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.
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
BTW Benevolent Heretic if the US is fixing facts then why is the EU, and even Russia very concerned about Iran's nuclear program? France Germany and Russia were so quick to get behind a Iraq Invasion.
Does Iran even need Nuclear power?
Im not advocating any violence but people that arent concerned in the least live in a blissful fantasy world I wish I could join.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I just don't think that's for us to determine. Maybe they want it. Maybe they want to sell their oil and use nuclear power for themselves. Maybe they're not in such an all-fired hurry to use up all the oil till there's none left. Maybe they want something cleaner. Maybe they want to have some for their legacy. Maybe they want to be rich beyond belief.
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
I just cant buy that, I believe they want to be rich beyond belief though everyone does. If Nuclear power was a route to getting rich for countries like this Saudi Arabia would be doing it too.
Im not pro war with Iran I think they should have a right to develop peaceful nuclear power. But we are IMO justified especially in light of such Hostile comments of Irans to be skeptical regarding the claim that Iran is putting all that money into uranium enrichment to replace its abundant fossil fuel.
Originally posted by Curio
The bottom line is that you don't know if Iran are trying to build a bomb. By the same token, I don't know either. Nobody knows - even the IAEA who's job it is don't know.
So it all comes down to trust.
So, leaving them to their own devices and expecting them to follow international laws doesn't seem to work. So why should we trust them?
They need to be bought into line.
Or would you rather they were allowed to selectively ignore the rules of the NPT?
Nobody is salivating over the prospect of more wars (OK, some people are...)
but sometimes force is necessary if needed.
Otherwise what's the point in having any international laws?
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
People trying to warn Europe about Hitler while he was rearming heard the same thing. So many believed that all Hitler wanted to do was unite German speaking people
N Korea played this same nuclear game. Oh we are just using nuclear technology to make energy we dont have a nuclear weapons program. People defended N Korea program as well. Then all of a sudden N Korea shocks the world and admitted to secretly having a nuclear weapon.
if the US is fixing facts then why is the EU, and even Russia very concerned about Iran's nuclear program?
France Germany and Russia were so quick to get behind a Iraq Invasion.
Does Iran even need Nuclear power?
Iran has vast oil and gas reserves for its energy needs 9% of the world's proven oil reserves, and almost 16 percent of the world's gas reserve (gas is clean buring and cheaper then nuclear power) Irans supply is estimated to be enough to last for 200 years!.
There are neither nuclear power plants nor plans for their development in Saudi Arabia. Most countries that generate nuclear power import the fuel they need.
Iran wants to make its own fuel.
Then we have the simple fact that Iran has publicly called for the destruction of other countries on numerous occasions
Im not advocating any violence but people that arent concerned in the least live in a blissful fantasy world I wish I could join.
Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- No it doesn't.
It comes down to proofs and factual information gained through engagement, monitoring and inspection, which we had.
Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- Actually North Korea has made some claims but whether or not they actually have a bomb is far from certain.
And what?
- I think you'll find they are intent on ensuring there isn't another disastrous ME war.
.
- Really?
When did that happen?
They helped the rebuild not the invasion.
Going nuclear maximises their possible exports at a time when prices can only climb and climb.
Why this seems so hard for some to understand I don't know.
Iran wants to make its own fuel
- Quite. They want control over the entire fuel cycle.
What's so odd about that?
- The Iranian government has done no such thing and has no such formal declared and legal policy.
You mean a ceremonial President (quite unlike the US version in powers) ran off at the mouth at a rally with his nasty slogans (as has happened for decades).
Hardly new and hardly the stuff to justify a new war.
Iranian Leader Khamenai 2 October 2000, Radio Tehran) "A regime based on force might last a certain period, but it will fail in the end… the Palestinians struggle and the Moslems' support for them will bring us to good results and will eliminate the enemy.”
22 October 2000, Khabar TV ) “The countdown for the Zionist regime has begun.”
Head of the Expediency Council and Former President, Rafsanjani In a Friday sermon, (14 December 2000, Khabar TV )" The Jews [who immigrated to Israel] should expect a ‘reverse exodus', because one day, the tumor will be removed from the body of the Islamic World, and then millions of Jews who moved there will become homeless again"
Ayatollah Kashani, Friday Sermon in Tehran 27 July 2001, IRNA ) "death to the Zionist culture"
Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
That's why we had inspectors and monitoring.
It comes down to proofs and factual information gained through engagement, monitoring and inspection, which we had.
- Well there's the point; Iran was fully complying and should be encouraged to comply, not threatened.
Threats make them disengage, they have not helped as their recent talk of withdrawing permission for spot checks etc show
..Many aspects of Iran's nuclear fuel cycle activities and experiments, particularly in the areas of uranium enrichment, uranium conversion and plutonium research, had not been declared to the Agency in accordance with Iran's obligations under its Safeguards Agreement. Iran's policy of concealment continued until October 2003, and resulted in many breaches of its obligation to comply with that agreement...
I think you just answered your own assertion there; it's plain as day there are plenty out there wanting to talk war war war all day long over this
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Oh yeah just like with N Korea. Monitoring, inspection that all worked great. We had no "proof" they were making a Atmoic bomb until the told the world they had one.
Worked great that time.
The money arguement again. Money poured into any of Irans existing natural resources like gas or oil would see a much larger net gain then enriching uranium.
