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 bars 38 atomic inspectors

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mdv2
I agree that Iran would probably be using its enriched uranium for military weapons. But:

1) You don't start a war on speculation
2) You don't start a war on US intelligence (example: Iraq)
3) It's none of the US's business
4) Nuclear weapons are predominantly to strengthen one's political position

And if you believe that they would launch nuclear missiles on Israel, you should stop reading fairy tales.


But there is this article ...

iran believes it could take out Israel with one nuke


The Soviet Union, once Western's biggest enemy, did not launch a single nuclear missile on Western soil, nor has China. Now the magical answer why nuclear weapons have only used once:


Because of MAD (see below) and the fact that they are run by pragmatists, not madmen or religious zealots.


Because Japan did not have nuclear weapons, if they did, the US would probably not have dropped a nuclear bomb on Japan to avoid self-destruction


I doubt that anyone who has really studied the history of WWII believes that after all the other atrocities they had committed, either Japan or Germany would have hesitated to use nuclear weapons if they had them.


When are people going to understand this?


Deterrence - as in Mutually Assured Destruction - only works if you are not dealing with madmen or religious zealots. Deterrence will not work when a country such as iran is run by mullahs and a president who feel that dying as part of an attack on the "great satan" is the most wonderful thing that could happen to them. And they don't care who they take with them.

When are people going to understand that?

[edit on 1/22/2007 by centurion1211]




posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mdv2
Which is why they are all going nuclear. Saudi Arabia probably has already nuclear weapons, while Jordan, Egypt and several other Gulf States have announced to be interested in nuclear programs.


Something which is undesirable and could pose serveral obstacles. The Middle East with nuclear weapons...sounds so dangerous.



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 07:42 PM
link   
Hmm, what I see happening here with this is that Iran has seen the American people speak, as well as Congress speak, to the point of issuing specific legislation that Bush cannot go into Iran without congressional approval. Iran is not only loving it, but is giving the US, the IAEA, the UN, and the world- the big finger. Now they will play this more on their terms.

I hope for Iran's sake they are right about Congress being able to enforce such legislation, when it can be technically argued that Bush can attack Iran if he wants to- even with that legislation. About the only way they could really stop him would be to ammend the constitution, and fix the big gaping loophole that leaves lawyers arguing endlessly about the war powers of a President.

And of course by the time they'd ever get any ammendment like THAT passed, he'd have plenty of chance to strike Iran.

From another angle, I am wondering if the British people have any plans for similar legislation to keep ole Tony's grubby hands out of Iran, too? And if they can't, what are your thoughts on if the UK would strike Iran alone or with other allies, if the American people and Congress manage to dry up Bush's wet dream? And then of course the same I wonder about Israel! They have said they would go it alone many times. But would they, with no one to back em up.

In any case, Iran expelling those inspectors right now was either foolish, or necessary. In the case of the former, why they didn't wait instead of provoking Bush even further is beyond me. In the case of the latter, well maybe they are about to announce their unwelcome membership into the nuke club. Trying times here, people. Let's hope for the best, whatever that is. Hard to tell anymore.

[edit on 22-1-2007 by TrueAmerican]



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
But there is this article ...

iran believes it could take out Israel with one nuke


I will quote your source:


JERUSALEM — Iran's nuclear program seeks first-strike capability against Israel, a leading strategist said.

The Israeli strategist and former intelligence officer said Iran believes it could destroy the Jewish state with one nuclear weapon.


An Israeli former intelligence officer says that Iran believes. Am I supposed to naively believe the words of this guy?:



I refuse to believe a loose statement like this, nor is there any evidence that Iran already is in possession on nuclear weapons.


Originally posted by centurion1211
Because of MAD (see below) and the fact that they are run by pragmatists, not madmen or religious zealots.


As long as the zealot or madman does not harm anyone else, and bear in mind, Iran has not been an aggressive power for decades, no one has the right to attack them. Additionally, it does prove that Iran is not a country of ''zealots'' as US and Israeli propaganda pretend it to be.



Originally posted by centurion1211
I doubt that anyone who has really studied the history of WWII believes that after all the other atrocities they had committed, either Japan or Germany would have hesitated to use nuclear weapons if they had them.


You misunderstood me. If both Japan and the US would have had a nuclear weapon, the US would probably haven't dropped two nuclear bombs out of fear for a nuclear rataliation. Iran's position is very different. They are not engaged in war, nor are they losing a war, while Japan was.


Originally posted by centurion1211
only works if you are not dealing with madmen or religious zealots. Deterrence will not work when a country such as iran is run by mullahs and a president who feel that dying as part of an attack on the "great satan" is the most wonderful thing that could happen to them. And they don't care who they take with them.


Even when Iraq invaded Iran back in the 80's and used chemical weapons on several Iranian targets, Iran did not retaliate with a counter chemical attack.

If you can find any sources that show the opposite, please show them. As for yet no one on here has been able to do so.

