Iran May Be Working on Nuclear Warhead (Breaking News)

recent breaking news on CNN suggests that iran may Indeed be working on a nuclear warhead, info can also be found in my other thread

link for news feed

www.cnn.com...

Iran may currently be working on secretly developing a nuclear warhead for a missile, the IAEA director general said Thursday in a draft report.

Original thread

Did Iran Just Test A Nuke?




[edit on 2/18/2010 by l neXus l]

Yeah we've been told about 10 times so far on several different occasions by Iranian mujadeen, Israeli intelligence, the Times and now the IAEA.

[edit on 18-2-2010 by john124]

yet nobody has listened, just ignored, and all of a sudden iran now has a nuclear program overnight. how crazy

Iran in the cross-hairs

if anyone still had doubts about an imminent conflict with Iran, it was removed this week by the arrival of the U.S. army chief in Israel and the threats from the Iranian president and Hezbollah secretary-general.

Something sinister is in the air.


If the international community's collision course with Tehran leads to harsh sanctions meant to halt its nuclear program, the spring and summer months will be especially sensitive. It would be impossible to rule out a scenario in which the increasing tension leads to all-out open war. Tehran and Jerusalem regularly exchange threatening messages via various channels, but with Beirut, Gaza and Damascus in the middle, the situation is liable to get out of control.

At a time when Iran is deliberately inflaming the situation, the U.S. is seeking to cool things down. Interestingly and strangely enough, the two rivals seem to have a similar read on Israel's current role in the drama. Both believe Israel could lose patience and implement its policy of "a leadership gone mad" that former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert took great pride in during the Second Lebanon War and Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. This belief serves as the backdrop for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's remarks implying that Israel is readying for war (which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has steadfastly denied) and for Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah's threats to attack strategic infrastructure in Israel.

The possibility of unleashing Israel's "bull in a china shop" approach is also behind the recent flurry of visits from senior American officials, including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Michael Mullen, and U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, who arrives next week. The visits are intended to explain to the Netanyahu government why an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities is unwanted at the moment ? and also to clarify what Israel seeks in return for sitting quietly and allowing the Obama administration to build an international coalition to impose sanctions on Iran.

Mullen landed here at the beginning of the week - on the hottest day of Israel's winter - with an unambiguous warning. His visit opened with a brief press conference at the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv, to which journalists were summoned on short notice, and that was characterized by something of a culture clash. Some of the Israeli journalists showed up in T-shirts, and Mullen seemed a bit surprised by the casual atmosphere and by the strident tone of the questions.

Despite this, he stuck to the message he was sent here to convey: that he is concerned by the "unexpected consequences" of an Israeli attack on Iran. Mullen's remarks, made in public even before his first meeting with his Israeli hosts, immediately dictated the tone of Israeli media would adopt to cover his visit.

In recent weeks, especially since its announcement that it has begun production of 20-percent-enriched uranium, Iran has not even bothered to claim its nuclear program is intended for peaceful means, as it had in the past. Iran's true intentions are clear to everyone from Washington to London to Beijing. China, however, is more concerned about its oil supply than the Iranian threat, and sees its refusal to impose sanctions as an effective means of challenging U.S. power.

It's possible the concern over an Israeli strike has come too soon. Israel will only attack as a last resort. But if Iran continues its enrichment and the U.S. fails to consolidate sanctions, or if the sanctions are ineffective down the line, the military option becomes more relevant. In this case, Israel also has more legitimacy to act in self-defense and cannot be blamed for the failure of diplomacy.

This week, Nasrallah broadcast another message from his bunker and, for the first time, mentioned the "axis of evil." He warned of a four-pronged attack against Israel by Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas ? which those parties have avoided outlining explicitly until now in an effort to maintain the appearance of independence. At the same time, Nasrallah presented Hezbollah's planned response to Israel's "Dahiya doctrine" (a term used to describe a conventional army targeting civilian infrastructure used by terrorists) by saying his group would destroy Ben-Gurion International Airport and attack Tel Aviv.

[edit on 18-2-2010 by john124]

reply to post by l neXus l



I'd say Iran are "too" far behind in technology to even attempt a crack at the US or the UK.

If Iran sent a nuke remotely anywhere near the the coasts of the EU or the US, im sure we will see them removed from the map permantly.

lol.

reply to post by Unstable Affliction


Although would be a threat to US interests and troops in that region.

Given the US, and Israel [the IMPERIAL powers] administration behave like mindless power hungry nazi genocidal murderers IRAN BETTER HAVE nuke defences.

It may be the only way to STOP an invasion from taking place - when both sides have nuclear weapons.


[edit on 18-2-2010 by Jinni]

reply to post by Jinni

It may be the only way to STOP an invasion from taking place - when both sides have nuclear weapons.

The very fact that Iran is persuing WMDs is the very purpose of the coming UN resolution. If it wasn't for this, the west would ignore the human rights issues because it would be too inconvenient to mention.

