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 increases uranium enrichment - IAEA

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 12:47 PM
link   
heres another story from the beeb saying is trying enriching uranium to 20% wich is still

miles away what they would need for weapon grade

but this is not realy the story it seems over the last few weeks there have been a spate

of storys on the bbc on how bad iran is how there weapons are useless and so on and so on the feeling i am getting is they are trying to condition us towards war

and making up and exadgerating every thing iran does so we think there is good reason

to go to war iraq and weapons of mass destruction comes to mind

so i am just wondering is the american media doing the same thing

www.bbc.co.uk...

www.bbc.co.uk...

news.bbc.co.uk...

[edit on 10-8-2010 by digby888]




posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:12 PM
link   
They will continue to further enrich uranium and I can't blame them with the US greenlighting an Israeli attack on Iran. Paranoia gets to everyone especially governments, the US being a great example itself. In every civilization people are convinced into wars not in their interest but i think with the advent of the atom bomb we've gone too far and in the near future I can definately see a nuclear war on the cards.

Call me paranoid...



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   
I'll point this out one more time. 20% is WEAPONS USABLE meaning they can use it in a small an relatively ineffective weapon (think 10's of tons of TNT versus 1,000's of tons of TNT) that is why everyone is in such an uproar. 20% is still VERY lethal as a weapon.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   
20% enrichment is not the issue though. The issue is the quantity being enriched. Iran has been enriching small quantities to the 20% level for some time now for medical isotope production, this has been well documented and is certainly not a new development.

Pointing out that the 20% mark can still be used for a low yield weapon is not the whole story as there is much more involved in the design and build of the system, something that there is no proof of, or even any intent build such a weapon.

So again, all we have is innuendo and a whole lot of hypothetical nonsense without any substance.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by brutalsun
 


20% is required for medical use. Why should they not go down that route?

What gives the US Government the right to tell any other country what to do about anything? Tell your Government to bring all your troops home, park up your navy, sort out your own country and stop interfering is everyone else's lives. The world would be a better place for it.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 03:27 PM
link   
Their weapons are not useless. They have a modern military and a ton of oil money to fund it.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 03:32 PM
link   
While I am not crazy about the fact that Iran will have nuclear capabilities I do think we should take care of things on the home front and stop meddling, it just causes more conflict.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by DaMod
 


Modern military compared to whom? North Korea?

A nation can have all the pretty war toys they want with all the money to spend to boot but if you don't have the qualified personnel with the training hours your army is going to be devastated. Iran against a nation like the US who has 50+ years of weaponry and technology build-up, thanks in part to the military industrial complex, and troops with a decades worth of combat experience in desert and mountainous conditions.

What experience does Iran have? Fighting the "elite" Iraqi Republican Guard, whom the US put to shame in 2003, back in the Iran-Iraq War decades ago? Or maybe they pit their "elite" Iranian troops against Kurdish Rebels who they only chase back across the Iraqi boarder and they dare not cross lest they want to feel the power of Shock and Awe that crippled the Saddam government.

Seriously, you sound like the person trying to stand up for someone you know can't hold a candle to others. Yep, you sound like the "Leave Brittney Alone guy" type with that comment of yours.


Keep on drinking that Bald Eagle flavored Haterade guy.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by mistafaz
reply to post by DaMod
 


Modern military compared to whom? North Korea?

A nation can have all the pretty war toys they want with all the money to spend to boot but if you don't have the qualified personnel with the training hours your army is going to be devastated. Iran against a nation like the US who has 50+ years of weaponry and technology build-up, thanks in part to the military industrial complex, and troops with a decades worth of combat experience in desert and mountainous conditions.

What experience does Iran have? Fighting the "elite" Iraqi Republican Guard, whom the US put to shame in 2003, back in the Iran-Iraq War decades ago? Or maybe they pit their "elite" Iranian troops against Kurdish Rebels who they only chase back across the Iraqi boarder and they dare not cross lest they want to feel the power of Shock and Awe that crippled the Saddam government.

Seriously, you sound like the person trying to stand up for someone you know can't hold a candle to others. Yep, you sound like the "Leave Brittney Alone guy" type with that comment of yours.


Keep on drinking that Bald Eagle flavored Haterade guy.


Iran was surprised attacked after the whole country had a revolution, yet they still managed to stop saddams invasion in its tracks. saddam was backed by the west, the arabs and america. they gave money, supplies and weapons. on top of that he had his whole army mobilized and ready to roll in. the sad part is that they underestimated the iranians, the same thing you're doing now. great historians and generals warn us to never underestimate the enemy, as this what has caused great empires to fall.

the americans war machine is much better than that of saddams. there is no doubt about that. i also think america can successfully strike and destroy iranian nuclear facilities, however it is afterwards where things will turn around. the iranian will come at you in iraq wave after wave... do you think the iraqis will help you? do you think the kuwaiti and saudis will fight? the iraqis will join the iranians, and the saudis will flee. and the oil rich region would be iranian territory. the economy will collapse.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 04:25 PM
link   
HOW DARE THOSE DAMN IRANIANS WANT MEDICAL ISOTOPES!



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by RizeorDie
Iran was surprised attacked after the whole country had a revolution, yet they still managed to stop saddams invasion in its tracks. saddam was backed by the west, the arabs and america. they gave money, supplies and weapons. on top of that he had his whole army mobilized and ready to roll in. the sad part is that they underestimated the iranians, the same thing you're doing now. great historians and generals warn us to never underestimate the enemy, as this what has caused great empires to fall.

the americans war machine is much better than that of saddams. there is no doubt about that. i also think america can successfully strike and destroy iranian nuclear facilities, however it is afterwards where things will turn around. the iranian will come at you in iraq wave after wave... do you think the iraqis will help you? do you think the kuwaiti and saudis will fight? the iraqis will join the iranians, and the saudis will flee. and the oil rich region would be iranian territory. the economy will collapse.

Not to mention the horrible weapons Iraq used on Iran, and still Iran didn't fall to Iraq, Chemical warfare is disgusting.
Iraq made sure to thank Uncle Sam for the weapons though.

[edit on 10-8-2010 by hippomchippo]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by RizeorDie
 


Afterward as in how much after? I'm sorry, but shock and awe is going to be more than enough to destroy any ground, air and sea forces that Iran may have before they would even stupidly think to mobilize over the boarder into Iraq to face the American military.

The US forces of land, sea, air and space have completely covered the entire ME area over the course of the past decade in a blanket of surveillance to the point where if significant troop movement within Iran's boarders is verified, drones piloted by guys in Arizona are going to launch tactical strikes all the while gathering intelligence in real-time.

Any thought of the US military running into trouble against the Iranian forces proper after the initial surgical strikes is a moot point since the Iranian army would either have to surrender like the Iraqis did in 2003 or revert to guerrilla style tactics without a stable central command. And the US forces hopefully have learned from their mistakes of ten years of being an occupational force and would think better against the style of occupation they are using now. But in the end we'll see what's more profitable.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join