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 accepted new Russian offer

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnsky
Germany was developing their nuke at the same time as the US, but never dreamed of actually using it on anyone.


lol, I find this sentence funny. They didn't think of using it on anyone because they hadn't built it
Hello anybody home.



... and you say the US is the only country that should have a Nuclear arsenal... may I remind you that the US is the only country that has been irresponsible enough to actually use them?

No other country in the world has ever nuked a civilian population except fot the US.


A completely ignorant statement
I suggest you read up about WWII and the war in the Pacific. You might get a little perspective then




If anything, it should be the US to disarm. They are the child holding the gun here, not the middle-eastern, asian, and european countries. They've been around ALOT longer than you have.


LOL. We've seen more wars, more despots in Europe than just about anywhere else. Yep they seem really responsible
Asia isn't far behind and the ME speaks for itself.
You don't seem to be very informed about the history of the world and its' geopolitics. You'll learn a great deal on this site, if .... you're prepared to learn




On top of that, I see you have been affected by the US propeganda machine. I suggest you stop getting your news from Fox and CNN, and actually get yourself educated about the outside world. Look into other countries history, culture, and government, instead of simply boasting as if the US is better than everyone else.


As above




I think the moderators would agree that Nationalism only clogs up these forums, and cannot be tolerated.


LOL, I think half the mods here a patriots and nationalists



[edit on 28-11-2005 by rogue1]




posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
LOL, I think half the mods here a patriots and nationalists


No need to go making broad statements like that, for good or bad intent....


Let's just keep things civil - Nice, peaceful, friendly opposition as opposed to "you must be uneducated" replies...mmmmmkay?



*waves an ATS banner*



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1


... and you say the US is the only country that should have a Nuclear arsenal... may I remind you that the US is the only country that has been irresponsible enough to actually use them?

No other country in the world has ever nuked a civilian population except fot the US.


A completely ignorant statement
I suggest you read up about WWII and the war in the Pacific. You might get a little perspective then




How is what he said an ignorant statement? US is the only country to date to ever have nuked a civilian population...so, again, where is he not informed on something?



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by alphabetaone

Originally posted by rogue1


... and you say the US is the only country that should have a Nuclear arsenal... may I remind you that the US is the only country that has been irresponsible enough to actually use them?

No other country in the world has ever nuked a civilian population except fot the US.


A completely ignorant statement
I suggest you read up about WWII and the war in the Pacific. You might get a little perspective then




How is what he said an ignorant statement? US is the only country to date to ever have nuked a civilian population...so, again, where is he not informed on something?


Like I said, read just a tiny bit of the history of WWII in the Pacific. Then tell me if it was irresponsible
It's been said many times before that the atomic bomb ended the war quickly, far more would have died if they hadn't. Irresponsible
I think not. So yes a very ignorant statement.



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by NR
It seems Russia has come up with a new deal with Iran so that we could finnaly enrich uranium on our soil, this is good to know and France is now backing us up on our nuclear program!!!


Wow. Russia did such a good job of keeping their nukes out of the hands of people who would sell them on the black market...oh wait. Hmmm.

Uhm...Who will be monitoring this again?

The French did a good job keeping submarine and anti-ship missile technology out of the hands of... oh wait.

Uhm... the French think this is a good idea?

Hahaha! Aw, What the hell. Nukes for EVERYONE! What's a little tritium and fallout amongst friends! C'mon and have a heapin helpin' of Grampa Oppenheimer's spicy vittles!



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
Like I said, read just a tiny bit of the history of WWII in the Pacific. Then tell me if it was irresponsible
It's been said many times before that the atomic bomb ended the war quickly, far more would have died if they hadn't. Irresponsible
I think not. So yes a very ignorant statement.


No one's questioning the expediency with which it ended the war..but the irresponsible part was unleashing a WMD on a vastly civilian population. So just so that i can recap your position you find it totally responsible that US did that, and, (by conjecture not by fact) assume that it saved SO many countless lives (btw were they military lives or civilian?) ... so at ANY cost its ok to decimate a civilian population for the sole purpose of winning a war?