The loose statement that Israel should be wiped off the map is a product of Dirty Israeli propaganda machines in the US.


Does Iran's President wants Israel wiped off the map?

To raze Israel to the ground, to batter down, to destroy, to annihilate, to liquidate, to erase Israel, to wipe it off the map - this is what Iran's President demanded - at least this is what we read about or heard of at the end of October 2005. Spreading the news was very effective. This is a declaration of war they said. Obviously government and media were at one with their indignation. It goes around the world.

But let's take a closer look at what Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said. It is a merit of the 'New York Times' that they placed the complete speech at our disposal. Here's an excerpt from the publication dated 2005-10-30:

"They say it is not possible to have a world without the United States and Zionism. But you know that this is a possible goal and slogan. Let's take a step back. [[[We had a hostile regime in this country which was undemocratic, armed to the teeth and, with SAVAK, its security apparatus of SAVAK [the intelligence bureau of the Shah of Iran's government] watched everyone. An environment of terror existed.]]] When our dear Imam [Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of the Iranian revolution] said that the regime must be removed, many of those who claimed to be politically well-informed said it was not possible. All the corrupt governments were in support of the regime when Imam Khomeini started his movement. [[[All the Western and Eastern countries supported the regime even after the massacre of September 7 [1978] ]]] and said the removal of the regime was not possible. But our people resisted and it is 27 years now that we have survived without a regime dependent on the United States. The tyranny of the East and the West over the world should have to end, but weak people who can see only what lies in front of them cannot believe this. Who would believe that one day we could witness the collapse of the Eastern Empire? But we could watch its fall in our lifetime. And it collapsed in a way that we have to refer to libraries because no trace of it is left. Imam [Khomeini] said Saddam must go and he said he would grow weaker than anyone could imagine. Now you see the man who spoke with such arrogance ten years ago that one would have thought he was immortal, is being tried in his own country in handcuffs and shackles [[[by those who he believed supported him and with whose backing he committed his crimes]]]. Our dear Imam said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime [Israel] has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world."
(source: www.nytimes.com, based on a publication of 'Iranian Students News Agency' (ISNA) -- insertions by the New York Times in squared brackets -- passages in triple squared brackets will be left blank in the MEMRI version printed below)

It's becoming clear. The statements of the Iranian President have been reflected by the media in a manipulated way. Iran's President betokens the removal of the regimes, that are in power in Israel and in the USA, to be possible aim for the future. This is correct. But he never demands the elimination or annihilation of Israel.
He reveals that changes are potential. The Shah-Regime being supported by the USA in its own country has been vanquished. The eastern governance of the Soviet Union collapsed. Saddam Hussein's dominion drew to a close. Referring to this he voices his aspiration that changes will also be feasible in Israel respectivel

Source




[edit on 23-1-2007 by Mdv2]



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 04:34 AM
link   
Here, here.

MDV, you paint an accurate picture of the situation.

The propaganda machine has been working overtime since Irans' Islamic revolution in the 80's. The unfortunate fact is that most of America has been led to believe that Iran is a terrorist nation, led by a mad man hell bent on destroying America.

Even when proof suggests the complete opposite.



September 18, 2001: Iranian women light candles in Tehran's Mohseni Square in memory of the victims of the terror attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington DC. Even the most hardline Islamic clerics, who despise the United States, have been shocked into silence by the attacks. President Mohammad Khatami set the tone for Iran's reaction with a statement that in Persian rang with deep compassion: "On behalf of the Iranian people and the Islamic Republic, I denounce the terrorist measures, which led to the killing of defenseless people, and I express my deep sorrow and sympathy with the American people."

Iran mourns 9/11




Well done for denying ignorance.




You have voted Mdv2 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Well the EU is dealing with them, how far did you get? oh yeah you referred them to the UN council for sanctions, so the atomic inspectors are spies? spies for what? top secret tech? Let them in and verify everything and as long as they were in there, i personally wouldnt have a problem with Iran having nuclear reactors for energy, but with the past they have and obvious connections to certain known groups, not trustworthy right now.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Mdv2, the only thing about that site about Ahmandinjad not wanting to wipe Israel off the map is that he is asked about it repeatedly, and he nevers says "No I didn't say that", but goes on an talks about the plight of the Palestinians (which he obviously cares nothing about THAT, but more cares about Israel not being there for political and religious reasons).

Not saying he wants to nuke Israel, for I have no idea nor do I care frankly! But he clearly states he wants the "Zionist regime" wiped out. Which he says is Israel's government. How would he do that exactly?

IT definitely isn't through peaceful ways that's for sure.

I think nobody on here knows enough to make a 100% clear judgment.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN

Originally posted by BlueRaja

I'm not sure kidnapping is the most accurate term to use with regards to rounding up FIS types.


