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 may Already Have Atom Bomb-Bearing Missile

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2004 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Iran may have atom bomb-bearing missile

Washington, DC, Nov. 19 (UPI) -- U.S. intelligence officials are evaluating worrisome new information about an Iranian missile purportedly capable of carrying an atomic bomb.

The intelligence came from a "walk-in" source earlier this month and includes more than 1,000 pages purported to be Iranian drawings and technical documents, including a nuclear warhead design and modifications to enable Iranian ballistic missiles to deliver a nuclear bomb, the Washington Post reported Friday.



I do not know about the walkin source but the drawings could spell more trouble in the days to come. Maybe Powell had it right all along? This could get serious very quick. Personally they should have kept this information under wraps for now.......damn.





Iran Missle Drawings




posted on Nov, 20 2004 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Amerika may have atom bomb-bearing missile



Hurry!! Invade Iran now, since we're doing so well with Iraq. I'm sure every other country on the planet will jump for joy when we screw up - oops! I mean liberate - the next country on the hit list.

Hello people! Seems like as of right now, the US is pretty much the only nuclear capable military going around starting wars. Starting another one might not be the most neighborly thing to do.

--Saerlaith



posted on Nov, 20 2004 @ 10:35 PM
link   
SO you would like to see Hamas with a Nuke huh? Iran has not attacked a country openly I agree, but the history of the government is not one of peace by any means.

We dont need to invade.........



posted on Nov, 20 2004 @ 10:36 PM
link   
If China invaded both Mexico and Canada, don't you think the US would grab some nukes, if they didn't already have them? It's the smart thing to do. All the cool kids have nukes these days, anyway.



posted on Nov, 20 2004 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by taibunsuu
If China invaded both Mexico and Canada, don't you think the US would grab some nukes, if they didn't already have them? It's the smart thing to do. All the cool kids have nukes these days, anyway.


Oh by all means I know why the Iranians want them, of that there is no argument at all. It is just will we tolerate them actually having one?


Sep

posted on Nov, 20 2004 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
SO you would like to see Hamas with a Nuke huh? Iran has not attacked a country openly I agree, but the history of the government is not one of peace by any means.

We dont need to invade.........


Iran does not give just anything to Hezbolla or other groups. For example they have been producing chemical and biological weapons for 20 years at least and we dont see terrorists running around with WMD. That is because Iranian government has its restrictions when it comes to supporting terrorists or freedom fighters or political groups or whatever you want to call them.


Sep

posted on Nov, 20 2004 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
SO you would like to see Hamas with a Nuke huh? Iran has not attacked a country openly I agree, but the history of the government is not one of peace by any means.

We dont need to invade.........


Iran does not give just anything to Hezbolla or other groups. For example they have been producing chemical and biological weapons for 20 years at least and we dont see terrorists running around with WMD. That is because Iranian government has its restrictions when it comes to supporting terrorists or freedom fighters or political groups or whatever you want to call them.



posted on Nov, 21 2004 @ 01:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger

Originally posted by taibunsuu
If China invaded both Mexico and Canada, don't you think the US would grab some nukes, if they didn't already have them? It's the smart thing to do. All the cool kids have nukes these days, anyway.


Oh by all means I know why the Iranians want them, of that there is no argument at all. It is just will we tolerate them actually having one?


What are we going to do about it? I've asked this before in numerous threads, and no one can come up with an answer. My opinion is that in the nuclear gambit Iran has played their cards very well, and will succeed in gaining operable nukes with at least continental delivery on missiles, all made in-house.

They took the Roosevelt motto: "Walk quietly and carry a big stick," by being neutral in Gulf Wars 1 and 2. With nukes they will be a much bigger political force in the Gulf. They are basically grabbing themselves by the boot straps and pulling up into the big boy world of nuclear nations. The US isn't going to do anything overt, and my opinion is that diplomacy will be made, Iran taken off the list of nations that support terrorism, in about 10 years if they get a nuke this year.



posted on Nov, 21 2004 @ 01:12 AM
link   
taibunsuu, i agree with ya. An Nuclear armed Iran will not be invaded by the US. However if Iran didn't have the capability, then Iran could'v been next.



posted on Nov, 21 2004 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by taibunsuu
What are we going to do about it? I've asked this before in numerous threads, and no one can come up with an answer. My opinion is that in the nuclear gambit Iran has played their cards very well, and will succeed in gaining operable nukes with at least continental delivery on missiles, all made in-house.

They took the Roosevelt motto: "Walk quietly and carry a big stick," by being neutral in Gulf Wars 1 and 2. With nukes they will be a much bigger political force in the Gulf. They are basically grabbing themselves by the boot straps and pulling up into the big boy world of nuclear nations. The US isn't going to do anything overt, and my opinion is that diplomacy will be made, Iran taken off the list of nations that support terrorism, in about 10 years if they get a nuke this year.


To answere your question about what WE (IMHO - the western world) should do:

Support an uprising. Iran is a nation that is very young and relatively (compared to their leadership) liberal. The young people there do want some change. I say, give them the support they need to achieve this.

This way, it is their own young generation getting what they want, the western world gets what they want (a democratic stable government) and we are all better off for it.

It would be more like Afghanastan then Iraq this way. Few western soldiers involved, and those that are there are just to train them and provide air support. That way, it is the people of that nation taking control.

