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.

 

Did Iran's Supreme Leader Admit Iran's Nuclear Weapons Ambition?

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Those of us who have put the evidence together and believe Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons don’t need more proof. There are still plenty here on ATS who believe these charges are trumped up as a pretext for war.

Today, while delivering a hate-filled speech to radicals in Iran filled with double-talk and rhetoric, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei appears to have slipped up.

We’ve all heard the threats, like:


He describes Israel as a "cancer" and says, "It will be cut."


And his admission that Iran supports terrorist acts against Israel and others:


Khamenei, who has final say on all state matters, says that Iran has helped the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas in their fights against Israel, and will aid others who do so.


Iran has repeatedly denied that its nuclear program is for military use, but today the supreme leader came very close to an admission. Talking about sanctions imposed on Iran he said:


"Such sanctions will benefit us. They will make us more self-reliant ... We would not achieve military progress if sanctions were not imposed on Iran's military sector ... More imposed pressures mean more self-reliance for Iran. Sanctions are beneficial also because it makes us more determined not to change our nuclear course ... Iran will not change its nuclear course because of sanctions...,"he added.
link

Sanctions against Iran's military sector??? That sounded to me like he’s admitting Iran’s nuclear program is for military purposes. What country’s military runs its nuclear program for public energy production??


I’m wondering when some of you “smart” people sticking to your guns on Iran will finally connect the dots??

edit on 3-2-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   
Bump.

Bump.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Sorry but that doesn't convince me one bit. I believe his statements about military sanctions and their nuclear program to be two different points. Not to mention the real possibility of his intention to be lost in translation. You have obviously made up you're mind and that is fine but I think you are reading a little too much into this one statement.


Today, while delivering a hate-filled speech to radicals in Iran filled with double-talk and rhetoric, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei appears to have slipped up.

BTW I see you've been practicing your own propaganda... good job.
edit on 3-2-2012 by fenceSitter because: Added Note



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   


What country’s military runs its nuclear program for public energy production??


None. And thats the problem. While its certainly plausible, I really do not think Iran wants to build weapon that will insure its destruction from outside forces.

I really don't think anyone in power in Iran is saying, yeah lets build a nuke and use it and get our 10 second victory before we get wiped off the face of the earth. Is it a possibility? Sure. But logically I don't see that many people standing behind a plan like that. But who knows, the world is a crazy place this past decade.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   
I don't see why Israel should command American foreign policy, but I must say ... if Iran truly is hoping to become a nuclear power, then that is something which should be prevented. I don't know if at all cost, but one must weigh up the impact of an attack on Iran with the potentially seriously destabilising influence Iran could have in the region as a nuclear power. Their sunni neighbours dislike them and it is not unforeseeable to think that it could get ugly.

I was never for a strike Iran and I still think it should be the last option, but I must say, I was rather amused when I learnt/read that their 'civilian' projects are being built inside of mountains and bunkers ... surrounded by anti-aircraft batteries? That doesn't strike me as being the actions of a nation with nothing to hide.

If they wanted nuclear energy (does Iran even need civilian nuclear energy when it has so much cheap fossil fuel to run its power plants?) for civil purposes, I think that would be commendable, but this attitude of 'no, sorry, we're not letting inspectors in' ... surely they too must realize that it sets them on a collision course with the West and even their regional neighbours.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Irans a threat to the whole world. Were not all brainwashed by the Muslim propaganda, but unfortunately it is winning the propaganda battle.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Assuming Iran actually has nuke weapons intentions,

How is the "West' going to benefit financially from stopping the program ?

I think there is a higher agenda at work.

The nuke thing may be just hype.

The "West" wants more 'business" in Iran.

Too much destruction may kill the possibilities.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by duality90
I don't see why Israel should command American foreign policy, but I must say ... if Iran truly is hoping to become a nuclear power, then that is something which should be prevented. I don't know if at all cost, but one must weigh up the impact of an attack on Iran with the potentially seriously destabilising influence Iran could have in the region as a nuclear power. Their sunni neighbours dislike them and it is not unforeseeable to think that it could get ugly.

I was never for a strike Iran and I still think it should be the last option, but I must say, I was rather amused when I learnt/read that their 'civilian' projects are being built inside of mountains and bunkers ... surrounded by anti-aircraft batteries? That doesn't strike me as being the actions of a nation with nothing to hide.

If they wanted nuclear energy (does Iran even need civilian nuclear energy when it has so much cheap fossil fuel to run its power plants?) for civil purposes, I think that would be commendable, but this attitude of 'no, sorry, we're not letting inspectors in' ... surely they too must realize that it sets them on a collision course with the West and even their regional neighbours.


They wouldn't have to hide it if their scientists weren't assassinated, or their bases sabotaged. I mean, someone gave the orders to bomb facilities and kill their personnel.

