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.

 

'Mossad, CIA agree Iran has yet to decide to build nuclear weapon'

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 10:06 PM
link   
And just think...if we had a CONservative President in office right now, we would have ALREADY LEVELED IRAN...

...and then asked questions later!!


We do not need dangerous politicians in office who RUSH into WARS folks!!
edit on 18-3-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by HangTheTraitors
And just think...if we had a CONservative President in office right now, we would have ALREADY LEVELED IRAN...

...and then asked questions later!!


We do not need dangerous politicians in office who RUSH into WARS folks!!
edit on 18-3-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)


Its equally dangerous to take a position of requiring the person pointing the gun at you to fire before you can take action.

I heard this anecdote on the radio a few years back.

A person decides to go downtown to see all the anti war protesters. While present he listens to one protester in particular who is advocating a non response position supported by the turn the other cheek mentality. The protester goes on for another 10 minutes and stops talking. He asks if there are any questions, and the guy visiting approaches to ask his.

Once he is close, he slugs the protester as hard as he can right in the face, sending him flying backwards and to the ground. The protester gets up, regains some composure and starts towards the guy who punched him. That guy then tells the protester he just punched the exact same line the protester made earlier, turning the other cheek, non response etc.

The protester backs down at which point the guy, again, punches the protester as hard as he can directly in the face, sending him once again to the ground. This circle continues for another 2 rounds before the protester gets it.

There will be times where peace and inaction are just not an option.



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 02:16 PM
link   
I've never been one to run off and hide in a hole, and that doesn't change now... I'm dropping back by here to simply say that I was feeling more than a touch of burn out for the last post I made on this thread where I got downright snippy.

Primarily, I chose a terminally....horribly...wrong set of words to use in describing what I was trying to convey. In using the term "Intelligence Reports", it would seem that triggered images of red top secret stamps and guys with handcuffs on briefcases or something. Frankly, the Intelligence Analysis Stratfor supplied to the paying clients is as much a part of that term as the leaks from a few sources and much of what members post here in commercial/professional documents created specifically to analyse an event with more than guess work.

Anyway.. Still.. My bad. The choice of words created an impression I wasn't intending. Frankly, the discourse and sheer fighting viciousness has reached a level in the political topics where I'm not sure I'll be involved much at all anymore. ATS has so much more.....and this isn't worth the headaches and time spent researching things just to have someone who spent 10 minutes pulling MSM reports to say it's all bunk and total fabrication because they said so.

Oh Well.. I'll hop off my soapbox now and enjoy the other fine offerings of the site here. There is, after all, SO much more than politics around here..and this area is just too much a mosh pit to really be around for awhile, anyway.



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 04:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
This is not new info and has been the position for some time.

The issue with Iran is their enrichment program. The West / UN / IAEA are concerned about Iran's ability to build a nuke and the time frame that could occur in.

Civilian nuclear power plants, depending on type, only require 2% - 7% +/- enrichment. The research reactors require 12% - 19% +/- enrichment.

Currently Iran is enriching at 20% +/-, which is the minimum baseline for Highly enriched uranium. Nuclear weapons are generally enriched to 85% however 20% enrichment is enough to sustain a nuclear explosion / dirty bomb.

Ahmadinejad has stated they are capable of enriching up to 80%. Thats why the entire issue has been about inspectors and verification that their program is peaceful. Irans stall tactics on those inspections is whats causing the added tension.

The US has never stated Iran has the bomb.
The US has never stated Iran is working on building a bomb.
The US has always acknowledged Irans right to a civilian nuclear program.


I forgot about this thread. And you're right, if Iran continues to increase their uranium then I would agree that Iran is up to no good, but as that they are at the 20% mark I'm not so quick to assume their are on their way to any program. They clearly could if they wanted too, why couldn't they? Besides, Allmahjahidhfa did Iran can go to 0% and has also said they are not working on a bomb. It's hard to say, in general, the US never stated this or that, because some US politicians sure have but more devastating is the MSM and their coverage of this bomb they do not have or are working on.



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 


From everything I have seen in the US MSM it has been consistent, which is to say the concern has always been about enrichment and not the program itself. Even UN resolutions acknowledge that, and the Us and West have stated Iran has a right to nuclear energy technology.

Taking what members of Congress have said as offical US Policy is just as bad as people on the other side ignoring the information about enrichment and ability and instead concentrating only on the word "nuclear bomb". Its more problematic when people don't take the time to research / understand the various levels of enrichment and whatt ype of power planet requires what level of enrichment. The willful ignorance by some is just as bad when added into the equation.

It has always been about enrichment levels and ability to produce a bomb. The intent behind the UN is verification, and that has always been their goal which is consistent with the treaty guidelines that Iran is a signatory of. It allows for inspections of sites that are connected to a nuclear program to ensure nothing is being diverted to a military weapons program.

