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 tests nukes in North Korea

page: 3
13
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 03:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


.
Huh? And because they have enough oil they should not be
messing with nuclear energy? I don't think that's a good
point at all.
.
edit on 6-3-2012 by snewpers because: sorry.. forgot to add the NOT part...




posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sharpenmycleats
These OPEC countries have enough oil practically sitting on the ground that will last them over 400 years, at a fraction of the cost that nuclear energy will cost. Why don't they invest in refineries instead? Why don't the use money for research and development to figure out alternative energy sources. Technology that could be sold to slow the flow and they could profit from.

Why?, because their program is not for peaceful purposes.


How did you come to the conclusion they have 400 years of oil left??
How do you know its a fraction of the cost?
You know their primary source of wealth actually comes from oil, so to use it for themselves would not be the smartest idea!
And just because they have oil does not at all mean investment in alternative energy sources are to be ignored.
Why dont they this why dont they that? It's really not yours, or anyones goddam business how they choose to invest in energy sources

If your concerned about rogue states in possesion of nuclear weapons, look no further then Israel


The history of the Israeli nuclear project is still shrouded in a great deal of secrecy. As part of Israel's policy of nuclear opacity (see below), Israel's military censorship prohibits publication of any factual Israeli-based information on the nuclear project.[3] Consequently, only fragmentary bits and pieces of information on the topic have ever been published, and most commonly only in the form of unconfirmed press reports by the non-Israeli press.



Widely believed to have produced enough weapons-grade plutonium for 100 to 200 nuclear warheads

Not a state party to the NPT, CTBT, BTWC, CWC or MTCR

www.nti.org...



Amnesty International has accused the Israeli authorities of subjecting jailed nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment by holding him in solitary confinement.

The 56-year-old, who spent 18 years in prison for revealing details of the country's nuclear arsenal to a UK newspaper in 1986, was sent back to jail for three months on 23 May on charges of contact with a foreign national, and almost immediately placed in solitary confinement.


www.amnesty.org...

ETA:
As for the article..

The Zionist piece was unable to cite any viable evidence linking Iran to these blasts

Here is the segment in the article regarding the allegation:


The Die Welt noted that evidence of the 2010 nuclear tests in North Korea was published in early February in Nature Magazine.

According to the report, Swedish nuclear physicist Lars-Erik de Geer analyzed data "showing the presence of radioisotopes that betrayed a uranium bomb explosion."


"After a year of work, (de Geer) concluded that North Korea carried out two small nuclear tests in April and May 2010 that caused explosions in the range of 50–200 tons of TNT equivalent.

"The types and ratios of isotopes detected… suggest that North Korea was testing materials and techniques intended to boost the yield of its weapons," the report said.


Do me a favor ATS'ers, CTRL+F Iran in this quote. Congrats, you came to the same conclusion I did! there is nothing linking Iran to these blasts!


As for the German newspaper (original source)

Here is the segment linking Iran to the blasts in North Korea

Keep in mind I have used Google Translate on this:


So where weapons-grade uranium that is for two explosives tested in 2010? There are only two possible explanations that make even the strict confidentiality of the tests appear reasonable and necessary. On the one hand it could involve weapons-grade uranium from North Korea's own secret production.

Although the country has contested up to the fall of 2010, to enrich uranium. In the meantime, however, has long been determined that North Korea has enriched uranium from 1998 with original Pakistani centrifuges of the type P-1. In the years leading up to the two tests in 2010 North Korea could easily produce highly enriched uranium for two nuclear warheads. The need for confidentiality of the tests would result in this case, the intent of the North Korean regime to maintain the structure of lies about his many years of enrichment activities in all circumstances.



The second explanation is that North Korea conducted a nuclear test foreign - in this case, an Iranian explosive device. That would be a sensation, but not entirely surprising. For several years the secret close cooperation between North Korean and Iranian experts register in preparing a nuclear test. The guesses were so far underground nuclear test but a made on Iranian territory.