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by alphabetaone
No one's questioning the expediency with which it ended the war..but the irresponsible part was unleashing a WMD on a vastly civilian population. So just so that i can recap your position you find it totally responsible that US did that, and, (by conjecture not by fact) assume that it saved SO many countless lives (btw were they military lives or civilian?) ... so at ANY cost its ok to decimate a civilian population for the sole purpose of winning a war?


Oh yes, and the U.S. was the first to use WMD's on civilians in WWII.


Do a little research into the horrors inflicted on Chinese, Phillipino, etc. civilians by the Empire of Japan during that war, some areas are still infected to this day.



During the Sino-Japanese War (1937-1945) and World War II, Unit 731 of the Imperial Japanese Army conducted human experimentation on thousands, mostly Chinese. In military campaigns, the Japanese army used biological weapons on Chinese soldiers and civilians. This employment was largely viewed as ineffective due to inefficient delivery systems. However, new information has surfaced within the last decade, which alleges a more active Japanese usage. For example, firsthand accounts testify the Japanese infected civilians through the distribution of plagued foodstuffs, such as dumplings and vegetables. There are also reports of contaminated water supplies. Such estimates report over 580,000 victims, largely due to plague and cholera outbreaks. In addition, repeated seasonal outbreaks after the conclusion of the war bring the death toll much higher.

en.wikipedia.org...




Unit 731, 100 - Inhuman WMD Biological Warfare
This WMD Biological Warfare is definitely the worst crime case of systematic biological massacre against Humanity committed by a country in our Human History.

"The fellow knew that it was over for him, and so he didn't struggle." recalled the old former medical assistant of a Japanese Army unit in China in World War II, "But when I picked up the scalpel that's when he began screaming. I cut him open from the chest to the stomach, and he screamed terribly, and his face was all twisted in agony. He made this unimaginable sound, he was screaming so horribly. But then finally he stopped." The former medical assistant who insisted on anonymity, explained the reason for the vivisection. The Chinese prisoner had been deliberately infected with the plague as part of a research project.

Imperial Japan's biological killing fields are a lost chapter of history that the full horror of which is only recently been exposed and understood in all its enormity.

More than 10,000 Chinese, Korean and Russian PoWs were slaughtered in these biological experiments.

www.skycitygallery.com...


And that's just the tip of the iceberg. It doesn't include their use of chemical weapons, their own nuclear program, sex slaves, etc. Even the Nazis were appauled by Japan's actions, read the above link.

But we were the bad guys in WWII, because we used nuclear weapons to stop the gentle, peaceloving Empire of Japan.

Can you please explain how nuclear weapons are worse than the biological, chemical, etc. WMD's used purposely on civilians by Japan?

[Mod Edit - Trimmed quote]

[edit on 29/11/05 by JAK]


cjf

posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by alphabetaone
..but the irresponsible part was unleashing a WMD on a vastly civilian population.


Cities and 'civilian targets' were never 'bombed' during WWII...



Originally posted by alphabetaone
US did that, and, (by conjecture not by fact) assume that it saved SO many countless lives (btw were they military lives or civilian?)


To the question posed...no assumption... affirmative to both and on all sides.


Originally posted by alphabetaone
... so at ANY cost its ok to decimate a civilian population for the sole purpose of winning a war?


That was the convention of the era, yes....

...The German referred to it as “Bombenkrieg” 1940-1945

For a start: Hamburg, Dresden, Berlin, London, Paris, Tokyo and Kobe
(BTW incendiary munitions were used in most cases
)

read up.


.



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by alphabetaone

No one's questioning the expediency with which it ended the war..but the irresponsible part was unleashing a WMD on a vastly civilian population. So just so that i can recap your position you find it totally responsible that US did that, and, (by conjecture not by fact) assume that it saved SO many countless lives (btw were they military lives or civilian?