It's been said by the IAEA and others that Iran has had enough fissionable material for two nuclear weapons since about last December.

I just heard this on the news as well, and what surprised me more than anything was the "shocked" response of the newspeople. OH MY! OH NOEES! I wonder............ I wonder whose cyberbuttons were just pushed and why to cause the MSM to suddenly treat this information as credible? That question disturbs me more than anything.

This information -- at least on CNN -- right on the heels of the suicidal plane crash in Austin, TX. Was TPTB just waiting for some event to dovetail with the IAEA reports?

Inquiring minds are scared shirtless.

Originally posted by john124
reply to post by Jinni

 

It may be the only way to STOP an invasion from taking place - when both sides have nuclear weapons.

The very fact that Iran is persuing WMDs is the very purpose of the coming UN resolution. If it wasn't for this, the west would ignore the human rights issues because it would be too inconvenient to mention.

Oh yeah?!

What about the human rights abuse, deaths, murder, mass murder, murderation and more murder the US has caused directly across Iraq, Afghanistan and by proxy?

We are talking well over 1.5 million dead.

Don't talk nonsense about human rights of others when the West are maniacally abusing them all over the world.

I won't even start with the effects of industrialisation because I'm sure you have already read up on that.

Originally posted by Jinni
Given the US, and Israel [the IMPERIAL powers] administration behave like mindless power hungry nazi genocidal murders IRAN BETTER HAVE nuke defences.

It may be the only way to STOP an invasion from taking place - when both sides have nuclear weapons.




[edit on 18-2-2010 by Jinni]

*snip*.. more nukes in this world is not good.. we need to get rid of all nukes in America. Russia Israel, china, Pakistan, NK.. So you want more nukes in the hands of religious nuts? we already have enough as it is...

Mod Edit: Please Review the Following Link: Courtesy Is Mandatory

[edit on Thu Feb 18 2010 by Jbird]

Originally posted by Jinni

Originally posted by john124
reply to post by Jinni

 

It may be the only way to STOP an invasion from taking place - when both sides have nuclear weapons.

The very fact that Iran is persuing WMDs is the very purpose of the coming UN resolution. If it wasn't for this, the west would ignore the human rights issues because it would be too inconvenient to mention.

Oh yeah?!

What about the human rights abuse, deaths, murder, mass murder, murderation and more murder the US has caused directly across Iraq, Afghanistan and by proxy?

We are talking well over 1.5 million dead.

Don't talk nonsense about human rights of others when the West are maniacally abusing them all over the world.

I won't even start with the effects of industrialisation because I'm sure you have already read up on that.

Bro its on both sides.. the Iranians want to be the big boy in the middle east and are using there proxy's to attack Israel citizen.. Both sides need to put down arms, come to an agreement... Its a never ending cycle.. to many ego's..

and on the SAME day...

'UN nuclear chief confirms Iran program peaceful'

www.presstv.com...

So US media saying nuke, Iranian media saying peacfull? which one to listen to?

reply to post by Itop1


My thought is to take a grain of truth from each. They're probably enriching uranium for both civil and military purposes. Why assume otherwise? Isn't this a logical outcome of developing nuclear technology?

Originally posted by john124
reply to post by Jinni

 

It may be the only way to STOP an invasion from taking place - when both sides have nuclear weapons.

The very fact that Iran is persuing WMDs is the very purpose of the coming UN resolution. If it wasn't for this, the west would ignore the human rights issues because it would be too inconvenient to mention.

It isn't a fact, it is still leaked documents and un published documents which are being cited as evidence, but don't let facts stand in the way of a good witch hunt.

So US media saying nuke, Iranian media saying peacfull? which one to listen to?

reply to post by Itop1


Based on past experiences......

Better go with Iranian media. Might be more credible.

reply to post by munkey66

It isn't a fact, it is still leaked documents and un published documents which are being cited as evidence, but don't let facts stand in the way of a good witch hunt.

The IAEA seem fairly sure about this, so that's good enough for me.

reply to post by smyleegrl

Better go with Iranian media. Might be more credible.

I wouldn't.... Iranian media reports 10's of millions in Azadi square on 11th feb, and google earth shots show less than 1/4 of the square filled, amounting to no more than 100,000.

I wouldn't trust fox news as a primary source either, but it's neither side this time. It's the UN telling us.

Originally posted by The Alamo Ripper

Originally posted by Jinni
Given the US, and Israel [the IMPERIAL powers] administration behave like mindless power hungry nazi genocidal murders IRAN BETTER HAVE nuke defences.

It may be the only way to STOP an invasion from taking place - when both sides have nuclear weapons.




[edit on 18-2-2010 by Jinni]

*snip*

Ever heard of prevention of war through threat of mutual destruction?

That would make oil mongrels think forever before attacking.

Oh and did you hear about the cold war?

Wonder how long it will be before the False Flag happens. I reckon a nuclear detonation somewhere in Israel will be the way to go.

This will give the PTB the excuse they need to launch an attack.