Who gave those orders is still a mystery. Though at the end of the day, someone did and those orders were executed.

Anyone going against covert actions against them would take precautions to avoid future incidents.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by fenceSitter
 



Sorry but that doesn't convince me one bit.


Of course not!




I believe his statements about military sanctions and their nuclear program to be two different points.


Sure!




Not to mention the real possibility of his intention to be lost in translation.


Typical response…YAWN



You have obviously made up you're mind and that is fine but I think you are reading a little too much into this one statement.


Of course I have…I said that in the first sentence of the OP.



BTW I see you've been practicing your own propaganda... good job.


Thanks! Have you ever heard him speak or seen the people who attend? HATE! Pure HATE.




posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
Assuming Iran actually has nuke weapons intentions,

How is the "West' going to benefit financially from stopping the program ?

I think there is a higher agenda at work.

The nuke thing may be just hype.

The "West" wants more 'business" in Iran.

Too much destruction may kill the possibilities.



Do you really care what the West wants? Look at the world we have created. Look at theirs. Which do you prefer? Its that simple. This is the sensitive point where taking military action means preventing millions, perhaps a billion lives lost fighting a third World War with a nuclear armed terrorist state that has obviously no regard for their own citizens lives, let alone their own lives.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   
If Iran gets Oil and Nuclear Power that is shifting the power in the region from Israel to Iran. Now I ask everyone here, Do you really want that? Just consider who's in charge over there.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   
What can they do with a nuke?
nothing

If they made some nukes..they could try to nuke israel..the fallout of course not only landing all around the middle east, but also making the whole area uninhabitable
the world would then smash them into bits...with the arab states in the lead for dropping radioactive crap all over their land

If they aim it at america/west, (lets pretend they had propulsion),,it would be knocked down before it even came close. like a fly trying to go through a fly swatter factory.

then they would be pounded back onto the jurassic era.

So, this leads me to believe that they aren't really trying for nukes...it is complete madness to go for it since its only benefit will be your complete annihilation no matter how you use it.

I could be wrong here, but I don't think so...yes, a single man can be that insane..but we are talking about a fairly large government all having to be that insane



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by cconn487


What country’s military runs its nuclear program for public energy production??


None. And thats the problem. While its certainly plausible, I really do not think Iran wants to build weapon that will insure its destruction from outside forces.

I really don't think anyone in power in Iran is saying, yeah lets build a nuke and use it and get our 10 second victory before we get wiped off the face of the earth. Is it a possibility? Sure. But logically I don't see that many people standing behind a plan like that. But who knows, the world is a crazy place this past decade.


Is teaching children to kill themselves by suicide bomb logical or rational? I don’t know why some people assume that other cultures share your sense of logic??? We’re talking about a culture that considers it the highest honor to die a martyr while killing innocent people.




posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
If Iran gets Oil and Nuclear Power that is shifting the power in the region from Israel to Iran. Now I ask everyone here, Do you really want that? Just consider who's in charge over there.


I prefer neither
Lets relocate Israel to Florida, and remove any and all presence from the middle east.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by theBigToe
Irans a threat to the whole world. Were not all brainwashed by the Muslim propaganda, but unfortunately it is winning the propaganda battle.


Just like Saddam and his weapons of mass destruction. How was the need to take Iraq down any different than Iran now?

Was Saddam a bad guy? Sure, I'll go with that. He wasn't a good person by many standards. The only propaganda I see these days is Iran has to be dealt with just like Saddam had to be taken out. Ask the civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan how much our intervention helped them. The Taliban is stronger than ever. We took out Osama, big deal! There are 20 more ready to take his place who will take things to the next level.

The only propaganda I see is an inevitable intervening in Iran. At the request of Israel.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   
No it's not an admission to their nuclear weapon ambition.

I take it you took it seriously when they said they would attack Israel with 100,000 rockets, or something like that. With all the propaganda floating about, I can't hold it against them to say something like that. When is the last time Iran attacked anyone?



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by cconn487

Originally posted by theBigToe
Irans a threat to the whole world. Were not all brainwashed by the Muslim propaganda, but unfortunately it is winning the propaganda battle.


Just like Saddam and his weapons of mass destruction. How was the need to take Iraq down any different than Iran now?

Was Saddam a bad guy? Sure, I'll go with that. He wasn't a good person by many standards. The only propaganda I see these days is Iran has to be dealt with just like Saddam had to be taken out. Ask the civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan how much our intervention helped them. The Taliban is stronger than ever. We took out Osama, big deal! There are 20 more ready to take his place who will take things to the next level.

The only propaganda I see is an inevitable intervening in Iran. At the request of Israel.