And now the secret trial of an Iranian nuclear weapon by North Korea? The obvious objection to this scenario would be that Iran is considered by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has so far produced no weapons-grade uranium. But this objection is weak.

"That would be a sensation"
Oh yes it is a sensation

"[According to IAEA, Iran] has so far produced no weapons-grade uranium. But this objection is weak"
Objection is weak? Says who?? I think the US agrees with their objection actually


US intelligence agencies do not believe that Iran is actively trying to build a nuclear weapon, The Los Angeles Times reported on Wednesday, citing a highly classified intelligence assessment from early 2011.

According to the report, the intelligence estimate holds that Tehran halted efforts to develop and build a nuclear warhead in 2003.

www.jpost.com...


In 2010, Iran said it had increased the enrichment of uranium from the 3.5% needed for commercial nuclear reactors to the 10-20% needed for a research reactor near Tehran

Weapons-grade uranium is at least 90% enriched

www.bbc.co.uk...

They only reached 20% enrichment recently, how the hell could they have used a nuclear weapon in 2010!

Honestly, is it even scientifically possible to prove this kind of allegation?
O here i tell you what, there was this nuclear blast 2 years ago, all the way in butt# North Korea... but guess what, Iranians were testing one of their weapons there too! Ya right


thanks but no thanks
edit on 6-3-2012 by seenavv because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 07:49 AM
link   
This could well be true, but TPTB are so determined to attack Iran that they would say anything to take us to war,my gut tells me this is another lie.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 08:36 AM
link   
I can't believe there are people who actually believe that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons. Iran's nuclear weapons research began under the Shah as far as I know. I wouldn't be surprised if the Shah was secretly assisted by the U.S. in the early stages. After all, the Shah was being built-up by the U.S. to provide stability for the Persian Gulf.

I don't understand geopolitics, so I don't know about bombing Iran. It sounds crazy to me.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by iamconcerned
 


I am not part of whatever conspiracy you think I am part of. I merely thought this was an interesting piece and under-reported piece of news. Whats with the urgent tone of your post? Shouldn't we be asking whether Iran wants nuclear energy for peaceful purposes or not? Or should we just take what they say without question?

What are "hasbara trolls"?
edit on 5-3-2012 by Skyfloating because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-3-2012 by Skyfloating because: (no reason given)



The apologists always druel with urgency when rushing to protect what they perceive as an assault on all of Islam .

The article is very interesting as is the post , it makes you ask questions and search for answers . In this case the conclusion of Iran supplying uranium to test is a very logical conclusion based on this isotope not figuring into what the north is known to construct a bomb from but Iran is refining.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 09:04 AM
link   
what i can't believe
is that this is even
a thing

how would you americans [yeah, generalising... i know, sorry] feel if the iranians came poking around in your top secret weapons bases?
waving credentials in the air from the almighty toaster in the sky
it's our solemn duty to tell you what you can and cannot make in your own country
and man, all this stuff has to go.

is this a 'biggest bully in the playground' thing? you've got the biggest stick and you're gonna use to make sure no one gets a bigger one?
is that really worth going to war
destroying the entire world for?

gotta ease off guys. stop telling people what to do in their own houses
they may even start to hate you less
but whatever, can we tryyyyy and think rationally?
i like this world. there's a lot of cool people here.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 09:07 AM
link   
I wanted to remind people about this news from 2010. It looks to me like North Korea can enrich its own uranium. Clearly they have uranium or they wouldn't bother with the centrifuges. (In other words, why does detection of a uranium bomb test in North Korea implicate Iran?)

Siegfried Hecker, a former director of the Los Alamos Nuclear Laboratory, returned last week from a visit to the Yongbyon complex, where he was shown a small-scale industrial uranium enrichment facility that was "astonishingly modern" and would "would fit into any modern American processing facility".

