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 only months away from a bomb

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 02:30 PM
link   


Who was on board this plane? Has the mosad taken action. Be interesting to see is some nuclear scientist were on board.


Well the official story is that it was loaded with media being flown south to watch an iranian military excercise... thats according to my local news




posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by LA_Maximus
Why should we care about Isreal?

Ill tell y'all why....Isreal is the Canary for the Western nations. The perpetual Canary in the coal mine.....what happens to them is what Islam has in store for us all in the future.

wipe us off the face of the earth....

Yes Max - the A-rabs are Gonna Get Ya.

And you better pray to J.C. that the Chinese do not get to you first.




posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 02:57 PM
link   


Its bad enough one muslim nation has nukes, two would be horrible.


how dare a muslim country obtain a nuclear weapon to defend its borders and deter the US from trumping up some reasons to invade.

But its just fine for a Jewish country..... we can trust them.



posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
Yes Max - the A-rabs are Gonna Get Ya.


Souljah, Iranians are Persians not "A-rabs"

Isn't it a bit racist of you to assume all terrorists are Arab? :shk:



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 02:30 AM
link   
as has been established the whole story is bogus.

iran isn't 'a few months away' from the bomb.

the actual IAEA quote is that iran could be a few months away from the bomb AFTER it has its underground facilities running... which they estimate to take about 2 years.

so in actual fact... Iran is AT LEAST 2 years away from the bomb.



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 02:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by metallicabrainz
as has been established the whole story is bogus.

iran isn't 'a few months away' from the bomb.

the actual IAEA quote is that iran could be a few months away from the bomb AFTER it has its underground facilities running... which they estimate to take about 2 years.

so in actual fact... Iran is AT LEAST 2 years away from the bomb.


So unless Iran stops it's unsupervised program, it is safe to say we are at least a year ad a half away from air strikes? (hell, by then it'll probably be space strikes from sats)



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 04:18 AM
link   
I mean, I'm all for action to be taken if it is deemed necessary. But I just dont want thit to turn into some kind of holy war. Because you know that that is how the Mullahs will spin it(the same way our religious leaders here in the US spin it, its just the Islamofacists killing us because we are infidels) I dont think that there is any other alternative to this situation, its going to be solved by battle because no side will back down. It really just boils down to pride really. I feel sorry for the people of Iran because of the road their leadership is taking them down, as someone else said, their youth dont want this. I actually saw a thing on some news channel about Iran and how westernization has really settled on their youth. Hopefully some change can happen before its too late.


Red

posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 04:30 AM
link   
If you guys are thinking there's going to be a war with Iran, it's not gonna happen! Especially not with Bush as president. He already learned his lesson.


Sep

posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
So unless Iran stops it's unsupervised program


I didnt know that the IAEA inspectors had left Iran. When did that happen? I had thought that the Natanz (Iran's enrichment facility) was offline. When did it come back online?



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 05:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Red
If you guys are thinking there's going to be a war with Iran, it's not gonna happen! Especially not with Bush as president. He already learned his lesson.


What Lesson? 43 hasn't back off yet. The 90+ divisions being trained in Iraq aren't for internal use, they are for support after we blast Iran.

I mean really, why does Iraq need so many US trained and "loyal" troops?

Iran is very, very close to having a good "supply" of nukes. It is probable they at least have one or two already.



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 12:48 AM
link   


Iran is very, very close to having a good "supply" of nukes. It is probable they at least have one or two already.


So apparently, your intel is better than the CIA, eh?
After all the CIA says they are probably years from being able to produce a weapon. Care to clue us in how it is that you know better?



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 01:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sep

Originally posted by American Mad Man
So unless Iran stops it's unsupervised program


I didnt know that the IAEA inspectors had left Iran. When did that happen? I had thought that the Natanz (Iran's enrichment facility) was offline. When did it come back online?


In case you are ADD/ADHD/whatever reading problem(s) you might have like I do...

If you notice, it was a question, not a statement.

Also, I said "program" - that does not include only civ energy. Iran has had nuclear weapons programs before, and there is little doubt they have them now.

That is why Europe is pissing themselves as we speak.

[edit on 8-12-2005 by American Mad Man]



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 02:22 AM
link   
We have the capability to destroy Iran as well. AMM.

I don't think Iran would first strike, I believe they want in the Nuclear club though.



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 04:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Munro_DreadGod
We have the capability to destroy Iran as well. AMM.

I don't think Iran would first strike, I believe they want in the Nuclear club though.



I agree, however i do not doubt the zionist influences in the US to make a case to prevent Iran from joining the 'club'.



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 06:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex



Iran is very, very close to having a good "supply" of nukes. It is probable they at least have one or two already.


So apparently, your intel is better than the CIA, eh?
After all the CIA says they are probably years from being able to produce a weapon. Care to clue us in how it is that you know better?


Simple logic. Iran is moving forward with it's program to mass produce nuke's. The amount of gas being produced is for many, many devices. This program dates back several years and has been capable producing small devices for over a decade "in secret".

Also they bought several devices from the "russia mofia" at the fall of the berlin wall. These devices have been reverse engineered with the help of A Q Kahn.

Iran is becomming the "attack dog" of Putin just as N Korea is the "pit bull" of China. Neither could be so bol without the backing of thier "masters".



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
That is why Europe is pissing themselves as we speak.


- AMM why do you keep on repeating this total distortion (......in fact it's so detached from reality as to be a lie)?

You have been told several times now that it is absolutely not true.

We in Europe would be concerned about an Iran with nuclear weapons, yes.
But that is very different from claiming 'we' are "pissing ourselves" thinking they either have them now or that they are on the brink of having them now.

What 'Europe' is concerned about now is that there are those so obviously pushing for a war with Iran and who are attempting to use the well worn 'everybody knows.....' myths, sheer guesswork and any old imagined scenario as 'proof' and 'justification'.

Never mind that the IAEA is still in there monitoring and saying Iran is fully meeting her obligations.

Mind you where is the surprise in this?
Once the official US intel agencies had dared to come out and say that Iran was at least 10 years off of a nuclear weapon
(in august 2005!

www.washingtonpost.com...)

one just knew that the war-perv crowd would pull out every stop to swamp the media with any and every story and half truth to crowd that off of the agenda.

Ditto this rubbish about a supposedly frightened Europe.

Interestingly Russia (also within the range of these scary Iranian missiles and their supposed coming soon nuclear tips) isn't "pissing themselves" either, they are trying to help Iran and her (civil) nuclear ambitions.
Funny that, huh?


[edit on 8-12-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 11:59 AM
link   
France and the UK each have enough nukes to respond massively to any Iranian nuke strike. An Iranian nuclear strike on Europe would be just as suicidal as one on the US or Israel. It's absurd.


Sep

posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
If you notice, it was a question, not a statement.


It was a statement within a question. You question was:

"So unless Iran stops it's unsupervised program, it is safe to say we are at least a year ad a half away from air strikes?"

Here you say, "unless Iran stops its unsupervised program" making the assumption that Iran's program is unsupervised. I was wondering if you have any proof whatsoever to back this.


Originally posted by American Mad Man
Also, I said "program" - that does not include only civ energy. Iran has had nuclear weapons programs before, and there is little doubt they have them now.


Little doubt to whom exactly? There is no evidence that I am aware of that proves Iran has a nuclear weapon program. Assumptions were made before and were proven wrong. Unless there is concrete evidence then neither I nor the majority of non-Americans would accept the assertions of US departments at face value.


Originally posted by American Mad Man
That is why Europe is pissing themselves as we speak.


I am not a European and the closest place to Europe that I have visited is Istanbul. So I am in no position to speak for them.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join