It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Aeons
Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by Aeons
There is no source that would be good enough for you. Sense about their actual energy needs has no impact on you. People link up actual members of their leadership telling you this, and you guys dismiss it.
Tell me the standard of proof you need.
Yes. A reliable source. Not your opinion or conjecture. Something from an impartial third party, like the newest IAEA report, or anything from the IAEA saying that Iran is building a weapon. Can't find it? Not surprised.
Their energy needs? How much power do they consume in a year? What is their estimate for growth that they need for the next decade? How much power will the Nuclear power plants give them? Are they enriching in order to sell the rods to other countries? How big are they looking to expand their medical facilities? These are just questions I thought up while I am writing this. Until you have answers to these questions (more to follow if you need), then you have no proof.
Standard of proof: Impartial third party.
Edit: what do you mean "you guys"?edit on 1-2-2012 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)
How about that in those IAEA reports they continue to find traces of highly enriched uranium? Hm?
After analysis of swipe samples, IAEA experts now say the HEU was Pakistani and presumably came to be in Natanz because imported centrifuge components were contaminated. The origin of the LEU contamination has yet to be established but there are some indications it is of Russian provenance.
Originally posted by pheonix358
In all of the discussion in this thread (and damn fine logical discussion at that) I have never once seen the accusation that the US in particular does not abide by the NPT. The countries that had nukes were supposed to dramatically reduce their WMDs over time. This has not happened. It sucks!
The other point to consider is that Iran has had years to study US invasion tactics and while they may not be able to win, they can certainly kill thousands upon thousands of US military. As the US found in Iraq it is on thing to take a country, quite another to keep it. Iran has had all this time to develop tactics to kill a force trying to hold the country.
Iran could hide tens of thousands of troops in their cities, armed with 50 calibre sniper rifles just waiting for the army of occupation.
Might want to try triple checking then. Iran has not been found to have nuclear weapons. US government said so, Iran says so, IAEA says so, and ISIS says so. Why are they only people that say they do, on ATS or MSM?
Ridiculous to suggest that Iran would attack Russia and China simply because they are part of the "original nuclear club".
Not a nuclear war, but, an invasion of Iran would leave them with higher than they are used to casualties.
I agree that not everything is as it seems to be in global politics, but they are on opposing sides of how to deal with Iran, US has placed sanctions against China for this. Read.
The only time they were aggressive was when they won the Iraq-Iran war and after beating the Iraqis, they kept fighting for years
"The west" destroyed a country under false pretenses. They are trying to garner public support to do it again.
No. I would just hope they would show the same patience if they had a nuke like they have shown without one.
I never said they were, I said they are the hypocrite in this case.
I'm a new member here without a long post history but I am a firm believer there are two sides to a coin, even if both of them are evils. I'm far from a warmonger but I think it's naive to think that (due to some of our foreign policies and corrupt overseas business practices) if a nuke were to go off in Anytown USA, half of the world wouldn't be dancing in the streets in celebration. Even if there's a lot of evil being perpetuated by our leaders I don't want to turn and the noise and find Seattle is history and there's a fallout cloud heading in my direction.
Originally posted by QuestionsEverything
reply to post by superman2012
I do have to say Pakistan's nuclear capabilities along with their methods of delivery falling into Taliban hands due to coup or popular revolt have me more worried then Iran gaining a bomb so kudos on pointing that out.
Originally posted by NightSkyeB4Dawn
reply to post by BooKrackers
Are you saying that this is the way Iran feels about you?
Or is this the way you feel about Iran?
When did they inform you of this uncontrollable hatred they have for you? If they hated you this much they wouldn't wait for nukes to attack you. Their hatred would overrule all intelligence and they would be unable to control their need to destroy you.
Since their rabid hatred has not lead them to attack you or anyone else, I have great difficulty in accepting your statements as fact.
Propaganda flows on both sides.
By the way, why did the US give nukes to Pakistan?
You are just repeating the usual "pro Iran" pseudo-arguments the other, like-minded people use.
Let's start with the fact that in the past AMERICA hardly ever initiated (!!) military engagement, rather INTERVENED for the sake of a purpose.
Whether it was Nazi Germany, Saddam Hussein's attack on Kuwait etc..etc..
In this case, Iran is/was getting caught going for nuclear weapons and Iran was TOLD BEFOREHAND this is not being tolerated by threatening them with SANCTIONS - *NOT* military action.
Iran however insisted on continuing their "civil" (LOL) nuclear program, giving the US and the rest of the world the finger, actually it was IRAN starting military action by saying they will block the Street of Hormuz if sanctions are imposed - starting their "military exercises".
The US/Western Europe then reacted TO THIS saying that blocking the Street of Hormuz is not acceptable...which should not be surprising since there are countries depending on Oil going through the street....
Now tell me..THE US IS THE "AGGRESSOR" here?
Because we voiced our concern about nuclear weapons in Iran and only after idiotic "ego games" by Iran we acted by reacting to THEIR military deployment?
Now again: Where are WE the aggressors here?
Your argument with "defense purposes" is really "cute"...
because for me this hasn't to do anything with defense purposes....
but simply Iran's plan and pride/egoism to get a Nuclear bomb as soon as possible.
if you (and others) really think that Iran having nuclear weapons is the better option.
If anything, the situation in the middle-east will only get MUCH worse as a result of this..
The US has nuclear weapons and did NOT use them for 70 years now. Let's see how long it takes Iran to use theirs...