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.

 

From the horse's mouth -Iran Supreme council:-new nuke capability and threats to Humanity.

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Brasov
 


Let me be clear. Regardless of what any international law says there is no such thing as Free Trade. It was an agreement that the world understood to globalize the economy.

Economic Sanctions can be legally tendered from any country depending on what forms they take. The sanctions that they are talking about is that if you buy from Iran we won't buy from you. They are not talking about blockades, or sinking ships, yet. Remember there are many different forms of sanctions and you need to be careful with generalizations. Once it gets to that point there are legalities in the international law and treaties that can make it bad bad news for whoever does the Military Sanctions or takes the Economic Sanctions to the level of blocking ports and thruways.




posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by grey580Then why doesn't Iran use Thorium?


Why doesn't the U.S.?

Why doesn' the U.S. destroy its nuclear arsenal that can erradicate life on Earth several times, before telling others not to develope nukes?

Hypocrisy from a failing empire at best. No one is listening to the old dog while it lashes out in its death throes.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by D8ncer
Noticed in a report that the experts were saying they had 3000 centrifuges running. This would not be enough to generate the required fuel for nuclear power stations.

Hence they stated it must for making a bomb.

They can’t win on this.

The more they decide to enrich for a power station or for medical reasons it will be seen as an attempt to enrich quicker and make a bomb.

If you know what I am trying to say.

edit on 10-1-2012 by D8ncer because: (no reason given)


Read from the horse's mouth. They are admitting to achieve 20% enrichment uranium grade nuke. It's more than justifiable grade for peaceful nuke energy alone. Its not how many centrifugues they have to provide energy, its the nuke grade. And the horses themselves admitted in full on their own achievenment, not from outside sources or IAEA.
edit on 10-1-2012 by SeekerofTruth101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Brasov
 



Hello USAisdevil



edit on 10-1-2012 by mkgandhas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Brasov
 


I totally agree.
We should be using Thorium in all of our reactors.
I don't know why it's not in use already. But we have US companies like Raytheon developing the technology.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101

Originally posted by D8ncer
Noticed in a report that the experts were saying they had 3000 centrifuges running. This would not be enough to generate the required fuel for nuclear power stations.

Hence they stated it must for making a bomb.

They can’t win on this.

The more they decide to enrich for a power station or for medical reasons it will be seen as an attempt to enrich quicker and make a bomb.

If you know what I am trying to say.

edit on 10-1-2012 by D8ncer because: (no reason given)


Read from the horse's mouth. They are admitting to achieve 20% uranium grade nuke. It's more than justifiable grade for peaceful nuke energy alone. Its not how many centrifugues they have to provide energy, its the nuke grade. And the horses themselves admitted in full on their own achievenment, not from outside sources or IAEA.


for a nuke 90% should be u-235... so how like 20% will do. Impossible.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by HellstormRising
reply to post by Brasov
 


Let me be clear. Regardless of what any international law says there is no such thing as Free Trade. It was an agreement that the world understood to globalize the economy.

Economic Sanctions can be legally tendered from any country depending on what forms they take. The sanctions that they are talking about is that if you buy from Iran we won't buy from you. They are not talking about blockades, or sinking ships, yet. Remember there are many different forms of sanctions and you need to be careful with generalizations. Once it gets to that point there are legalities in the international law and treaties that can make it bad bad news for whoever does the Military Sanctions or takes the Economic Sanctions to the level of blocking ports and thruways.


Go tell 1 million murdered iraqi civilians about legalities and the U.S.

Iran is not Iraq, it knows how to deal with international pirates on its shores and abroad.
edit on 10-1-2012 by Brasov because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by mkgandhas

for a nuke 90% should be u-235... so how like 20% will do. Impossible.


Impossible today. Just as it was impossible that its claim of nuke was for peaceful energy, but then centrifuges for enrichment became a reality yesterday, 20% enrichment acheived today. What tomorrow brings? Another surprise of the impossible becoming possible?

I seek for no wars. I do not speak for humanity, but I am sure they too seek for no wars. Iran's authorities best do some explaining to the concerned world with nuke proliferation over its duplicity along the way since its claim for nuke energy. Hopefully, may it not be too late.
edit on 10-1-2012 by SeekerofTruth101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:53 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 


stop making imaginary scenarios and fearmongering.Iran cannot make nukes with 20% enrichment.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:53 AM
link   
--sarcasm on--

It's the Zionists running the newspaper, and the CIA is helping them. It's a false flag. Iran is peaceful, and has no ambition of killing innocent people. You're all paid shills, or you're all fools for believing the obvious CIA propaganda.

