iraq making no progress nor finding the will to simply leave, Iran has been very busy. Dancing the diplomatic dance all for show while secretly working to produce nuclear weapons.

I can not believe just how extremely counter productive Iraq has been for the USA.
.



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 10:40 AM
link   
It is a very plausible argument of Iran that they want to build nuclear reactors now we know that oil is gonna be in short supply and soon will be depleted.
Why use your own oil for fuel and industrie that is (gonna be) worth as much as gold while u can have altenative power sources that are essential for all countries when the oil is gone.

Why would Iran start an offensive with abombs????the fundamentalist terrorist are not the ones in power and never will be.The goverment of Iran maybe fundamentalists but u cant compare them with the terrorists which make up minor part of the population.

All terrorist attacks in the past have been relatively small, and the 9-11,
Now it seems like the terrorist are well organized and have the potential to attack in force

If 9-11 didnt happen the US would have no foot to stand in this case against Iran(and Iraq and afghan for that matter) and with reviewing the 9-11 case extensively have come to the conclusion that this was an inside job 200% and that the US are only ones benefitting from this event.

The rest is all fear mongering propaganda and the dumb(majority) people are buying it



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 10:52 AM
link   
.
Iran is a theocracy.
That means their thinking is of themselves having divine right to do some things.

That is the same thinking used by Israel to rationalize settlements in Arab areas.
That is the same rationale used to impose a Christian fundementalists agenda on the formerly free nation of America.

Iran will probably not sell weapons to just anyone with money like Pakistan and North Korea.
That is good.
They however hate israel and support Hezbollah and other very questionable organizations.
If they do anything involved against Israel they could start a Nuclear exchange.
The whole world would suffer, with nuclear fallout drifting around the globe.

If the Iranian people were in charge of their own government i think the likelyhood of it being a genuine energy production effort would be much increased.

Radical religious politics are inherently problematic.
Armed radical religious governments are a recipe for horrible disasters.
.



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 11:07 AM
link   
I still laugh everytime one of these articles comes up...
There is no verified source that says they even have these centrifuges...

secondly, this is propaganda to convince us that the enemy is Iran, instead of the Wahhabbist Suadi Arabia... because why students?
SA is our ally and provider of oil... and just don't question where all the money we give them goes... ok...
don't look behind that curtain...

also don't consider the fact that oil prices have skyrocketed... another curtain.

If you look at the situation... oil isn't rare... most wells are NOT at full production, because they want to keep the prices high artificially. More profit means more bombs to blow up the great SATAN america...

Steering us towards the moderate Iran, is like trying to wave a shiny set of keys to get a childs attention... it works everytime.

extremists are the enemy... not conservatives, not moderates, and certainly not liberal muslims...
where are they? wahhabism is the major religion in SA... you don't hear that from CNN do you?
It si also very popular in Qatar, Yemin, and all the other regions we call freinds...

Iran, will be a true positive force in the region as long as they resist the taliban type wahhabism...
disgree or not, but here it is

wahhabism... the true enemy



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by evanfitz
talk about contradiction, but I was lucky enough to get it in two sentences

Well why dont they?
Live in fear or take the chance to live in peace.



care to expand on that?

There are easier ways to rid ourselves of nukes.



true, but is iran having nukes going to make the situation any better. Sounds more like your mind is set on war not mine.

I am pointing out the bad, if that makes me look like I want war then sorry thats a misinterpretation.
How is it not makeing it better?
Another reason for us not to shoot em.



good idea, but it wont happen. Like I said, its reality. or according to you "BS"
[edit on 18-8-2005 by evanfitz]

People wont stop pointing guns at each other?
Didnt know you knew the future...


cjf

posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 02:15 PM
link   
DW,

I hear and understand what your saying; but c’mon…Iran with the possibility of Nukes? (Never mind the known active pursuit by the IAEA, concealment, government statements….)

The ‘idea’ is worthy of discussion but reality is much different. If the ‘processes’ are to be peaceful the why is the EU3 agreement off the table etc etc etc? Why are there volumes of underhanded dealings and covert research applications by Iran not being held as ‘prior recollection refresh’ even simply historically?

Even if one wants to err on the side of caution (or not) and deal with ‘reality’ (or not), where do you truthfully stand? Should your neighbor possess the bomb?



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 04:48 PM
link   
cjf,

Thank you,

I would rather see no nukes , these states like iran cant be trusted.
But they cant be trusted as far as anyone.
This is what people think like :
How can I know that america wont nuke anyone?
I have assurance of the president and the men and women who man them, how can I be sure they are not lieing?

We live in a world of paranioa, once we can stop that , we can live..




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join