Iran nears completion of nuclear warhead, page 6


Pages: <<  3    4    5    6    7    8  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 17 times


reply posted on 20-10-2012 @ 04:50 PM by Hijinx
reply to post by bcccl



Exactly, more war machine propaganda. It's all about money, Iran poses a threat to the western cash grab, and they won't have it. I expect we are going to see more of this "Iran is *insert blank* (days, weeks, months) away from developing nuclear weapons."

The way I see it, with all the technology the world has in the sky, and orbiting earth the second a succesful nuclear test is detected, all the us forces near by, the Israelis locked, primed and waiting, not to mention the Nato nations in the area could launch a rather fast strike at that time rendering said technology moot.

You see, just because you build one bomb that works, doesn't mean it's that good, nor that it can be applied in a manner that is a threat to anyone. That's the thing with prototypes, there is usually only one or two as it's extremely wasteful to build 100 potential nukes and have the design not work what so ever.

Of the suspected facilities, which one is the facility harboring scientist, materials and technology to even build said bomb? I'm sure with all the cyber warring and espionage going on they have some idea of the facilities to question, and given the chance Iran did acquire a bomb, under the current surveillance regime Israel would be pretty quick to carpet bomb the crap out of Iran.

I just don't see any damning evidence to suggest they have or are working towards acquiring said bomb.

Nuclear fuel, and weapons material are not exactly the same thing here, and everyone seems to be very quick to assume uranium = bomb. It just isn't the case.


reply posted on 20-10-2012 @ 05:19 PM by Hijinx
reply to post by ~widowmaker~



Exactly! This blog is complete BS. It's kind of like that garbage movie inception. Implant an idea(the break through evidence blog), get a few important people to repeat the garbage and bam, the world thinks it's true let's go to war.


reply posted on 20-10-2012 @ 05:35 PM by Hijinx
reply to post by Phenomium



Annnnnnnnnnnd you get the golden cookie.

Hit the nail right on the head my friend.


reply posted on 20-10-2012 @ 06:49 PM by r2d246
reply to post by Hijinx



We have icbm's too. They're just not widely talked about. We'd newk him back the stone age.


reply posted on 20-10-2012 @ 08:54 PM by Phenomium
Originally posted by r2d246
reply to
post by Hijinx



We have icbm's too. They're just not widely talked about. We'd newk him back the stone age.


That is what they would expect. They want world cataclysm. They want the destruction of America and Israel. They will watch from some spot in the world that they have chosen to be safe from the Middle Eastern Crisis that they have created. When I say "they" I mean the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds and those other bloodline families who slept with their cousins or sisters...you sick F*kcs! I know what you're doing you pansies...hiding in the darkness all the time like cowards or rats! You'll still lose, you arrogant old bast@rds!

"I am Phenomium.......and I approve of this message."
edit on 20-10-2012 by Phenomium because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 20-10-2012 @ 09:00 PM by Wrabbit2000
Originally posted by Dr Expired
The question should be why is India allowed to have large amounts of Nuclear warheads with a large muslim population ie 200 million approx and approx 50 million Iranian muslims are such a threat when they currently have none?
Australia has announced it will sell India as much uranium as it wants hypocrisy?
Or is it simply that Israel is thousands of miles away from India?


India isn't 'allowed' to keep anything..any more than Pakistan. They didn't ask or bother to let anyone know they were going gangbusters on a nuke program. Now, you couldn't possibly disarm one without disarming both. Let's say India as the one I personally think of as much more realistic to work with, WOULD agree (which is laughable, IMO)..Pakistan never would. They barely even cooperated on The Q Kahn guy helping other nations with their nuke programs like a personal crusade or something. They'd never just disarm what cost them untold billions to accomplish and is a matter of serious national pride and status now, I believe.

More importantly though, I went looking for solid answers on this because I was curious myself and India, Pakistan and Israel are 3 that aren't members of the NPT and so, aren't bound by it.

What shocked me was...they can't JOIN either. Even if they wanted to. Apparently, the text of the treaty prohibits any Nuclear Weapon State Members from joining if weapons were developed after Jan, 1967.

The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), which entered into force in March 1970, seeks to inhibit the spread of nuclear weapons. Its 190 states-parties are classified in two categories: nuclear-weapon states (NWS)—consisting of the United States, Russia, China, France, and the United Kingdom—and non-nuclear-weapon states (NNWS).1 Under the treaty, the five NWS commit to pursue general and complete disarmament, while the NNWS agree to forgo developing or acquiring nuclear weapons.

With its near-universal membership, the NPT has the widest adherence of any arms control agreement, with only India, Israel, and Pakistan remaining outside the treaty. In order to accede to the treaty, these states must do so as NNWS, since the treaty restricts NWS status to nations that "manufactured and exploded a nuclear weapon or other nuclear explosive device prior to 1 January 1967." For India, Israel, and Pakistan, all known to possess or suspected of having nuclear weapons, joining the treaty as NNWS would require that they dismantle their nuclear weapons and place their nuclear materials under international safeguards. South Africa followed this path to accession in 1991.
Source

That's a very interesting little Catch-22 going on there I'd never heard about or knew existed.


reply posted on 20-10-2012 @ 11:25 PM by Swills
Originally posted by Bone75
Originally posted by Swills
reply to
post by USN1983



WND, not much of a source. They have been judged time and time again. A real source, like American & Israeli intel agencies say Iran has no nuke, isn't building a nuke, & doesn't have plans to build a nuke.


You mean the same intelligence agencies that told us our Ambassador in Lybia died in a riot over a video? Folks will believe anything these days


I think you are beliveing what Washington DC politicians were reporting in the first days of the attack. The intelligence community was aware it not a protest gone wrong, in fact there was a US drone over head the Benghazi consulate during the last hour of the attack and there were also security camera's throughout the compound and the CIA Libyan station chief even reported this was a militant attack within 24 hours of the attack.

So whatcha talking Willis?

edit on 20-10-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 20-10-2012 @ 11:39 PM by Propulsion
reply to post by superman2012



So oil will never run out?
Of course the oil will eventually run out, but not any time soon for Iran.


Why does the US have nuclear power plants? Aren't they #3?
America is (on the most part) a stable country, and still every so often something happens that creates havoc because of our nuclear facilities. Iran on the other hand isn’t the most stable country running around out there. You are right, it is #3

It’s kind of scary when you have a man (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) who want’s soooo much to enrich uranium, and at the same time comes out and tells the world that Israel needs to be wiped from the map.

And the whole “death to Israel” comments…

And if I remember correctly, this is the same man who believes the holocaust never happened?

Maybe it’s just me, but Ahmadinejad seem like a guy who’s not all there. I wouldn't trust him with anything that produced radiation. Not even a microwave oven! Of course, that's just my opinion.

edit on 20-10-2012 by Propulsion because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 21-10-2012 @ 06:22 AM by icepack
reply to post by bcccl


i experienced, what i experienced. i can't change it.
Pages: <<  3    4    5    6    7    8  >>    ^^TOP^^



Ahmadinejad speaking at the UN - Is he going to declare war?
  Posted 1 days ago with 21 member flags
Turkey says it is prepared for possibility of war with Israel
  Posted 10 days ago with 15 member flags
IDF general: Likelihood of regional war growing
  Posted 18 days ago with 14 member flags
Full-scale Middle East war is \'imminent\', warns Israeli general
  Posted 17 days ago with 10 member flags
Netanyahu: Palestinian Statehood Bid \'Doomed\'
  Posted 4 days ago with 9 member flags
US Boots on the Ground in Libya, Pentagon Confirms
  Posted 11 days ago with 8 member flags