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.

 

Obama Won't Stop Iran From Getting Nukes, Harvard Simulation Shows

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Obama Won't Stop Iran From Getting Nukes, Harvard Simulation Shows


www.businessinsider.com

Obama Won't Stop Iran From Getting Nukes, Harvard Simulation Shows.
(visit the link for the full news article)

Admin Edit: corrected title to properly reflect the article's title.

[edit on 8-12-2009 by Crakeur]




posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 04:13 PM
link   
It is becoming more and more clear each day that Obama is no friend of Israel. The reasons why are less clear. Using Vietnam as a example of war covering profiteering. If a wide ranging war covered the middle east region who would benefit? I believe those with the resources to come in after and seize the oil fields and mineral deposits. In a nuclear war little is left that has to be dealt with in regards to organized resistance. Placing this in context to the Copenhagen talks seeking to control carbon emissions and resources it looks like a calculated power grab for energy control.

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

[edit on 8-12-2009 by cliffjumper68]


CX

posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   
I've never heard of these simulations before, can anyone tell me if they are worth listening to?

Is it not going to be just a case of someone telling Obama what they think he'll do before he actualy does it.....therefore they have no idea really and it's just a guess?


The more i think about this, thats all it is, a guess, a prediction, is that really something that people will listen to?

CX.

Edit to add: You might want to add to your title that it's just what a simulation says, at the moment it reads as though Obama will definately allow Iran to have nukes, when that is not the case.


[edit on 8/12/09 by CX]



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by cliffjumper68
it looks like a calculated power grab for energy control.


What exactly looks like a power grab? The simulation?

I don't see any description or explanation of the simulation, so it's hard to put any faith into it's results.

It doesn't say "Obama will let Iran have nukes." either; it's saying that we will ultimately fail in preventing their acquisition.

www.israelnationalnews.com...


A simulation conducted at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government over the weekend predicts that the United States will fail in its efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, and will, for lack of other options, attempt to convince Iran not to use those weapons.


If their model is sound then hopefully it will help point out flaws in the current strategy. Predicting the future is impossible though, I won't base any opinions on the results of a "Simulation" that I know nothing of.

How many and what variables did they use to run this? I didn't see any hard information in either article I read.



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by cliffjumper68
it looks like a calculated power grab for energy control.


What exactly looks like a power grab? The results of the simulation?

I don't see any description or explanation of the simulation, so it's hard to put any faith into it's results.

It doesn't say "Obama will let Iran have nukes." either; it's saying that we will ultimately fail in preventing their acquisition.

www.israelnationalnews.com...


A simulation conducted at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government over the weekend predicts that the United States will fail in its efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, and will, for lack of other options, attempt to convince Iran not to use those weapons.


If their model is sound then hopefully it will help point out flaws in the current strategy. Predicting the future is impossible though, I won't base any opinions on the results of a "Simulation" that I know nothing of.

How many and what variables did they use to run this? I didn't see any hard information in either article I read.

[edit on 8-12-2009 by DirtyPete]



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   
Why would Iran say it's going to build 20 more enrichment plants? Because the only way the regime can gain legitimacy for another 10 years or so is if Israel bombs them, and they can win back enough Iranian's. The regime doesn't have much more than 2-3 months IMO before the cracks in the revolutionary guards collapses altogether, so they'll hope Israel does it soon.



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by cliffjumper68

It is becoming more and more clear each day that Obama is no friend of Israel.


I disagree, there's a difference between being a friend of Israel and not allowing yourself to be under Israel's thumb and pretending not to be under their thumb.

One of the last 2 is the truth.

By the way this is just a simulation
Never heard of this type of article before though

interesting



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 04:44 PM
link   
I think that Obama is extremly naive. or a dumbass....

I think that if they promise not to use them he will belive them, because he thinks eveyone want world peace and crap like him.



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Originally posted by cliffjumper68

It is becoming more and more clear each day that Obama is no friend of Israel.

I disagree, there's a difference between being a friend of Israel and not allowing yourself to be under Israel's thumb and pretending not to be under their thumb.


So what about Israel's nukes? And Pakistan's? India's?

What about North Korea...a decidedly less stable government than Iran...

Y'all might want to reconsider being world cops...if you can't apply the law evenly across the board!
(It will result in a lot less people 'hating your freedoms', too)



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 04:56 PM
link   
I dont know much about Harvard or these simulations but I know a thing or two about illegal trade and getting what somebody says you should not get and nothing is impossible to get.

