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's Revolutionary Guard takes control of Iranian nukes

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 03:41 PM
link   
This is not good news; these are the same guys the British are accusing of supporting terror in Iraq…

Source



Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has placed the military firmly in control of his nation's nuclear program, undercutting his government's claim that the program is intended for civilian use, according to a leading opposition group.

Leaders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the force created specifically to defend the 1979 Islamic revolution, now dominate Iran's Supreme National Security Council, the country's top foreign policy-making body under the constitution.

Mr. Ahmadinejad, a little-known former mayor of Tehran before his surprise election in July, is a former IRGC commander, as is new council Secretary-General Ali Larijani, who has taken the lead in negotiations about Iran's nuclear programs….


Not good people.




posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 03:47 PM
link   
I posted this story in another Iran thread earlier.
As I mentioned in the other thread, with all the talk of pre-emptive strikes coming out of Israel and the US, is it any wonder that the military are taking over these sites?
I expect the areas will be bristling with SAM defences too.

Like the wording too, "Iranian nukes", misleads totally in giving the impression of nuclear weapons sites, of which there is no proof. But hey!, why let the truth get in the way of a sensationalist story



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 03:49 PM
link   
So they've militarized their supposedly civilian energy production program eh? And, for repetition, this is a country with massive oil reserves, claiming that it needs nuke tech for generation of electricity.
On the upside, in a generation or two things will be pretty much better for the people in the Free Iranian Republic.

Then again, they might just as well merge with 'old' iraq and become the Free Repbulic of Persia.



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 03:50 PM
link   
More power to them


Simple reaction to the threats from US/Israel, they're preparing for war.

[edit on 5-10-2005 by shire19]



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 03:52 PM
link   
...and that goes Hand in Hand with "Pax Americana".

I bet its the same Dudes that brought us the Story about Saddam and his WMDs.

As long as the US Military Machine keeps rollin!



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
So they've militarized their supposedly civilian energy production program eh? And, for repetition, this is a country with massive oil reserves, claiming that it needs nuke tech for generation of electricity.
On the upside, in a generation or two things will be pretty much better for the people in the Free Iranian Republic.

Then again, they might just as well merge with 'old' iraq and become the Free Repbulic of Persia.


Oil wont last for ever
at the rate of consumtion it wont be that long before their oil is gone
and then they will be screwed when it comes to it

with a nuclear reactor they can save on oil and have more for exports

and its not supprizing that they are putting more defences around the plants with all the hostility being thrown at them



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
So they've militarized their supposedly civilian energy production program eh? And, for repetition, this is a country with massive oil reserves, claiming that it needs nuke tech for generation of electricity.
On the upside, in a generation or two things will be pretty much better for the people in the Free Iranian Republic.

Then again, they might just as well merge with 'old' iraq and become the Free Repbulic of Persia.


Please explain how putting it under the control of the military means that it has been militarized.

In light of the threat against their nuclear reactor, and related sites it would be very wise to have those resposible for defense overwatching.

...And the reason Iran wants nuclear power is because OPEC quotas are for oil production, not export.

The loans on the Nuclear Power plants will be paid for by the electricty customers.

In the end the STATE of Iran gets more money from selling the oil they otherwise would have burned.

ALL nations have a strong desire for nuclear electric power with oil prices rising out of sight, and all OPEC members have an even stronger motive for replacing oil fired power plants with others that consume Nuclear, or other non-petroleum fuel



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 05:21 PM
link   
If Iran's oil is indeed for civilian purposes (highly doubtful) then they are just shooting themselves in the foot again, this will only add more fuel to the fire.
It's also dumb because if the US really wanted to attack those sites then it wont matter if their Guard is there or not, it will only mean more casualties for Iran.

[edit on 5-10-2005 by WestPoint23]



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Could someone tell me, why Isreal is allowed to have nukes, and not Iran. Could someone tell me also what's Iran history of preemptive attacks? Also, who provoked iran to go to war with iraq?



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Skippy, please stop linking to IranFocus. The website is run by the MKO, a terrorist organization that has slaughtered Americans and Brits. What's next, neo-Nazi sites to promote your agenda of hate?