North Korean officials told him the plant contained 2,000 centrifuges designed to manufacture uranium for civilian nuclear power, though he concluded the centrifuges "could be readily converted to produce highly enriched uranium bomb fuel".

"Instead of seeing a few small cascades of centrifuges, which I believed to exist in North Korea, we saw a modern, clean centrifuge plant of more than a thousand centrifuges, all neatly aligned and plumbed below us," wrote Prof Hecker in a report posted on the website of Stanford University, where he works.

N. Korea Centrifuges
edit on 6-3-2012 by cloudyday because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by Intrud3r

How the hell is that evidence of anything?

Seriously, how is any of this evidence ?


The evidence in this case are traces of Uranium. This was already mentioned in the OP, you must have accidentally missed it!



I didnt missed that part:


Another question raised in the article is why North Korea for the first time in their history used a new type produced uranium in the two tests of 2010 ?!


And the evidence is ? North Koreans used enriched uranium, how is that linking Iran with anything ? Please provide evidence that the enriched uranium they tested is from Iran.
edit on 6-3-2012 by Intrud3r because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-3-2012 by Intrud3r because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 09:40 AM
link   
Ohh so you guys wanna talk FACTS? Okay, we can do that


Exactly what proof is there of this/these bomb(s) being of Iranian creation and/or design?
Prove to me, and the rest of the world, that the 2 blasts in NK were indeed Iranian nuclear devices being detonated for testing purposes. Were there any Isotopes found that ties them to an Iranian reactor (Isotopic fingerprint)? If not, then exactly what means have you used to identify Iran to this?

For as far as I can see, people are trying their very best to CREATE a connection between 2 separate entities and events (Iran - Nuclear tests in NK).

Saying that it was an Uranium based bomb because NK doesn't have any Uranium will prove nothing more than the fact that the uranium needed for the bomb did not originate from NK.
Does this mean that South Africa is secretly testing a new line of nukes in NK? Perhaps it was China? Maybe it was Bolivia? Luxembourg anyone? If you want to link Iran to this event and don't want to appear as a dis-info agent, you better provide solid proof to back up your claims.


IT--
edit on 6-3-2012 by edog11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by cloudyday
 


All uranium has its own little fingerprint so to say and maybe this is how they drew this conclusion . I don't like speculation but sometimes articles are ambiguous for reasons unbenounced to us.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by thebabyseagull
This could well be true, but TPTB are so determined to attack Iran that they would say anything to take us to war,my gut tells me this is another lie.


Im not keen on going to war with Iran or any other country. But if a country calls mine "the great Satan" I think its good advice to be skeptical of their intentions.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by edog11
 
or was it Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías, President of Venezuela, that had the test done for Iran see how it all fits? Iran could not go to NK directly that would be a red flag on them but going to a third party now your getting somewhere. Iran is buddy buddy with Venezuela, why?? one thing comes to mind, the hate for the west, as well as the NK , but now that little ill is no longer , this is a wait and see with them, will they put up nuke testing? they did this once and then got the nukes going again for the same reason food was no longer a need.

Iran could have a very real nuke just one problem how to launch it , have they not tested a new missile? why yes they have, say in 45 days in not sooner NYC could glow again



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


no country called anyone anything.
a country is a land mass
it is made of dirt and trees and metals
it cannot speak.


and as for the individuals who have said that
well
have you had a look at what your country has done over there?
i'd be pretty mad too.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by decepticonLaura

have you had a look at what your country has done over there?
i'd be pretty mad too.


Yes, they are mad as hell and all their "we have peaceful intentions only" seems to be a ruse.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


no, a ruse is what you get in tacky old-style dramas
these are REAL HUMANS
with legitimate problems and concerns that deserve to be voiced

how can you possibly just throw everyone in piles together like this?
are you really that simple?



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by decepticonLaura
 


If they want people to not fear them and more importantly not fear an Iran with a bomb, then they need to stop the inflamatory rhetoric.

