Official!! Iran announces nuclear ability.

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Its too late now.

Iran has declared nuclear capability.


Iranian President Ahmadenijad made the announcement before the religious clerics of the nation:

"I formally declare that Iran has joined the club of nuclear countries," President declared. The crowd broke into cheers of "Allahu Akbar! God is Great!"

"At this historic moment, with the blessings of God almighty and the efforts made by our scientists, I declare here that the laboratory-scale nuclear fuel cycle has been completed and young scientists produced enriched uranium needed to the degree for nuclear power plants Sunday," Ahmadinejad said.
Iran Hits Milestone in Nuclear Technology

I think President Bush has screwed up in dealing with Iran with his gung ho policies. You can't scare everyone into submission.

Next time we may hear an announcement that Iran has managed to build 20 nukes.

Now the US has no option but to make deals with Iranians and accept them with normal relations.

Otherwise there will be WW3.

Mod Edit: Added source links and ex tags





[edit on 4/13/06 by FredT]




posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Well, this news was kind of inevitable I guess. Unfortunately, I can't see how military action can be avoided now. The Iranian president is a dangerous guy - he's hardline. The US (and the UN to a lesser degree) simply cannot let somebody like that get away with this. If the US backed off now it would be a huge victory for Iran and, I would imagine, their president will come out of looking like a hero to his people. What kind of message does that send out? The US will have to give him a "bloody nose" now, just on principal.



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
What government in all of history has ever announced a strategic advancement in capability the moment it was achieved?


I concur concerning the timing of such ‘announcements’, however I lean toward the ‘announcement’ as a mere continuation of Iran’s recent episodes of ‘chest beating’; a finale for her weeks of ‘uber’ weapon’s displays and war games. This particular announcement was timed for effect.

Perhaps today, the reported and probable ‘ten year timeline’ pertaining to Iran’s ability to create ‘the bomb’ may have actually been lowered just a few notches.

mg



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Double Post
[edit on 11-4-2006 by missed_gear]

[edit on 11-4-2006 by missed_gear]



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 02:19 PM
link   
This has DISASTER written all over it. What can this guy's head be at? I read somewhere he had apocolyptic, religious VISIONS. Wha??? And we're allowing this guy to advance his nuke prog???? And we "supposedly" went into Iraq just on the assumption that Hussein had WMD. There has GOT to be more to this story than we're being told. Why haven't we blown this regime off the face of the earth yet? Could it be that we KNOW he already has nukes? Is there something bigger in the works involving Israel?



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajesticJax
This has DISASTER written all over it. What can this guy's head be at? I read somewhere he had apocolyptic, religious VISIONS. Wha??? And we're allowing this guy to advance his nuke prog????

I know. He's even said god talks to him. Oh.. we aren't talking about bush are we?


This might sound silly.. but why exactly is the US allowed to have nuclear weapons and other countries are not?


[edit on 11-4-2006 by riley]



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by riley
This might sound silly.. but why exactly is the US allowed to have nuclear weapons and other countries are not?


Exactly! Every nation who owns nuklear weapons are a risk. Perhaps not today but tomorrow. What if Bush, his successor, or Putin or whoever hears god speaking to him and decides he's got to do the final justice, so to speak.
These a really dangerous times, thank to the religions and the military industrial complex. Oh #.



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 02:52 PM
link   


I know. He's even said god talks to him. Oh.. we aren't talking about bush are we?

This might sound silly.. but why exactly is the US allowed to have nuclear weapons and other countries are not?

It doesnt sound silly...It is silly. Other countries are allowed to have nuclear weapons, if you mean Russia, China, France and Brittain by "other countries".
Other countries, who have signed the non-proliferation treaty, are not allowed to have nukes, because of the treaty the have signed.

And if there is one argument why a specific country are to be disallowed nukes, look at the reaction of the people and goverment of Iran in case of the danish muhammed-cartoons.



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by Britguy
Come on, show us the proof of a nuclear weapons programme and the stockpile of weapons threatening us all.
So the Iranians have successfully enriched Uranium, so what! That was their stated aim anyway, for their power programme. Big difference between switching on a light and nuking a city


I hear ya BG, barely, over the rattling of sabres. Just like the build up of hype before Iraq. I guess if you've got a formula that works you keep with it.


You mean it's okay for Iran to say "Yeah! We got Nu-clear power!!" and "Israel must be wiped off the map!" In practically the same paragraph?

THIS is what has people who are REALLY in the know worried.

Maybe we can spread some news of our own...like maybe..."We've reconsidered and will bring our Nuclear Arsenal back with the codes changed to include the following targets..."

Just fill in the blanks.

[edit on 11-4-2006 by Toelint]



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 03:10 PM
link   
The US has proven itself to be [ethically] irresponsible by going against the UN and invading Iraq.. they should not be allowed to intimidate other countries into submission. Seems the US is allowed to threaten other countries with nukes yet those countries aren't even allowed to discuss protecting themselves [lest they get nuked]. I am not saying that I think Iran is incapable of attacking other countries unprovoked- but America is certainly not the moral compass for the rest of the world.

And if there is one argument why a specific country are to be disallowed nukes, look at the reaction of the people and goverment of Iran in case of the danish muhammed-cartoons.

Yes. The US has never had riots or civil unrest..


[edit on 11-4-2006 by riley]



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 03:14 PM
link   
He claims he has spoken to the "Mahdi". People complain about Bush but they sure are silent about a guy who claims to have spoken to "God" right out in the open. Also somebody who threatened to wipe out a whole country . Also someone who is building nukes. Why did we invade Iraq instead of Iran?