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by crusader
Could someone tell me, why Isreal is allowed to have nukes, and not Iran.


Because Israel never signed the UN NNPT but Iran did.


Could someone tell me also what's Iran history of preemptive attacks?


Iran was occupied just before WWII, and not liberated from the puppet Monarchy the British imposed on them until the American hostage crisis.

The Iranians never had a chance for a 'pre-emptive' attack until just before the Iran-Iraq war which Iraq started so the answer is that there is no history.


Also, who provoked iran to go to war with iraq?



The war began when Iraq invaded Iran on September 22, 1980, following a long history of border disputes.
en.wikipedia.org...


Iraq started it thinking Iran to be weak after so long under foreign control, and having such a young government.



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by shire19
they're preparing for war.

Preparing for a war that they are apparently instigating and have been instigating all along. Interesting that it happens at the command of Ahmadinejad, a radical from the revolution itself. Apparently he's a beleiver in the revolution and is willing to go to war over it.

Oil wont last for ever
at the rate of consumtion it wont be that long before their oil is gone

Thats patently absurd. The iranians have far more oil than they can possibly use, let alone need, thats why they sell it.


ArchangelPlease explain how putting it under the control of the military means that it has been militarized.

Because its under the control of the military. If the voting system in the US was run by bushes Secret Service and Blackwater Mercs, you think its still a public/civilian system??

it would be very wise to have those resposible for defense overwatching.

Phhpt. What would be wise would be to cooperate fully with the IAEA, unless the revolutionaries and radicals actually want a war, in which case you'd simply do what they are doing, build nuke tech, put it under control of the military, and beef up your military, and whip your citizens up into a war fervor (like, say, recruiting 40,000 suicide bombers).


crusader
Could someone tell me also what's Iran history of preemptive attacks?

In the few years that they've existed? None. How is that relevant? The government of Iran uses language to describe the west and the US in particular that would well nigh be considered an act of war if say, Bush made it in a speech. Iran is openly opposed to the United States, and their cooperation with the IAEA has been poor, according to the IAEA. It'd be foolish for the US to no suspect something. When someone says that they're going to kill you, and they're building a bomb, whats it matter if they say its for peaceful purposes??

Could someone tell me, why Isreal is allowed to have nukes, and not Iran

Every nation is allowed to build up nuclear technology, except the ones that signed on to things like the NPT, whereing they specifically agreed to never research nuclear weapons in exchange for nuclear technology. The iranians are not allowed to have nuclear weapons becuse they said so.


wecomeinpeace
The website is run by the MKO,

\I wouldn't want to speculate as to why skippy reads the propaganda of a terrorist organization, however the article is originally sourced from the Washington Times


Anyway, if iran doesn't want to have the United States invade it, at this point, it needs to get the IAEA to say that they are in complete compliance.



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
I wouldn't want to speculate as to why skippy reads the propaganda of a terrorist organization, however the article is originally sourced from the Washington Times


I'm aware of that, but if Stormfront posted a WP article, it'd be preferable if one linked to the WP rather than that site. Same principle, and this is not the first time the WOT forum's resident hate-monger has linked to Iranfocus.

[edit on 2005-10-5 by wecomeinpeace]



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 07:12 PM
link   
An inaccurate title to say the least, the article states that they took over the "nation's nuclear program," not any weapons, so "nukes" is a little "yellow." While the object of desire in Iran's nuclear program may be nuclear weapons, let's not panic, a program takes years to develop, an airstrike hours to complete.

Dismissed.



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

Oil wont last for ever
at the rate of consumtion it wont be that long before their oil is gone

Thats patently absurd. The iranians have far more oil than they can possibly use, let alone need, thats why they sell it.





bbc'
World oil demand estimate raised

The International Energy Agency has revised upwards its estimate of world oil demand, quashing hopes of an imminent decline in oil prices.
The IEA said in its monthly oil market report that demand for oil was running at 82.2 million barrels a day, 750,000 more than previously thought.