I suggest you do a little reading on the island battles in the Pacific ending with Okinawa. The Americans expected at least 500 000 casualties and possibly as many as 1 000 000. The Japanese population was expected to put up a fanatical resistance. So....mnay American military lives were saved and even more Japanese lives, far more than a million.
SO instead of being sarcastic about it, do some reading. Educate yourself, before you make completely inaccurate statements



... so at ANY cost its ok to decimate a civilian population for the sole purpose of winning a war?


LOL, what you think Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the only cities bomed flat
In one conventioanl raid on Tokyo over 100 000 people were killed - why aren't you protesting that ? because they did it with incindiaries and HE and not atomic arms

You do realise of course that if any other ountry built the bomb in WWII, they would have used it as well.

Oh BTW, lets not forget that the long term effects of radiation were not known at the time.



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
Oh BTW, lets not forget that the long term effects of radiation were not known at the time.


Not nearly as bad as the long term effects of many of the agents Japan intentionally used on civilians and only civilians. Any time on this board when a discussion comes up in which the U.S. is portrayed as the evil ones who used nukes, I point out Japan's far more attrocious WMD usage, and nobody even acknowledges it. Japan used WMD's first, and they were also after atomic weapons at the time. Who knows how many would have died if they got it first.



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 10:25 PM
link   
^^^ Hey you don't have to convert me, you're preaching to the choir. I have read extensively about Japans General Shiro Ishii and Unit 731. They are still reoccurring outbreaks of plague etc which can be directly related to Unit 731.
What gets my back up about Unit 731 though is that the Americans pardoned most of them so the Ishii would share his Biological Warfare research. Thi was a man who ordered vivisections of people to study the effects of the germs inside their body. Truly sick and ghastly.



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
Thi was a man who ordered vivisections of people to study the effects of the germs inside their body. Truly sick and ghastly.


While they were alive, with no anesthesia. Even children and babies. It is beyond comprehension.

I wasn't directing my frustration at you, I know we're on the same page. I was just pointing out that those who like to use the old "the U.S. are the only ones to have used nukes" line never respond when Japan's WMD use is brought up. Ever notice that?



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 10:41 PM
link   
NR? Seen this?


Iran rejected late Monday European requests that it move parts of its nuclear enrichment program out of the country and allow enrichment of uranium to be carried out in Russia.

The EU-3 – France, Germany, and the United Kingdom – which suspect that Tehran’s nuclear program is for military purposes and are negotiating with Iran to reach a solution, had suggested that the Islamic Republic carry out uranium enrichment – the precursor for the development of an atomic bomb – in Russia to alleviate international fears that it was developing a nuclear weapon.

Iran rejects proposal aimed at breaking nuclear deadlock



seekerof



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

I wasn't directing my frustration at you, I know we're on the same page. I was just pointing out that those who like to use the old "the U.S. are the only ones to have used nukes" line never respond when Japan's WMD use is brought up. Ever notice that?


Many people have no idea about Japans atrocities against Asian peoples. I bet 95% of westerners have never heard of Unit 731. Japan has done a wonderful job of covering it up and throwing it into the dustbin of history.

You can be sure though the Chinese will never forget what happened and Japans day of atonement will come.


Anyway, back on topic. Come on NR we're still waiting for an intelligent response


[edit on 28-11-2005 by rogue1]



