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 bodrul
iran has every right to reject it
they have the right to enrich uranum and so on for peacefull nuclear power
Originally posted by bodrul
iran has every right to reject it
they have the right to enrich uranum and so on for peacefull nuclear power if the US and co cant except they should go screw them selves
the US wont go in forcefully with its troops and ships in range of iranian missiles
casuilty would be high for the US (unless they are expendible?)
Originally posted by Mechanic 32
I think you're missing the point, bodrul.
The President of Iran just days ago 'called for the permanent removal of Israel'.
Originally posted by American Madman
Don't give the iranian missles too much credit.
ANd if the nuke research was peacefull they would be building the infrastructure to move that power .
THe US can bomb the hell out of irans nuke sites. Sf teams can do whatever else is needed. No occupation needed.
If iran was to openly attack american troops they would be inviting much worse then is already comming.
Originally posted by American Madman
Iraq is not as bad as the media makes it out to be. The terrorists supported by iran and syria are more interested in targeting civilians and keeping the country in chaos then they are in defeating or even fighting americans.
Another great miscalculation. Drawing america and israel into a wider more open war with countries such as iran and syria is playing into americas hand.
Thats the last thing wither rogue regime wants.
[edit on 15-7-2006 by American Madman]
Originally posted by bodrul
iran has every right to reject it
they have the right to enrich uranum and so on for peacefull nuclear power if the US and co cant except they should go screw them selves
the US wont go in forcefully with its troops and ships in range of iranian missiles
casuilty would be high for the US (unless they are expendible?)
Originally posted by bodrul
your so right i mean americans arent been blown up by IEDs
americans dont go around revenge killing
the united states is the largest state sponsor of terrorists
lol at rougue regieme the US should know best about rogue regiemes its got a history with supporting them when it comes to their selfish reasons.
Originally posted by American Madman
How many americans have died? how many Iraqis have been killed by terrorists? Just because they kill an occasional american doesn't mean they aren't targeting civilians primarily.
Largest state sponsor of terrorism? please explain. What when we helped afghans kick the russians out.
What country doesn't act in their own interest?
And please revenge killings. None have been proven and how many have been reported? 2... I'm not saying they haven't happened but 2 incidents is nothing to condemn a people for.
[edit on 15-7-2006 by American Madman]
Originally posted by Curio
The sooner their nuclear facilities are a smoking crater, and their military knocked back to the dark ages, the better
Originally posted by American Madman
Russia did the same thing with vietnam. They had operators at sam site, and pilots even reported seeing russian pilots in the migs buzzing them. In the end they won't stop anything if the US decides to act.
Originally posted by American Madman
Um, Iran has been threatining the US openly for a long time. The US is calling for action against Iran only because of the Nukes. Using the US as a reason for Iran developing nukes is weak they would be doing anyway.
Originally posted by American Madman
The sooner gas gets out of control price wise the sooner the US gets off it and on to something new. We are already gearing up for change. COnsidering Europe pays about 4 time what we pay per gallon I think we're ok for now.
[edit on 15-7-2006 by American Madman]
Originally posted by Curio
So it doesn't bother you that Iran lied for nearly 20 years about their nuclear program to the IAEA/UN, in direct violation of the NPT?
www.hinduonnet.com...
en.wikipedia.org...
Though it is often claimed that Iran had "concealed" its enrichment program from the IAEA "in violation of the NPT" until it was "caught cheating" in 2002, the fact is that Iran was not obliged to inform the Agency about those facilities at the time since according to Iran's safeguards agreement with the IAEA in force at the time, "Iran is not required to allow IAEA inspections of a new nuclear facility until six months before nuclear material is introduced into it." In fact, it was not even required to inform the IAEA of their existence until then, a point conceded by Britain at the March 2003 Board of Governors meeting. This `six months' clause was a standard part of all IAEA safeguards agreements. Nonetheless, Iran allowed intrusive inspections of the facilities by the IAEA pursuant to the Additional Protocol, and the IAEA concluded that the facilities were not related to any secret nuclear weapons program.(Iran and the invention of a nuclear crisis by Siddharth Varadarajan
Originally posted by American Madman
Um, Iran has been threatining the US openly for a long time. The US is calling for action against Iran only because of the Nukes. Using the US as a reason for Iran developing nukes is weak they would be doing anyway.
its this kind of attitude that makes me agree with what Iran does
hopefully not all americans think ur way