Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Iran now has Nukes and Launchers?

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 31 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
You never really know, but I'm guna call this propaganda. There are a million reason Iran having nukes is a moot point, but if we (the US) want to expand our war efforts and control in teh Middle East, Iran having nukes is a glorious reason to invade (remember all those WMD's we found in Iraq? oh, wait...)

Not trying to prop up my thread, but I called this yesterday -->> www.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on May, 31 2011 @ 08:09 PM
link   
Quick, call Colin Powell back to the UN to explain it. I'm sure he'd do a bang up job of explaining everything. Never let the facts stand in the way of a good story, eh?

Although I do understand the implications of Iran having a nuclear arsenal, I don't think we (i.e. any other nation) has the right to say they can or can't have them. If they told the US that they shouldn't have nukes the US would laugh at them. Similarly, they laugh at the US. I think that's fair. As it stands, I think we (the west) are not protecting our people when we take issue, but protecting the assets of the few.

Fox leading the bugle call? Pah.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Badgered1
Quick, call Colin Powell back to the UN to explain it. I'm sure he'd do a bang up job of explaining everything. Never let the facts stand in the way of a good story, eh?

Although I do understand the implications of Iran having a nuclear arsenal, I don't think we (i.e. any other nation) has the right to say they can or can't have them. If they told the US that they shouldn't have nukes the US would laugh at them. Similarly, they laugh at the US. I think that's fair. As it stands, I think we (the west) are not protecting our people when we take issue, but protecting the assets of the few.

Fox leading the bugle call? Pah.


What are you talking about? Rumsfeld makes war seem clear as mud for the layman.
/end sarc



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by dirtycrickrat
Has the whole "wipe Israel off of the map" thing been long proven that it was a misinterpretation of him actually saying "erase the lines off of the map and return to Palestinian territory''?

this article is bs.


What is the diference between ''wipe USA off the map'' and ''erase the lines off the map and return to Indian territory''? Would anyone in US give a crap when both things mean no more USA?

So, whatever he said , he ment one thing : NO MORE Israel.

Anyway, if they have nuclear capable missiles...why would they have them WITHOUT nuclear warheads?Same thing as someone who have a gun, but he doesn't have YET bullets.

I, for one, won't wait for iranians to get their hand on some ''bullets''.And i mean iranian leaders ofc, who are nuts, not iranian ppl, who, ofc aren't.
And if someone thinks that if Iran knows that they will get obliterated if launching a nuke attack and they are afraid because of that...its desillusional. (70 virgins anyone? 12th imman prophecy?)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Britguy
Note the use of the term "Nuclear Capable" here.


I was reading to see if anyone had brought this up. I had to read half way through the page before someone mentioned the wording.



This is just more propaganda the government is feeding the hungry cattle, building up the stage for war with Iran and/or Pakistan. It's unfortunate the American public buys into it. As if they learned after the Iraq War. The same people that told you Iraq has WMD's is now telling you Iran is trying to acquire WMD's.
edit on 1-6-2011 by BiGGz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 10:39 PM
link   
How would you feel if you were surrounded by people who want to push you around and dictate what you could and couldn't do and have the fear of a nuclear offensive attack if you did not get in line.

Would you not want do procure a nuclear weapon as a deterrent....



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Talk about war with Iran has been going on for years now. Nobody is buying this...its just more blah, blah, blah. No war with Iran.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by matadoor
 





Also, reports from last October revealed that the Obama administration concluded that Chinese firms were helping Iran with the improvement of its missile technology and the development of nuclear weapons, and asked China to stop such activity.


How did that go over for the administration? How much bowing was done, and how many times did they say "qing" (Please)?

I'm not afraid of a nuclear equipped Iran, even if they develop further range capabilities. If anything, it'll help keep the Zionist state in line, and could eventually lead to forcing them to clean up the gulags.

However, that's all wishful thinking. I'm sure we have just been given the reason for a future invasion into Iran. We must stop those evil Persians from destroying the world.

Then again, the Chinese are shaking their heads and saying don't do it. I'm glad my 2nd baby mama is a PRC national and I am on great terms with her. Let's all practice now "Wo shi Zhong guo ren (I am Chinese)" !
edit on 3-6-2011 by tamusan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 11:22 AM
link   
I havent seen any proof that Iran is NOT making bombs.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 11:34 AM
link   
"Dont let them have nukes because nukes are dangerous" - Rich comming from the only country that has ever used TWO of them to kill thousands and still holds a huge stockpile now, and the argument " america dont want other countries to have them because they know what nukes can do" is flawed because if they were that bad then the US would have got rid of their stockpile also....



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Used the two nukes to stop a war and hasnt used any ever since despite having had tens of thousands for decades. There are whacko nut job leaders out there who want to get there hands on just a couple to use immediately. Horrible argument.


Originally posted by Itop1
"Dont let them have nukes because nukes are dangerous" - Rich comming from the only country that has ever used TWO of them to kill thousands and still holds a huge stockpile now, and the argument " america dont want other countries to have them because they know what nukes can do" is flawed because if they were that bad then the US would have got rid of their stockpile also....



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 04:34 AM
link   
reply to post by ShAuNmAn-X
 


For obvious reasons .. the banner in your signature is what .. a sick joke ?

*Obvious reasons explained for people with IQ < 70: Poster states it is bad news that Fox news ( lol ) states that Iran *might* ( or might not ) have two nuclear warheads, while stating this poses a threat to the only nation in the middle east that threatens its neighbours with nuclear destruction ( Israel ) while having a banner reading "Fight Hypocrisy" in his signature.

Are you a travesty artist ?



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 04:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Recollector
 


Are you illiterate? I wouldn't think so but can never be too sure around here.

When someone says American government. Do they mean the American people as well?

When someone says Iranian regime. Do they mean the Iranian people as well?

When someone says Zionist regime. Do they mean the Israeli people as well?

No. No. No.

Stop spreading disinformation.

Edit:

FOXNEWS. LOL. That's all that my brain can fart out when people use sources like FOX. Excuse me.
edit on 12-6-2011 by Zamini because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 06:05 AM
link   
Iran does not yet have the bomb so I can’t see why they would bother building missiles to carry nuclear weapons when they don’t have nuclear weapon technology yet.

Sounds like more neocon propaganda from FoxNews.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 06:08 AM
link   
America claim they need nuclear warheads for peace and balance of power. Well, America has had warheads for decades BEFORE anybody else, they have used them TWICE AGRESSIVELY (that we know off publically, not including any secret covered up uses on a smaller scale).

The rest of the world is just defending themselves against the agressor, which really is Balancing of the power.


Rest of the world wants nuclear power for enegery and medical uses.

America says no!, America must have the only nuclear power on the planet, even unsafe ones, as WANT to make more nuclear weapons, also why the US will never go thorium, which cannot make weapons.

edit on 12-6-2011 by zookey because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join