If the homeless bum living in a cardboard box can get crack coc aine daily there is no way an nation with a military is going to be prevented from getting what it wants.

All the sanctions and strongly worded letters in the world wont stop them. As long as the desire to have a thing remains the thing can and will be gotten.



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 05:41 PM
link   
It's not that he dislikes Israel.

In order to be friends with the Arab world he can't be seen to be biased in their favor, and after all the years of our one-sided relationship with the Israelis any attempt to cool things down a little will be inevitably be seen as negative.

He just wants everyone to love him, because that is what he has been used to his entire political life, he cannot handle rejection.

Let's see how that works out for him when he's dealing with countries that have an inherent cultural hatred of the US.



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
So what about Israel's nukes? And Pakistan's? India's?

What about North Korea...a decidedly less stable government than Iran...

Y'all might want to reconsider being world cops...if you can't apply the law evenly across the board!
(It will result in a lot less people 'hating your freedoms', too)


Oh I completely agree with you on that one
I'm like an old broken record always repeating that, ask any1 haha

So I partially agree with you, I agree with you that it we shouldn't be world cops as we wouldn't want such a country on us, but I disagree with the insunation that you perhaps didn't even make that if we are like this with iran and north korea we should be like that with everyone implying that go for being world cops as long as everyone is equal... under you that is



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by cliffjumper68
 





It is becoming more and more clear each day that Obama is no friend of Israel.


Lets see checking U.S. Constitution for the “Must be a friend of Israel clause!”

What was that country’s name again?

Actually the framers of the Constitution did not want us taking sides in foreign disputes.

Running a nation is a BUSINESS and not a FRIENDSHIP, don’t think so? Talk to the IRS about that on April 15th!

What is amazing though is the sleazy way some people have the audacity to just come right out and say PUT ISRAEL BEFORE YOUR OWN COUNTRY…like we are really supposed to be doing that for some spectacular reason.

The billions of CHARITY we GIVE ISRAEL is never enough of course. Like it is some how our fault here in America ISRAEL IS A PERENIAL CHARITY CASE.

No they should be allowed to pick fights with other nations and us to step in and protect them on top of it?

Zionist Israel is 61 years old, when is it going to stop acting like a 3 year old, and when are its supporters going to stop acting like 2 year olds.

Want to know who else is not a friend of Israel? It’s Zionist Government and suspect characters who try convincing Americans that being a good American means putting Israel before the United States.

Nothing more dangerous than a stupid friend, that’s for sure!

Israel meanwhile refuses to sign the Nuclear Regulatory Treaties of allow inspections of it's Nuclear Facilities by International Atomic Energy Agency Inspections.

Iran happens to be in full compliance while Israel is the world's worst offender.





[edit on 8/12/09 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Reply to post by cliffjumper68
 


A simulation eh? Since when have we been able to accurately forecast human behavior? Sounds like more republican rhetoric.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Of course he won't stop them. Why? Obama is the president of the usa, not iran. Why should he stop them? Are we(the usa) the only ones allowed to have nukes or something?



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Quite frankly, I don't think the world has it in them to stop Iran, we are too wishy washy, while Iran just keeps stalling till they can tell us they have the weapons already.

I think the end result will be the U.S, U.K. and Israel along with some other nations, will end up attacking Iran with a first strike to take out said nuclear weapons and military. The big trick will be making sure we get all of them.......... It will get pretty hairy, Russia and China will complain but won't risk anything for Iran.



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
I think the end result will be the U.S, U.K. and Israel along with some other nations, will end up attacking Iran with a first strike to take out said nuclear weapons and military. The big trick will be making sure we get all of them..........


Forgive me for being impudent...but what the frig's it to ya?

Do you see Iran gunning for the U.S.? Is there a 'clear and present danger, or do y'all just have a little more dough left to pi$$ away overseas?



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


Iran will not be allowed to be a nuclear armed power, I don't see how they will be allowed to keep them. You may disagree, but my scenario is a likely one.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 

Iran will not be allowed to be a nuclear armed power, I don't see how they will be allowed to keep them. You may disagree, but my scenario is a likely one.


You betcha!
We all know how North Korea backed down.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 08:40 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


Last time I checked there was no major oil reserves near North Korea.....apples and oranges.

[edit on 9-12-2009 by pavil]




top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join