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Tehran: Iran said Sunday it reserved the right to restart ultra-sensitive uranium enrichment work for "research and development" purposes, insisting the sensitive nuclear activity was not up for negotiation.
Foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi also said forthcoming talks would need to provide "concrete guarantees" that Iran can conduct fuel cycle work on its own soil -- a position at odds with a Russian compromise plan.
"The question of research and development is different from the production of nuclear fuel. What can be negotiated is the question of nuclear fuel production," Asefi said, without saying if and when Iran could resume such work.
The International Atomic Energy Agency on Thursday put off taking Iran to the Security Council to give time for new Russian diplomacy to resolve fears Iran is using an atomic energy drive as a cover for nuclear weapons development.
Under the compromise plan, Russia would conduct uranium enrichment -- a process which can make both nuclear fuel and the explosive core of a weapon -- on Iran's behalf.
But Tehran has already rejected the proposal, refusing to give up what it says is its right to enrichment for peaceful purposes enshrined by the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
"The subject of the discussions must be concrete guarantees for the carrying out of the fuel cycle inside Iran. There should not be special rules for Iran,"
Asefi said, adding that Iran had yet to be officially presented with the Russian plan.
The comments on enrichment research came after diplomats at the IAEA in Vienna said they had seen a four-page intelligence document claiming Iran had discussed options for possibly resuming enrichment at Iran's Natanz facility, where there is already a cascade of 164 centrifuges.
But Asefi said the report was "baseless", nonetheless repeating that the suspension of enrichment work at Natanz was "voluntary".


www.defencetalk.com...


Well, seems Iran never wanted a compromise in the first place.

[edit on 29-11-2005 by rogue1]



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
why aren't you protesting that ?


Because the topic is Nuclear Weaponry, not incindieries, not cutting people open while they are still alive either...if the topic were ALL atrocities ever afflicted on civilian populations, then my tone would be different...im not saying i dont condemn these things, im just sticking to the one topic only... using NUKES and nukes only on other civilian populations. Isnt that what were talking about? Dont assumed I or anyone else is not knowledgeable about a particular subject just because they decide to stay on topic ok?



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 08:59 AM
link   
^^^^

Well I beg to differ. You can't look at the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki without looking to the events in the Pacific War which led up to them. That just isn't reasonable.
Look at the conventional bombing of Germany and Japan, that was the norm for the day from both sides. The atomic bomb was seen as just a giant explosive device back then, capable of more effiently destroying a city than a thousand bomber raid. And as I've said earlier, far more people were killed in Tokyo during an incindiary raid than in either city.


[edit on 29-11-2005 by rogue1]



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 10:42 AM
link   
oops, double post









[edit on 29-11-2005 by 27jd]



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by alphabetaone
Because the topic is Nuclear Weaponry, not incindieries, not cutting people open while they are still alive either...if the topic were ALL atrocities ever afflicted on civilian populations, then my tone would be different...im not saying i dont condemn these things, im just sticking to the one topic only... using NUKES and nukes only on other civilian populations. Isnt that what were talking about? Dont assumed I or anyone else is not knowledgeable about a particular subject just because they decide to stay on topic ok?


It is on topic. Those attrocities that were being commited by the Japanese had to be stopped, and those bombs stopped them. If you look at the whole picture, you'll see that it's completely unfair, and outright wrong to focus on the U.S. as if the war was completely conventional, with everybody playing by the "rules", and then we just decided to drop atomic bombs on Japan. Again, I ask, are NUKES worse in your eyes than all the biological and chemical WMD's used by Japan solely on civilians? Since you are knowledgeable as you say, surely you know there are still areas that have biological outbreaks to this day because of those weapons. AND Japan was actively pursuing atomic weapons themselves, so they were GOING to be used in that war, it was just a matter of who used them first.

The thing is, Japan at that time probably wouldn't have been too worried about the consequences of the use of atomic weapons, I'm sure they would have used more than two if they had them.



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
^^^^

Well I beg to differ. You can't look at the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki without looking to the events in the Pacific War which led up to them. That just isn't reasonable.
[edit on 29-11-2005 by rogue1]


Of course, you're 100% right IF what we were discussing was in fact WWII...but from my perspective if you were asking me whether or not i LOVED oranges and when i reply no you find it inconceivable that i couldn't love apples, is akin to this..my remarks were solely this "The US IS the only nation to ever have N-U-K-E-D a vastly civilian population" which was the topic or so i thought...nukes



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join