Iran is interpreting the treaty differently by refusing to allow inspectors into sites as well as failing to notify the IAEA when they beging construction on facilities that are part of their civilian nuke program. They are supposed to submit information about the proposed site before construction. Iran has been notifying them well after, and ain a couple of instances have outright ignored the reporting until Western coutnries explosed the locations.

The argument people make about Iran wanting to protect its sites is based on a fallacy. They ignore the fact the West already knows where the sites are through intelligence. A perfect example is the last location Iran refused to disclose until the west exposed it, at which point Iran tried damage control to no effect.

It makes one wonder why Iran refuses to comply with verification programs. If the sites are being blown up it will reflect poorly on the UN and do nothing but solidify Irans position while making the West look like the agressors no?
edit on 1-4-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



Its equally dangerous to take a position of requiring the person pointing the gun at you to fire before you can take action.

so..
let me get this staright:
what you are saying X is: Iran should attact the US and Israel before they pull the trigger they are constantly threatening to pull ..
and justifying that PULL with pure horse pukey like every other war those two along with britian and NATO have started

did you catch the crap about curveball?
(intentional word use justified by death toll IMHO)

A man whose lies helped to make the case for invading Iraq – starting a nine-year war costing more than 100,000 lives and hundreds of billions of pounds – will come clean in his first British television interview tomorrow.

"Curveball", the Iraqi defector who fabricated claims about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, smiles as he confirms how he made the whole thing up. It was a confidence trick that changed the course of history, with Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi's lies used to justify the Iraq war.

He tries to defend his actions: "My main purpose was to topple the tyrant in Iraq because the longer this dictator remains in power, the more the Iraqi people will suffer from this regime's oppression."


Now there is a true NEOCON
Really I dunno how you can get any lower then that
and say, has that war paid for itself yet?



edit on 1-4-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-4-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   
then why is he lab underground ?


because they are building a bomb



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 05:04 PM
link   
114 nations support Irans nuke program.. I'd say Iran enjoys world wide support,the people in DC should get on board with world consensus.

Besides, the alphabet spook agencies will float inflated lies they are ordered to float... whatever it takes to start the nazi-esque aggressive wars the US elite want.

Remember.. aggressive un-provoked wars based on party leader lies are only crimes against humanity when 1930 Germany does it.. as master nation de jure, the GOP & DNC dear leaders enjoy moral authortah! to torture like nazis, launch was like nazis, patriot act / enabling act/ peoples courts / GETMO like nazis.. but are not nazi-like!!.. special patriotic cootie shots keep sheep baaa'ing in unison.


"Curveball", the Iraqi defector who fabricated claims about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, smiles as he confirms how he made the whole thing up. It was a confidence trick that changed the course of history, with Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi's lies used to justify the Iraq war


..and "His lies were presented as "facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence" "

www.independent.co.uk...



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


Actually you apparently failed to read my post because I am not sure at all where the hell you got your info from.

I stated, many times now, that US and Western intelligence have never stated Iran is building a bomb. They have been stating, since the begining, that the ability for Iran to make a bomb is the concern. That specifically deals with enrichment, which we have covered and yet some people still ignore it because it doesnt fit their argument.

Iran is enriching to 20%+ and Ahmadenijad says Iran has the ability to enrich up to 80%. Ive already posted this info time and again so I refer you back a few posts / page for the detailed info on enrichment and why its the main problem.

Source - 80% enrichment
Source - 80% enrichment

Wikipedia - Uranium Enrichment Levels and Purpose

Al Jazeera - Iran nuclear program timeline

So before you accuse me of something, how about you extend the courtesy of reading my posts and understanding them before accusing me of being something im not. Are you that incapable of offering up a rebuttal post without the typical name calling?

For people to continually claim US and Western Intelligence are stating Iran is not building a bomb and somehow trying to use that to support their argument is a joke. Its never been about production of a bomb.. Its been about enrichment and ability. Its been about verification to ensure material is not being diverted to a military program.

how about you and the others spend some time reading the UN resolutions against Iran and read the specifics.

Here is the latest from Bloomberg... Are the Russias now becoming pawns of the West?
Iran Breaks UN Resolutions on Nuclear Program, Russia Says

Iran is breaching United Nations resolutions and increasing the size of its nuclear program amid an “alarming” escalation in global rhetoric toward its atomic plans, Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said.

“The scale of the Iranian nuclear program is expanding,” Ryabkov said yesterday in an interview in New Delhi. This “is in direct violation of UN resolutions.”