Removing Saddam left Iran open to new markets in Iraq because of the newly installed Shia-Muslim backed government. Not only that but it was an estimated guess Saddam was hiding an ability to build nuclear weapons. The whole world knows Iran is building one. Its no secret. Even Russia and China have said so themselves and have expressed concern that their nuclear ambitions arent peaceful. This world doesnt need anymore nuclear energy, and especially when its going to be in the hands of a bunch of religious zealots that want to commit genocide above all else.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by duality90
 



I don't see why Israel should command American foreign policy, but I must say ... if Iran truly is hoping to become a nuclear power, then that is something which should be prevented. I don't know if at all cost, but one must weigh up the impact of an attack on Iran with the potentially seriously destabilising influence Iran could have in the region as a nuclear power.


I totally agree!



I was never for a strike Iran and I still think it should be the last option, but I must say, I was rather amused when I learnt/read that their 'civilian' projects are being built inside of mountains and bunkers ... surrounded by anti-aircraft batteries? That doesn't strike me as being the actions of a nation with nothing to hide.


No country produces nuclear energy underground…and there is no need for highly enriched (weaponized) uranium if you’re only producing energy.

The region is volatile enough. Anything could spark conflict, and with a nuclear Iran we’re looking at the potential for nuclear war (whether the US is there or not).


If they wanted nuclear energy (does Iran even need civilian nuclear energy when it has so much cheap fossil fuel to run its power plants?) for civil purposes, I think that would be commendable, but this attitude of 'no, sorry, we're not letting inspectors in' ... surely they too must realize that it sets them on a collision course with the West and even their regional neighbours.


I believe they WANT a confrontation. I believe they want Israel and the US gone and would do anything or partner with anyone to make that happen…they’ve said as much.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
Assuming Iran actually has nuke weapons intentions,

How is the "West' going to benefit financially from stopping the program ?

I think there is a higher agenda at work.

The nuke thing may be just hype.

The "West" wants more 'business" in Iran.

Too much destruction may kill the possibilities.



How would US benefit from conducting a limited war with Iran? We’re talking about a HUGE economic issues if war breaks out there because nobody will be traveling the straits (oil and trade stops). It’s about not letting a nut-job regime have the power to end humanity.

If it was about money, wouldn't the US would promote trade with Iran; I’m sure they’d love to sell US oil and other goods and the new competition in the market could lower prices, could it not?



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 
Hi Seabag -


We’ve all heard the threats, like...

...like all the ones we and Israel have spouted against them for years now? First off, the example that you provide isn't a clear statement that Iran's going to do this, just that it will occur - regardless, as far as I'm concerned, Iran is every bit as free to rattle sabres as we are, and I'd have to run through many years' history of news to confirm, but I feel somewhat safe in saying we've talked much more trash on them - and officially issued more outright threats and declarations - than they have against we and Israel.


And his admission that Iran supports terrorist acts against Israel and others...

...like our own government does when suits their needs to "destabilize" certain regimes from within? We talk all this bluff and bluster about the "Global War on Terror", but we're more than happy to actively work with terror groups and get them taken off watchlists when it's handy for us to do so (such as the MEK in Iran, the mujahedin in Afghanistan against the soviets - more or less directly founding Al Qaeda - and likely all sorts of other examples to provide here, with enough research).

Hell, even western nations (Operation Gladio, for example) are happy to support terrorist acts even in their own countries when it pays dividends.


Today, while delivering a hate-filled speech to radicals in Iran filled with double-talk and rhetoric...

I just had to throw this in for fun, since we often get so much of the same here at home...Dr. Sacks' recounting of the aphasia ward at his hospital breaking into hysterics when watching a presidential speech always gives me a chuckle.


Sanctions against Iran's military sector??? That sounded to me like he’s admitting Iran’s nuclear program is for military purposes. What country’s military runs its nuclear program for public energy production??


I’m wondering when some of you “smart” people sticking to your guns on Iran will finally connect the dots??

I won't say your interpretation is right or wrong, as it's neither here nor there to me. As we've gone over before, our own experts have consistently said there's no proof Iran is working on a capacity for the nuclear bomb, but if they *are*, I'm very much inclined to agree with Israeli intelligence in that this is for deterrent reasons - very much akin to North Korea's situation. We used to make BIG news about North Korea constantly, make all sorted of veiled and not-so-veiled threats, issue ultimatums, make threatening gestures...

...and then they developed the nuke - and seemingly dropped off our radar oh-so mysteriously. I have no problem assuming that Iran noticed the exact same thing and may be making the exact same moves with that motivation in mind.

Additionally, Israeli intelligence experts as well as a few of our own have said that Iran is not acting irrationally here, and will likely continue to act rationally absent some further provocation or direct threat - Iran is NOT suicidal, is not ignorant of palestinian victims of any aggression on their part, and is not ignorant of the likely results of any such action they may take.

They may puff up like so many animals trying to scare off a threat, but they are in a defensive position. They're not stupid, and they know NO ONE will be done any good if they actually do something to provoke a military response from us.
edit on 2/3/2012 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join