[edit on 11-4-2006 by Nakash]



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 03:21 PM
link   
No, the US is not the moral compass, but its the only country willing and able to take offensive actions. Please dont forget that it isnt the US only who wants to get rid of Irans nuclear program. A broad concensus exists, even Russia and China like to see it stopped.
The argument is over the means. If you review history you will see that diplomatic pressure and/or sanctions dont mean a sh*t to countries like Iran. Given the statements of the Iranian president that they wouldnt back down a Iota, force, or the threat of using force, seems to be the only way.

What do you buy for diplomacy. The UN is 2.5 years arguing wheter or not to take sanctions against Sudan. While they are talking, people are dying... Hell it took 5 years for the UN and the EU to get involved in the ugliest war in Europe since WWII, the balkan war. Sometimes action is needed. But some people think that if we dont take actions, everything will be ok. Well, it won't.

And yes, the US has seen riots. But i've never seen mass riots in the US which were targeted to infidels/muslims/christians/embassies because of some form of humor.

Oh, and Riley, will you please post a link for proof that the US has treatend Iran with using nukes ?

[edit on 11-4-2006 by teknobass]



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by missed_gear
I concur concerning the timing of such ‘announcements’, however I lean toward the ‘announcement’ as a mere continuation of Iran’s recent episodes of ‘chest beating’; a finale for her weeks of ‘uber’ weapon’s displays and war games. This particular announcement was timed for effect.

Perhaps today, the reported and probable ‘ten year timeline’ pertaining to Iran’s ability to create ‘the bomb’ may have actually been lowered just a few notches.

mg


I dont dissagree with you, but I bet the truth is someplace in the middle. But, we aren’t talking about their ability to make really good cotton candy and can assume things aren’t as bad as they may be. Due to the actual subject, weapons of mass disaster and annihilation, assumptions need to be on the conservative side. If we assume they are further along than they say, even just a little bit, its still enough of a serious matter that we cannot just sit and watch.

This is the perfect example of a productive paranoia.

Id rather be paranoid about this and be wrong, than be content and be wrong.

[edit on 11-4-2006 by skippytjc]



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 04:35 PM
link   
I wonder why people think that Iran is not allowed to have nuclear power. Just because the U.S. caters to the oil companies doesn't mean Iran is obligated to. As a matter of a fact the U.S. is dumb for not increasing its use of nuclear energy. I'd like to see the IAEA inspect what Iran has and confirm whether it is for energy or military purposes. If it is for energy purposes that would mean that attacking Iran over it would be an act of terrorism. But I suspect that the U.S. won't allow it to get that far because we don't want the truth to be known. I'm guessing that this isn't about Iran and nuclear anything but rather Iran and what they are sitting on top of as the price of oil nears $70 per barrel.



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 04:42 PM
link   
How about, before slaughtering masses of people, we see if they build plants on a scale to produce the amount of E.U. required for nuclear bomb production? That seems like it would make the most sense to me.



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Toelint

Originally posted by intrepid
I hear ya BG, barely, over the rattling of sabres. Just like the build up of hype before Iraq. I guess if you've got a formula that works you keep with it.


You mean it's okay for Iran to say "Yeah! We got Nu-clear power!!" and "Israel must be wiped off the map!" In practically the same paragraph?

THIS is what has people who are REALLY in the know worried.



No, that's what people willing to accept the spin are worried about. "Yeah, we have Nu-clear power!!" That's not nuclear arms.

"Israel must be wiped off the map!" In practically the same paragraph? That's some more spin. Seems like people are just justifying things to placate the fear that they've been fed.

I've been through this many times and no one sees, or wants to see, reality. They just continue on with "We must do something to save Israel from Iran." Then quote the nutjob that is Iran's president. Iran is WAY off of arms grade nuclear matter. Now how do they deliver it? Yeah, yeah, the new missile they've developed. Funny how we just recently heard about this. That missile has to travel over how many miles of coalition controlled air space? You'ld be better off with a trunk bomb.

I'm not willing to swallow what's being fed the masses. I won't go into the whole Iraq WMD thing, I know that no one that's for attacking Iran will listen to logic. Ie: the difference between the words "have" and "had". Still looks like this Administration preparing the population for what they are going to do. It's working too. :shk:



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
I'm not willing to swallow what's being fed the masses. I won't go into the whole Iraq WMD thing, I know that no one that's for attacking Iran will listen to logic. Ie: the difference between the words "have" and "had". Still looks like this Administration preparing the population for what they are going to do. It's working too. :shk:


You know what? Iran made a threat to Israel. That makes it Israel's problem. Not the US. Let them put their own money and their own troops and weapons up against Iran. It is their problem not ours.



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 05:30 PM
link   
the agenda continues....hey Iran is trying to do what we're doing..we can't let them get away with that...

didn't Bush say god told him to invade Iraq? it's all hypocrisy and I just hope all this isn't being completely bought...the conflict is created and brought to the forefront, while behind the scenes it's a multi headed dragon, should be interesting to see how much these US officials threatening to resign effects anything



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 06:30 PM
link   
Can we just turn Iran into a glass parking-lot and be done with it already?

Seriously folks, the UN makes resolutions, doesn't enforce them, and then the world gets pissed when someone decides to do something about it. Saddam got away with his WMD program for years, you know he had them he used them on his own people, and Iran is trying the same crap.



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 06:36 PM
link   
Maybe he should have waited until he actually had a bomb, the US could attack tomorrow. What are they going to do then, throw the stuff at them? This just works in the US's favor so i don't know what is up with this guy. Bush and his cronies must be loving this. Does anyone know how long it will take them to assemble a functioning bomb? I'm not one to condone wars but Iran seems inevitable so why not destroy their capabilities now before they reach the final stage? This time no invasion just a wham bam thank you mam.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join