Why is it most countries that use nuclear energy do not make the fuel themselves? They have no problem with that fact. Why does Iran want too so bad?
No who is being naive? What do you exactly think publicly calling for the destruction of Israel is? Do they have to send a formal letter to Israel
They have publicly been saying this stuff for years.
But it would all be wasted on you its clear you have such a blinding bias when you cant even come to grips with a clear fact like Iran Publicly calling for the destruction of Israel many times.
Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
They have been chanting all sorts of offensive slogans for years, but that is all it is sloganizing.
They have not attacked anyone despite having the WMDs and the missiles to deliver them for well over 10yrs.
Experience and reality verses imagined possibility......so, who is being naive, hmmmm?
Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
Curio, are you going to base your approach to this by what was happening pre 2003 or what progress had been made by 2006?
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States cannot say for certain that North Korea possesses any nuclear weapons but believes Pyongyang has continued to produce plutonium from its 5-megawatt Yongbyon reactor, top intelligence officials said on Tuesday.
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Your spin attempt "all it is sloganizing" is just weak
You say they havent attacked Israel despite having WMDS. for well over 10 years
First you should learn your weapons systems because they havent had a accurate delivery system to hit Israel with a WMD for well over ten years. They just recently upgraded the Shahab-3 to do such a thing.
Second attacking a nuclear armed country like Israel with some Chemical missiles would be one of the most moronic moves in military history.
Iran has publicly called for the destruction of another country.
It openly backed and has been a state sponsor of terrorist organizations such as Hizbullah and Hamas.
Anyone that wouldnt be the least bit concerned about them getting nuclear weapons is naive.
Its funny you took such offence to the Pre-WW2 Hitler reference.
I would bet good money now you would have been one of the people saying Hitler would never invaded hes just trying to improve Germany
"We are optimistic we can agree with our Iranian partners ... we think we can come to an agreement that a joint venture on the soil of the Russian Federation will be able to meet Iran's needs fully," Russian President Vladimir Putin told a news conference during a visit to Hungary.
Moscow sees the enrichment joint venture as a way out of confrontation, but diplomats in Europe and the United States doubt the proposal will satisfy Iran, which they suspect of covertly seeking nuclear weapons.
Although Tehran says it has a "basic" agreement with Russia about the scheme, it has refused so far to give up what it sees as its right to enrich uranium at home.
"We would like to enjoy our rights like Japan to have nuclear technology, of course for peaceful purposes," Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said in Japan on Tuesday.
Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
First you should learn your weapons systems because they havent had a accurate delivery system to hit Israel with a WMD for well over ten years. They just recently upgraded the Shahab-3 to do such a thing.
-This link details Iran's complete missile development, by 1995 you will see several references to 1000km+ range missile tech. By 1996 it's 1600km and so on.
One can only wonder how come (if the standard propaganda is correct) they didn't just get their terrorist - state officials or malitia types - mates in Syria or wherever to just launch with the shorter range types and have done with it.
(because the idea is nonsense)
www.nti.org...
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
See but I said accurate delivery system to hit Israel.
Look at the junk they were talking about in that link upgraded Scud-B, Scud-C what junk they would likely kill more palestinians then Israelis with that junk
They know without nuclear weapons they can never defeat Israel and it stupid to even try until they have them. Chemical and Bio missiles vs Israeli nukes 50 or 200 of them it would still be stupid.
Most of Israel have gas mask at the ready to go at any time so how effective you think those chemicals are going to be?
But its still classic how you put spin on the Publicly calling for the destruction of Israel thing. Nurmeous public officials, State controled TV and newspapers Parades all calling for the same thing.
Well if that aint calling publicly for something nothing is.
Oh and your newest spin on organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas As freedom fighters is that what you called them? So now strapping explosives to your body for the sole purpose of blowing up a bus full of civilians is freedom fighting now sminkeypinkey Classic
Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
......In fact the state of Israel was born out of a terrorist/freedom fighters struggle itself......
Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- Why?
If your aim is supposed to be solely about destroying the state of Israel as a functioning political entity then what is so "lol" about a massed chemical and biological attack?
I realise those promoting the idea of this imagined scary (almost) nuclear Iran have to ignore the wider chemical and biological WMD question (yet when it came to Iraq it was the most important thing in the world) but neither you nor anyone else has satisfactorily answered this question.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Still blindly supporting Iran I see sminkey
if the Iranian president, or any other members in the Iranian government say something such as calling for the complete destruction of Israel, it's just talk and not government policy. But if someone in the US government says something such as "all options are on the table," then that means the official government policy is war
I'm still waiting for an explanation for that in the other thread.
And you still don't know your history I see.
Care to explain this statement?
Originally posted by ShadowXIXIrans goal is to get rid of Israel not get rid of Israel at the cost of wipping out their own country.
Iran has to even the odds and that means taking as much of the impact of Israels nuclear weapons out of the equation as you can. The only realistic way to do this is to acquire your own nuclear force equal or greater to that of your enemies.
Talks between Russian and Iranian negotiators on a Russian plan for joint uranium enrichment have ended with a "general" agreement but the proposal needs work, Iran's chief negotiator said on Wednesday.
Ali Larijani said talks would be continued to work out outstanding issues but he said Tehran was still insisting on its right to enrich uranium on its own soil.
"In general we are agreed on this question but we need to refine ... a few elements of this question and study it. This requires time," Larijani said after about four hours of talks with officials from Russia's Security Council