--sarcasm off--



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:55 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Brasov
Perhaps tomorrow you'll murder your wife and children, therefore you should be locked up today, or better yet, executed.

You're as fallacious as a crooked cop's speed trap.
edit on 10-1-2012 by Brasov because: (no reason given)


Are you here to discuss rationally, or to attack others' views viciously?



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3Iran is peaceful,


Actually Iran is a threat to other countries, they've invaded someone 300 years ago.

In contrast the U.S. is a peace maker, they've humanitarily bombed and invaded 3 countries since 2003. They' ve also bombed more then 100 countries and territories in the 20th century alone causing more than 6 million civilian deaths.

Conclusion: trust the peace-loving americans, Iran is the bad guy for defending its sovereign territory, everybody knows the U.S. have the right to their oil.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Brasov

Go tell 1 million murdered iraqi civilians about legalities and the U.S.

Iran is not Iraq, it knows how to deal with international pirates on its shores and abroad.
edit on 10-1-2012 by Brasov because: (no reason given)


Brasov, No offense meant man but you missed my point entirely. You're throwing generalizations around. All I'm trying to say is that the U.S. and the International community for that matter have a right to do business with whomever they deem. If they decide they don't want to do business with you because you do business with someone else then that is up to the people of the government to decide if it is a legitimate gripe and change allegiance or not. In this matter (whether it's true or not is not the case), the U.S. is imposing sanctions on the international community in the form of an embargo (which is totally legal). They have deemed Iran to be a threat to their national interest. So Iran's people need to look at that and really analyze why.

Iran is using uranium for its power generation and enriching it far beyond that of typical power generation, medical use, or even experimentation processes. Sorry but unless they're holding some crazy theory back the only option really left for that kind of enrichment process is for missile production. Besides Thorium is a much less expensive and more efficient means of power generation not to mention the half life is almost nil considering the usage is 100%. The fact that they've openly admitted to underground research facilities dedicated to the enrichment process screams that they also have hidden missile factories and other such facilities(that's a game plan from NK, with whom IRAN is on good trading terms with.)

Listen, I don't like the bully nature of NATO countries (yes, U.S. is included in that.) as much as the next guy but you have to admit that they have a point in some respect. Although IRAN hasn't officially attacked another country in a long time they've certainly done their part to fund several terrorist organizations and harbor international criminals that have caused harm to NATO interest countries. Who's to say that one of those enriched uranium material won't get into the hands of one of those organizations. I think that this is the true motivation for the bullying you see because otherwise 5 years ago we were actually on trading terms with IRAN.

just .02
edit on 10-1-2012 by HellstormRising because: Edit: 20% is beyond normal enrichment for power generation.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101Who died and made you king here that you feel obligated to attack other viewpoints than your own offensively?


If you can't take discredit for your publicly exposed contradictions the solution is really simple: leave the forum.
edit on 10-1-2012 by Brasov because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Brasov

Actually Iran is a threat to other countries, they've invaded someone 300 years ago.

In contrast the U.S. is a peace maker, they've humanitarily bombed and invaded 3 countries since 2003. They' ve also bombed more then 100 countries and territories in the 20th century alone causing more than 6 million civilian deaths.

Conclusion: trust the peace-loving americans, Iran is the bad guy for defending its sovereign territory, everybody knows the U.S. have the right to their oil.


Was that a sacarsm? May I take it as it is not?

Presuming that it is not, then lets skip the BS peace maker stuff. There will always be disagreement and contentions about US and the free world's role. THe past had happened. Nothing can change that. BUT Today, a new situation had developed, caused and admitted freely by the persian infidel leader, and it concerns not just US, but the free world as well.

So is the free world to keep silent, and let that persian infidel does as he wish, continue with his duplicity to everyone including his own citizens, with no obligations to a world we humanity all share?



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by HellstormRisingIran is using uranium for its power generation and enriching it far beyond that of typical power generation, medical use, or even experimentation processes.


Let's buy the U.S. crock that Iran wants to have nukes... does any nuclear country have the moral right to complain about it?

For any country not illegally eyeing the resources of Iran, like the U.S. does, there's nothing to fear from their defensive capabilities, be they nuclear or not.

The only rogue country to have ever used nukes on civilians is the U.S, and they did it twice. The world knows it perfectly, but you seem to believe non-americans have no memory or are stupid to really know what kind of a rogue the U.S. is.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join