The so-called BRICS group of major emerging nations that met yesterday in India said the situation in Iran can’t “be allowed to escalate into conflict,” according to a communique. Iran faces growing economic and financial sanctions over its nuclear program, which the U.S. and its allies say is a cover for making atomic weapons. Iran says it’s for civilian purposes.

Ryabkov’s comments “are eyebrow-raising to say the least,” according to ING Groep NV economist Simon Quijano- Evans, who notes that U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asked Russia this month to warn Iran it has one last chance to reach a negotiated settlement over its nuclear program, according to a March 14 report in Russia’s Kommersant newspaper.

“There is clearly more going on behind the scenes than meets our eye,” Quijano-Evans said today by e-mail from London.

A military confrontation over the nation’s nuclear plans would trigger a new global economic crisis, Ryabkov said, adding that he doesn’t rule out strikes against Iran by countries such as Israel.


Click link above for more of the article...

All people need to do is take the time to read the history of whts been going on with Irans nuclear program and its plain as day as to what the issue is - Enrichment. Its always been enrichment and the issue still is enrichment.

UNR 1696 - enrichment

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1696, adopted on July 31, 2006, after expressing concern at the intentions of the nuclear programme of Iran, the Council demanded that Iran halt its uranium enrichment programme.[1]


UNR 1929 - Enrichment

There was concern that Iran had not yet fully suspended uranium enrichment activities, resumed co-operation with the IAEA or clarified issues relating to a possible military dimension to its nuclear program.[3]


UNR 1737 - Enrichment

....imposed sanctions against Iran for failing to stop its uranium enrichment program following resolution 1696.


UNR 1747 - Enrichment

In June 2006, the five permanent Security Council members plus Germany offered a package of economic incentives including transfer of technology in the civilian nuclear field, in exchange for Iran to give up permanently its disputed uranium enrichment programme.[1]


UNR 1803 - Enrichment

The Security Council of the United Nations, acting pursuant to Article 41 of Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter, required Iran to cease and desist from any and all uranium enrichment. It also required Iran to stop any research and development associated with centrifuges and uranium enrichment.


UNR 1835 - Enrichment

The resolution was in response to the 15 September report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that stated that Iran had not suspended uranium-enrichment-related activities.[


Please point out where in the above UN Resolutions does it state Iran is building a bomb? It recognizes Irans right to peceful nuclear power. Each resolution deals specifically with Irans enrichment activity.

This is not a hard concept to understand at all. The West has stated Iran has a right to peaceful nuclear power. The concern is not that Iran is currently building a nuclear weapon, its Iran's ability to do so, and revolves directly around enrichment activities.

As I posted earlier read the posts detailing enrichment levels and the level required for energy and research, and then justify Irans need for 20% and higher. Or is the UN and all media outlets lying? The article people keep posting about intelligence services reporting Iran is not building a nuke is to re-affirm the ability of a peaceful, Diplomatic solution to the problem.

People are only reading and seeing ehat they want while ignoring the rest, and that is the problem we are facing in these threads. Inability for people to read and understand whats going on while making acccusations that aren't supported by anything at all.

So next time how about you do some research instead of accusing me of being something im not in an attempt to hide your ignorance on the subject matter.
edit on 1-4-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-4-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 




Its equally dangerous to take a position of requiring the person pointing the gun at you to fire before you can take action.

Im just reading that statement back in my usual dyslexic way

my comment re curve ball thats just the bottom line on the wests' morality and hence non right to justify the current and threatened actions Re Iran...
edit on 1-4-2012 by Danbones because: fixed quote box



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by Xcathdra
 




Its equally dangerous to take a position of requiring the person pointing the gun at you to fire before you can take action.

Im just reading that statement back in my usual dyslexic way

my comment re curve ball thats just the bottom line on the wests' morality and hence non right to justify the current and threatened actions Re Iran...
edit on 1-4-2012 by Danbones because: fixed quote box


Please Read

The morality you speck of has nothing at all to do with what we are discussing. It has everything to do with Iran choosing to ignore its treaty obligations.

It really is as simple as verification.....



posted on Apr, 2 2012 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Morality has a-lot to do with it when the arbiters of truth, so called, decide what a treaty violation is...

In real life, those arbiters are actually fat liars, known liars who always get caught telling lies.. because as we all, these people lie for a living... when not spinning some crisis for political purpose / nefarious power elite gangster gain..

Intelligence based on lies found saddam to be in violation of blah, blah, title blah dot of blah.. oh and started this thing called the Vietnam war.



posted on Apr, 2 2012 @ 07:12 PM
link   
We're being set up.What better way to start WW III.All they have to do is let a bomb get through while those who watch are covered or stand down.
Or they use a contractor.



posted on Apr, 2 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 


Why would a Muslim country want nuclear capability to build a bomb, bombs are for retarded nations that love to drop bombs on nations that have no bombs.