What does FIS type mean? Do we now operate like Israel does and just take people we deem guilty without explanation other then they are supplying insurgents? I highly doubt these 5 people are supplying Iraq with the means to fight the US off. I wouldn't be surprised if the Iraqis aren't also using the huge shipment of explosives that went missing some time ago. Tons of explosives just mysteriously disappear and nothing is done about that. I guess it just vanished and none of it is used to make IED's at all? Maybe someone sold it to China to make bottlerockets and firecrackers.




FIS=Foreign Intelligence Service

If you have folks from an intel service working with Shia militant groups, providing info, training, $$$$, weapons, etc... you might want to talk to them. If they enter the fray, then they become legitimate targets of interest. If they want to meddle in Iraq, then they shouldn't complain when they get caught.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
FIS=Foreign Intelligence Service

If you have folks from an intel service working with Shia militant groups, providing info, training, $$$$, weapons, etc... you might want to talk to them. If they enter the fray, then they become legitimate targets of interest. If they want to meddle in Iraq, then they shouldn't complain when they get caught.


All I see and hear is accusations...where is the proof? M-16's and explosives were stolen. None of it is being used against our troops? If all this stuff was stolen in Iraq and not even being used in Iraq , then where did it go? Why didn't FIS know about that, but yet they know for sure about Iranians? You have a lot of confidence in inept people. I don't.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 03:00 AM
link   

The economic essence of this arrangement was that the dollar was now backed by oil. As long as that was the case, the world had to accumulate increasing amounts of dollars, because they needed those dollars to buy oil. As long as the dollar was the only acceptable payment for oil, its dominance in the world was assured, and the American Empire could continue to tax the rest of the world. If, for any reason, the dollar lost its oil backing, the American Empire would cease to exist. Thus, Imperial survival dictated that oil be sold only for dollars. It also dictated that oil reserves were spread around various sovereign states that weren’t strong enough, politically or militarily, to demand payment for oil in something else. If someone demanded a different payment, he had to be convinced, either by political pressure or military means, to change his mind.



The man that actually did demand Euro for his oil was Saddam Hussein in 2000. At first, his demand was met with ridicule, later with neglect, but as it became clearer that he meant business, political pressure was exerted to change his mind. When other countries, like Iran, wanted payment in other currencies, most notably Euro and Yen, the danger to the dollar was clear and present, and a punitive action was in order. Bush’s Shock-and-Awe in Iraq was not about Saddam’s nuclear capabilities, about defending human rights, about spreading democracy, or even about seizing oil fields; it was about defending the dollar, ergo the American Empire. It was about setting an example that anyone who demanded payment in currencies other than U.S. Dollars would be likewise punished.



energybulletin.net...



The same story was told by senator Ron Paul from Texas here :

video.google.com...



The ideea is this : if oil exporting countries start selling oil for euros, not dollars ,then the dollar will lose it's value. That is the reason for the war in Iraq ,and for the threats against Iran



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 09:24 AM
link   
I found this article to be pretty interesting. This man was visiting Irans facilities back in March of 2006 right after USA took the case before the UN.



An American in Iran? Sounds wild. A former senior U.S. administration official? Can't be. So what would you say about the fact that Iran, an evil country according to Bush, hosted such an individual at the uranium conversion plant in Isfahan, at one of the cornerstones of the Iranian nuclear program? In March 2006, at the height of the nuclear crisis and a month after the matter was referred to the United Nations Security Council, Dr. Gary Samore had the opportunity to tour the facility, in which the first stage of the uranium enrichment process takes place.

"I wasn't particularly impressed by their capabilities. The Iranians don't have a reliable manufacturing capability," he says during a break in the Herzliya Conference at the Daniel Hotel, where he participated in a panel on "Coping with a Nuclearizing Iran: Options for Prevention and Deterrence."

Samore is a vice president at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, and his name has been mentioned recently as a candidate for a senior position in the next Democratic administration, if it comes to be. Samore was a member of the National Security Council during the Clinton administration, and the president's special envoy on proliferation issues.

Source


Do you think Israel's leaders and officials are alarmists?

"Yes, and I can also understand them. The U.S. is far away, Europe is complacent and Russia may oppose the idea of nuclear weapons in Iran, but doesn't see it as the end of the world. Clearly Israel is the most worried. Both because of President Ahmadinejad's declarations and because of the Holocaust. On has to take into account that nuclear weapons in Iran will affect Israel's nuclear monopoly."



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN

Originally posted by BlueRaja
FIS=Foreign Intelligence Service

If you have folks from an intel service working with Shia militant groups, providing info, training, $$$$, weapons, etc... you might want to talk to them. If they enter the fray, then they become legitimate targets of interest. If they want to meddle in Iraq, then they shouldn't complain when they get caught.


All I see and hear is accusations...where is the proof? M-16's and explosives were stolen. None of it is being used against our troops? If all this stuff was stolen in Iraq and not even being used in Iraq , then where did it go? Why didn't FIS know about that, but yet they know for sure about Iranians? You have a lot of confidence in inept people. I don't.







By FIS, I meant Iranian intel types, working with Shia insurgents. As for confidence- I trust those with boots on the ground rather than pundits.




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join