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.

 

Time Short For An Effective Strike Against Iran

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 06:13 AM
link   

Time Short For An Effictive Strike Against Iran


www.jpost.com

According to Kuperwasser, who stepped down from his post last year, Iran is "very close" to the point that it will cross the technological threshold and have the capability to enrich uranium at an industrial level. Once they master the technology, the Iranians will have the ability to manufacture a nuclear device within two to three years, he added.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.jpost.com
www.iht.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Iran's promise: '80 seconds of hell'

`````````````
edit for title spelling

[edit on 10/7/07 by masqua]




posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 06:13 AM
link   
I am not saying that I want a military strike against Iran. I am saying that there are still plenty of people who think they are gearing up for industrial production of weapons grade nuclear material. The article also goes on to talk about how they are digging tunnels that could be used to store the material and components for weapons. Making it more difficult to destroy in a strike. Also there are reports that the general who disapeared six months ago is giveing information to the U.S. on all of this. Be sure to see the aditional news link.

www.jpost.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Would these be the same ppl who said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction? I think we should be more concerned with Israel.its a country thats been in constant conflict since its (modern day) creation,yet they are allowed to develop nuclear weapons.and they do so with the backing of the UK & US.doesn't that seem strange? who is the more likely to use nuclear weapons,Israel or Iran?



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 05:33 PM
link   
The person saying this is an Israel official. To my knowledge he did not have anything to do with saying there were weapons of mas destruction in Iraq.
Yes Israel has been in almost constant conflict in its modern day history. Yes they do have nuclear weapons. Do I trust them.....? Well they have had them for some time 30 or 40 years or so. And they have not used them yet, despite the almost constant conflict. So yes at this point I might say I trust them.
A bigger question is would you trust Iran with nuclear weapons? Or given a choice would you sooner trust Iran or Israel?



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 05:53 PM
link   
I don't think i trust either,lol.Iran is becoming dangerous (supposedly) because of the behaviour and threats of the UK & US governments....i wonder to myself,why are politicians going out of their way to start a global war when the ppl they're after are a small group of fanatics.(small when you think of how many muslims there are in the world.).....i guess they just can't help themselves,we've been medaling with the middle of east for way too many decades! now we're involved with 2 wars that should never have happened.....

have you noticed as well,now that global warming is back in the headlines,the iraqi war is hardly mentioned...and the war in afghanistan even less! how easy it is to redirect some ppl's attentions...



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedGolem
The person saying this is an Israel official.


Lmao.. so we should be taking these words seriously then i guess..


Originally posted by RedGolem
A bigger question is would you trust Iran with nuclear weapons? Or given a choice would you sooner trust Iran or Israel?


I would trust Iran over Israel. Why? Because Israel is not trustworthy, as it has always been in a state of "self defence", otherwise known as pointless aggression, due to the "history" of itself..

Israel has caused nothing but pain in its lifetime. It has also put a big target over many Jewish peoples heads, who will probably be subject to yet another holocaust at the hands of the Zionists, who played them like a pack of cards, only for self gain, yet again..

Save Humanity. End Zionism.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by shrunkensimon
I would trust Iran over Israel.


I don't particularly like either but count me out of your world. Israel has had nuclear weapons for a while now and at least I know Israel is interested in self preservation. Iran on the other hand... I wouldn't take a chance.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 07:07 PM
link   
Iran would not be seeking nuclear weapons if Israel had not been given them by the UK and USA.. It is Israel that introduced nuclear weapons into the Middle East, and don't you forget it.

There is also no evidence to show that Iran is actually making nuclear weapons. Its all propaganda thus far, and there has been nothing to substantiate the rhetoric coming out of Washington and Tel Aviv.

Why anyone would trust the worlds number one terrorist state is beyond me.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by shrunkensimon
Iran would not be seeking nuclear weapons if Israel had not been given them by the UK and USA..

First off stop saying the U.S. Or the U.K gave the bomb to Israel. The U.S. does not export WMD. That is nothing but hateful propaganda.


On 3 October 1957, France and Israel signed a revised agreement calling for France to build a 24 MWt reactor (although the cooling systems and waste facilities were designed to handle three times that power) and, in protocols that were not committed to paper, a chemical reprocessing plant. This complex was constructed in secret, and outside the IAEA inspection regime, by French and Israeli technicians at Dimona, in the Negev desert under the leadership of Col. Manes Pratt of the IDF Ordinance Corps.