They have weekly prayer rallies where the religious clergy who rule the country extoll rally goers to chant "Death to America! Death to Israel!", over and over. You can substitute America for the enemy of the day. It has in the past been Britain and others. As the OP mentioned, they regularly call the USA the "great Satan" and Israel "little Satan". They call for wiping Israel off the map. Yeah, translate it how you want, but its obvious they want Israel gone, and i a nuke would be a great way to start and usher in their "12th Mahdi".

Why would anyone NOT fear these lunatics having a bomb?



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by nightbringr
 


It's one thing to want Israel gone and it another thing to want the Israel regime gone...that's is a big difference a very big difference. I could care less if Iran had a nuclear weapon as I don't see them going for it and if they do it is because U.S. and Israel pushed them into a corner. I think this whole thing to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions is to stop them from selling nuclear energy. At the least Iran's government is stable enough to handle a nuke...Pakistan is the nuke I'm concerned about.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by decepticonLaura

how can you possibly just throw everyone in piles together like this?
are you really that simple?


You said that Iranians are mad and I agree with you. They are anything but peaceful, they are mad. Im surprised you are bothered about me agreeing with you.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by txraised254
reply to post by nightbringr
 


It's one thing to want Israel gone and it another thing to want the Israel regime gone...that's is a big difference a very big difference.

Ok, please explain the difference? So, if the Israeli regime is gone.................where are the Israeli citizens? How do you propose they "get rid of" the current regime? Not sure i see your point. And dont kid yourself, they want all the jews out. They call them "little Satan", and these are religious fanatics. Do you really believe these people will allow what they believe to be satanic people to live if they can wipe them out?


Originally posted by txraised254
I could care less if Iran had a nuclear weapon as I don't see them going for it and if they do it is because U.S. and Israel pushed them into a corner.

I dont blame them for going for it either. North Korea is much safer from a US strike now that they have theirs. But im not sure you understand that the balance of power in the middle east will be badly damaged and Iran with only one of two bombs would not reserve a "second strike" capacity like Israel has with its subs. In times of hightened tensions (and it will always be tense with a nuclear Iran), Iran may be greatly pressured to use their nuclear deterence first before Israel can wipe them out. It will take Iran a couple decades before its deterence is just that and they can assure a second strike.

Originally posted by txraised254
I think this whole thing to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions is to stop them from selling nuclear energy. At the least Iran's government is stable enough to handle a nuke...Pakistan is the nuke I'm concerned about.

I think for the USA yes, its about them not selling energy. For Israel, i believe they view Iran as an existential threat, and rightfully so. If someone calls you evil, calls to have you removed from the middle east over and over and chant that your satan, yeah, you might want to take them seriously.

And yes, i fear Pakistants nukes as much if not more. Doesnt mean Iran isnt a worry.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by nightbringr
reply to post by decepticonLaura
 


If they want people to not fear them and more importantly not fear an Iran with a bomb, then they need to stop the inflamatory rhetoric.

They have weekly prayer rallies where the religious clergy who rule the country extoll rally goers to chant "Death to America! Death to Israel!", over and over. You can substitute America for the enemy of the day. It has in the past been Britain and others. As the OP mentioned, they regularly call the USA the "great Satan" and Israel "little Satan". They call for wiping Israel off the map. Yeah, translate it how you want, but its obvious they want Israel gone, and i a nuke would be a great way to start and usher in their "12th Mahdi".

Why would anyone NOT fear these lunatics having a bomb?


Dictatorships often promote xenophobia to make the population focus their anger away from their own government.

I don't understand all this talk about bombing Iran. Somebody is deliberately keeping this in the news - probably the government. It's depressing that freedom of the press has turned into propaganda from the government.

Really it's no different from the Iranian government organizing hate rallies except that it's more subtle here.
edit on 6-3-2012 by cloudyday because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join