‘Hiroshima and Nagasaki’
I do not think we have to fear a nuke from the Muslims now or never, I think we have to be scared of the nation that has already dropped two atomic bombs already…1...and ,2.
Despicable.



posted on Apr, 3 2012 @ 02:09 AM
link   
reply to post by GovtFlu
 


In the case of Iran the UN / IAEA is the one stating Iran is violating its olbligations. Even Russia is now stating Iran is violating them by explanding its nuke program.

Iran Breaks UN Resolutions on Nuclear Program, Russia Says

While I got the point of your argument I think its a bit short sided when all the info is viewed. As I stated the US and West have consistently stated Iran has a right to peaceful nuclear energy. They have consistently stated Iran is NOT building a bomb. The concern has been and still is their enrichment program and verification that nothing is being diverted to other programs.

You now have Russia stating Irans actions are violating the agreements. Is their view valid or are they a puppet of the west now for changing their stance?



posted on Apr, 3 2012 @ 02:12 AM
link   
reply to post by LastProphet527
 


A yes.. the typical only country whoused a nuke bs argument. At the very least you could put it into perspective. Japan attacked the US, not the other way around. In addition to the US program, Germany and Japan both had nuclear weapons programs. Had either nation developed theirs first, the world would be different than it is now.

How about you spend and equal amount of time researching Japanese war crimes and the death count, then compare that number to the people who died in Hiroshima and Nagaski, then get back to us. Feel free to research unit 731 and get back to us.
edit on 3-4-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 06:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by GovtFlu
 


In the case of Iran the UN / IAEA is the one stating Iran is violating its olbligations. Even Russia is now stating Iran is violating them by explanding its nuke program.

Iran Breaks UN Resolutions on Nuclear Program, Russia Says

While I got the point of your argument I think its a bit short sided when all the info is viewed. As I stated the US and West have consistently stated Iran has a right to peaceful nuclear energy. They have consistently stated Iran is NOT building a bomb. The concern has been and still is their enrichment program and verification that nothing is being diverted to other programs.

You now have Russia stating Irans actions are violating the agreements. Is their view valid or are they a puppet of the west now for changing their stance?


Read your own source Xcat...You say Iran is "violating it's obligations" when instead they are ignoring the unfair UN resolutions in response to escalating rhetoric about its nuke program from other countries. Iran never agreed to these resolutions the Russians mentioned, and it you read your own source, the Russian comments are in favor or Iran's peaceful nuclear program.

It disgusts me when you defend the Mickey Mouse UN when it supports your argument but are quick to dismiss their claims if they vindicate Iran of any wrong doing. The sad thing is that in this instance you added a spin to the article and were probably hoping none of us would read past the title.

Shame on you Xcat. You should really be ashamed of yourself for what you stand for.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


It annoys me when you are incapable of reading the article and simply ignore the information that doesn't support your argument. You have this knack of trying to change the argument mid stream when you get called out. Being that happens to often with you one would figure you would be better at obfuscation but apparently not.

The issue with Iran has always been and still is their enrichment program and their ability (as in ability to make, or read in some peoples cases) to make a nuclear weapon. The West has consistently stated Iran has a right to peaceful nuclear power, including the United States. A point you and others seem to just ignore because, again, it doesn't support your argument.

As for your other baseless claim read the IAEA / NPT and Iran's obligations when the voluntarily signed the treaty.

The sanctions are fair as are the UN resolutions in place against Iran for violating its treaty obligations. Even Russia is stating Iran has violated their commitments.

Amazing how you completely ignore that point and instead try to spin a baseless "the world is being mean to iran" song and dance. When you decide to get around to actually refuting the evidence instead of the typical personal attacks and distraction techniques people like you use, come on back and join in.

Otherwise whine to yourself as we get enough of that from IRan..

Some more info for you to ignore and whine about -

Iran lawmaker: Country can produce nuclear weapons but will never do so


TEHRAN, Iran – A prominent Iranian lawmaker says Iran has the knowledge and scientific capability to produce nuclear weapons but will never do so.

Gholamreza Mesbahi Moghadam says Iran can easily produce the highly enriched uranium that is used to build atomic bombs but it is not Tehran's policy to go that route.


Read more: www.foxnews.com...
[edi tby]edit on 10-4-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-4-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   
I really don't think Obama wants to go into Iran. I think everything that is going on is a complicated process to try and keep Israel from attacking Iran and also keep the American Jewish vote placated. A war with Iran is not in America's interests right now, not militarily nor economically. We're just finally extracting ourselves from Iraq and probably soon from Afghanistan. That's the direction we need to go, and i think the Obama Administration agrees.



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join