sorce

Also you said you trust Iran more then Israel with a nuke. Because Iran has not been in a constant state of conflict. Well Iran has also been supporting conflict in lebanon and Iraq. Not the same state of conflict but doing there share to keep conflict going.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 08:51 PM
link   
To add to Red Golem's post above, in reference to the trust issue:

If you truely trust Iran, than wouldn't it make more sense to say they are telling the truth that their nuclear research is based on peaceful purposes?

I will trust Israel any day over Iran, because of their proven track record in keeping their cool, and not making statements that any person, group of people, or country for that matter, be "wiped off the face of the Earth." Rhetorical or not, I'll be struck if anybody gives that statement, and then should be allowed possesion of a weapon with exactly those possibilities.

edit- typo

[edit on 10-7-2007 by jhanks28cold]



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 10:18 PM
link   
I'll throw my hat in too. Israel is tried and true with its nukes. Same thing I look for in anything I buy. Has it proven itself over time? You go ahead and swear by the new model, just be ready for the unexpected.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 10:23 PM
link   
I would say more like nonexistent. Winning a war against Iran's military might not be that tough (notice I say might here) but I don't think the paramilitaries could be pacified after the war was "over".

This is happening right now in Iraq, folks.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 10:30 PM
link   
Perhaps the statement by Kuperwasser is just letting the rest of the world know that Iran is and will remind in Israel watchful eye for a possible attack coming from Israel.

This is an Israel-Iran problem not our problem here in the US.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043

This is an Israel-Iran problem not our problem here in the US.


Unfortunately, this is the attitude of too many people. It is our problem. We are a direct backer of Isreal, and that means all of the good AND bad that comes along with it. You can't simply agree to be allies, and then drop that agreement at the drop of a pin. If that were possible, neither WW1 nor WW2 would have happened.

I respect everyones opinions greatly and appreciate the opportunity to hear all sides of the problem for a change, but this is an issue that seems to have no end in sight. While it may be easy to just say that we have no business anywhere else, especially in the middle east, we must also realize that the world is much smaller now than it has been at any other point in history. Sadly, we are involved. And not only is it our problem, it will likely be us that is looked to to remedy the situation.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by jhanks28cold
You can't simply agree to be allies, and then drop that agreement at the drop of a pin.


Why not?



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist

Why not?


I do not have that answer.

My opinion is that it is because nobody does anything to stop what they believe falls under what I call the "bad idea category." If you think it's a bad idea for a leader to make a pact with another country, yet sit by and do or say nothing, what good is it?

Time will tell. We will let this go by, and in 2 or 3 days when this whole story falls by the wayside as we focus on our everyday lives, we may be privy to weather or not we should have done something to abandon our allies. And I will continue to believe that's exactly what Isreal is- our ally.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by jhanks28cold

Originally posted by uberarcanist

Why not?


I do not have that answer.

My opinion is that it is because nobody does anything to stop what they believe falls under what I call the "bad idea category." If you think it's a bad idea for a leader to make a pact with another country, yet sit by and do or say nothing, what good is it?

Time will tell. We will let this go by, and in 2 or 3 days when this whole story falls by the wayside as we focus on our everyday lives, we may be privy to weather or not we should have done something to abandon our allies. And I will continue to believe that's exactly what Isreal is- our ally.


Israel is not an ally, she is a parasite. Can you name ONE thing Israel's done for America?



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist
[

Israel is not an ally, she is a parasite. Can you name ONE thing Israel's done for America?


How about some dialouge instead of quoting and one liners. How about you name one thing that points Israel out as "parasitic."

Israel has given the U.S. unwaivering support, something even it's citizen's have a difficult time accomplishing.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 11:37 PM
link   
Fine, I'll get right to the point-America has poured billions upon billions into Israel and I don't think anything positive's come out of the relationship.

Your response?

[edit on 10-7-2007 by uberarcanist]



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 11:51 PM
link   


First off stop saying the U.S. Or the U.K gave the bomb to Israel. The U.S. does not export WMD. That is nothing but hateful propaganda.


lol, so where did they get the technology then? It wasn't the Russian design they got.

Yes, the US exports nuclear technology. They just like to pick and chose who they give it to... and thats changing, and their pissed!



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join