Demand growth this year is running at its fastest level in 24 years, the Paris-based organisation said.






link 2
Oil is the single most important commodity traded in the world today. Almost 83 million barrels were consumed every day last year. But oil prices have risen rapidly since January 2004 - October saw oil prices peak at fifty five dollars a barrel. That was sparked by worries that supply could not keep up with demand and has renewed concerns about how much oil we have left. In this Big Question, Emma Joseph travels to India – now the seventh biggest importer of oil in the world - where she asks: How much does the world rely on oil, and can we rely on it for the future?



Oil is one of the main trading blocks in the world and its consumption is increasing rapidly thanks to fast economic growth which has led to them needing to import more oil!

Irans OIL wont last forever and that means them limiting the USE of how much oil they use means they wont be eating into their own reserves
meaning it will last longer

so please dont give the grabage
Thats patently absurd. The iranians have far more oil than they can possibly use, let alone need, thats why they sell it.


[edit on 6-10-2005 by bodrul]



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 12:05 PM
link   
You know even if Iran does get nukes, they are going to find out the same thing that everyone else who has developed nuclear weapons.

YOU CAN'T USE THEM!

The moment you use nukes against people who have nukes you get a nuclear response against your country. If Iran launched against any one of its enemies it would be wiped off the face of the earth. Game over.

Now the clerics in charge of Iran my go on about suicide bombing and martyrdom but bear in mind its fine for them to say that as long as they don't actually have to do it themsleves. Like all dictatorships ( I know its a theocracy, but I count it as a dictatorship), the people in power are concerned about two things and two things only. Self preservation and more power.

Nuclear weapons lead to both. You get the power and prestige of being a nuclear power and you get the added bonus of sleeping well at night knowing that George W ain't gona role in on his Abrams for a spot of regime change. The clerics in Iran are not stupid ( In fact I admire the Iranians political adeptness, they are kicking the Americans and British into the ground at the moment!). They saw what happened in Iraq and they have seen what happened in North Korea and who can guess what the difference between the two is...........



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by bodrul
so please dont give the grabage

Look at iran's oil reserves.

Iran is OPEC's second largest oil producer and [url=holds 10 percent of the world's proven oil reserves. It also has the world's second largest natural gas reserves [...]
Iran holds 125.8 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, roughly 10 percent of the world's total, up from 90 billion barrels in 2003 [...]in July 2004, Iran's oil minister had noted that the country's proven oil reserves had increased to 132 billion barrels


They do not need nuclear power plants to generate electricity, and far from running short on oil, their reserves are constantly being found to dramatically increase. True, its a non-renewable resource. So maybe when the iranians in colonies on mars and europa ask for fuel oil, they might have to be turned down, but that nuke plant will be obsolete generations before iran runs out.



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 01:00 PM
link   
The point that people seem not to remember is that the EU offered light-water reactors to Iran for their 'nuclear' needs. (Much more difficult to make a bomb), Iran said "No!" we want the heavy water reactors and a bunch of centrifuges which we won't use to make hexaflurine gas!



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Lets not kid ourselves, Iran is most likely aiming for the bomb and those that are saying otherwise probally just dont want proof the other one right.

Allthough there isnt any credible proof that Iran is going Nuclear or might already have, I sincerely hope they get the bomb before Israel/US are ready to do anything about it.

Those that keep screaming that as soon as Iran has the bomb they will start hitting Israel or US need to lighten up, Iran has had Chemical (Bio?) weapons for several decades and the ability to deliver them.

"But they keep labeling US as the Satan and vowed to wipe Israel off the map" you say?

Well those are just words and you cant blame them for showing anger against the US/Israel verbally, but they are just words in the end, their actions have shown that they would think twice before pulling stunts like that off.



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Could it have occured that the Iranians are seeking an alternative to oil for energy consumption, or have we given them the benefit of the doubt? Once again, U.S. intelligence has been embowered in vauge generalities in regards to many aspects of Iranian intentions, I see no reason to take this article deeply. What's more concerning is that the U.S. itself has stockpiles of Nuclear Weapons and has disregarded numerous treaties in regards to weapons of such calibre; hypocricy is not an admirable virtue.

Luxifero



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join