What are everyones thoughts on this solution? Please - don't just bash it - if you dissagree state why, and state a better solution that ALL sides (the Iranian people, the US, and the rest of the world) would agree on.



posted on Nov, 21 2004 @ 02:11 AM
link   
I agree that internal dissent in Iran is a hidden timebomb for the Theocracy now running Iran.

The younger generation is unhappy as related in this report,
Deseret News


"Iran had a big birth boom between 1980 and 1985. They put Khatami in power when they were 16 to 21 because they wanted freedom," added Amir Mohebian, a conservative political analyst. "But now they're in their 20s and they want to marry and get a house and job, so the discourse has changed to how to cope with their economic situation."
Because of that baby boom initially urged by the clerics, who later reversed policy Iran now needs to create up to 800,000 jobs a year, analysts say.
As a result, political opposition among Iran's youth over the next decade could grow significantly, Mohebian said, because neither reformers nor conservatives have effective economic programs to spur job creation. "This reality," he predicted, "will change many things."


Then their is Michael Ledeen who says 20,000,000 Million for Coup in Iran


The private money, Ledeen explained, would jump-start a campaign of civil disobedience by providing financial support for the families of Iranian opposition and dissident leaders, enabling them to step up their campaign of resistance against the Iranian regime. Once the U.S. government saw the mass demonstrations, Ledeen said, it could then be persuaded to seriously back a regime change initiative


I personally know several Iranian expatriots that literally speak with hatred and vehemence towards the theocracy in Iran. As far as they have explained to me they were not part of the Pahlevi apparatus although one aquaintence was an airforce pilot who flew F-4 Phantoms for the Iranian airforce after the revolution. There main rub is how religious fanaticism was shoved upon their families and themselves while the economy went down the drain.

My big question about regime change in Iran is will it positively ensure that nuclear weapons will be given up and all the programs stopped - or will we just buy some time.



posted on Nov, 21 2004 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man

To answere your question about what WE (IMHO - the western world) should do:

Support an uprising. Iran is a nation that is very young and relatively (compared to their leadership) liberal. The young people there do want some change. I say, give them the support they need to achieve this.



This seems like the logical choice. The only problem is that it relies entirely on popular sentiment. In 1979 the country underwent a popular uprising against the Western-backed Shah. The people that went through with that and their children at the time are still what you'd call the status quo, and many members of the leadership were revolutionaries themselves. The engageable members of Iranian society who could actuate a revolution, property owners, leaders of industry and government and social institutions, don't seem interested, so a popular internal revolution at this point seems unlikely from all indicators. An aborted attempt could have backlash against the West in the popular mindset. This area seems to be a checkmate, and like I said I think the Iranians have been playing their cards well.



posted on Nov, 21 2004 @ 07:09 PM
link   
Iran hasn't given chemical weapons to Hezbollah yet (or ordered them to be used) because they don't have nukes themselves yet, and Israel does, and Israel would nuke them if they got gassed by Hezbollah. (Jews have this, well, complex with being gassed).

The plan, I believe, is for Iran to simultaneously give nukes + germs to Hebollah while it retains its own capable nuclear missiles as deterrent. As soon as it gets its own nuclear missiles, it will greatly increase the terror and killing from Hezbollah.



posted on Nov, 21 2004 @ 07:23 PM
link   
So, assuming it's just the U.S. and Britain, how would two nations invade Iran? We'd use our border with Iraq and Iran, plus the border with Afghanistan. How many forces? How long an air campaign?



posted on Nov, 21 2004 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Wow thats such a big freggin deal. I think I have 3 suitcases in my basement that are probably big enough to have me a suitcase nuke. I think I have enough trunk space in my car as well. Its like having 4 tires and being excited that you almost have a car. The tires are kind of the easy part. Without the rest they are just tires. Can't have a nuclear missle without the nuke.



posted on Nov, 21 2004 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Isn't Israel a concern here? They have clearly stated that they will not tolerate an Iran armed with nukes, and Iran says that it will retaliate if Israel lauches pre-emptive attacks on any Iranian facilities. The thought of an Israeli-Iran war is not a good one. Talk about throwing a match into a fireworks factory...



posted on Nov, 21 2004 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Isn't Israel a concern here? They have clearly stated that they will not tolerate an Iran armed with nukes


Why they should be concern when they have willing americans to die for them taking out the Iranian governement.

They don't have anything to worry about.



posted on Nov, 21 2004 @ 11:25 PM
link   
I just cannot wait for the very specific Americans to shout out their anti-Iran sentiments and bigotry and brag about how the war will be a cake-walk.

After Iraq, America can do anything!!!



posted on Nov, 22 2004 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
So, assuming it's just the U.S. and Britain, how would two nations invade Iran? We'd use our border with Iraq and Iran, plus the border with Afghanistan. How many forces? How long an air campaign?


Actually your assumption is wrong. This time US is alone. British already mentioned few times that they wont get involve in the possible war with Iran.

[edit on 22-11-2004 by persian]



posted on Nov, 22 2004 @ 12:07 AM
link   
YAHOO!!! Saddle up cowboys! Time for another holy war rodeo for Jesus and all God loving Americans! "We'll get those Weapons of Mass Destruction from Saddam...er, who's it this time? Yeah, the guy in Iran?"

Here we go again. At least if they do have one, its probably only on a SCUD or something and will just fall down on its own launch pad.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join