Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Twistedwhisper
Topic Author
Posts: 689
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 11:52 pm

Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:06 am

The US is planing a "nucular" attack on Iran, Seymour Hersh says.

George W Bush and several others in the white house consider Irani president Mahmud Ahmadinejad to be the new Adolf Hitler.
They also think that the only way to "fix the Iran issue" is through war, and plans are well under way.
A nuclear strike against the criticized Natanz plant would be a part of such an attack Hersh says, claiming to have sources high up within the Pentagon.

The full story in the next issue of The New Yorker.



IMO, the only country that should not be allowed to have nukes is the US. At least until November 5:th 2008... then we'll take it from there.  duck 
 
agill
Posts: 1102
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 4:49 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:09 am

TWISTEDWHISPER: Well I'm more concerned with Iran having nukes than USA to be honnest.
 
User avatar
alberchico
Posts: 3370
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:52 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:10 am

There will be no freaking nuclear strike.

At the most there will be only a Israeli style precision bombing attack on the plants where nuclear material is made. But even then there is an inherent risk of nuclear air drifting over to Israel.

Quoting TWISTEDWHISPER (Thread starter):
George W Bush and several others in the white house consider Irani president Mahmud Ahmadinejad to be the new Adolf Hitler.

Oh give me a freaking break !!! Places like North Korea and Saudia Arabia are 100 times worse than Iran.......
 
Boeing Nut
Posts: 5078
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:42 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:12 am

The only way you'll see a nuke attack on Iran is if they use it on the US first. Period, end of story.

I'm am no Bush fan, but this article seems to me to be more of an editorial than a story.
 
User avatar
OzarkD9S
Posts: 6010
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 2:31 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:14 am

Quoting TWISTEDWHISPER (Thread starter):


George W Bush and several others in the white house consider Irani president Mahmud Ahmadinejad to be the new Adolf Hitler.

And many more consider Bush to be the American Hitler. All the facism without the funny moustache.

[Edited 2006-04-08 18:15:30]
 
User avatar
alberchico
Posts: 3370
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:52 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:15 am

Quoting Boeing nut (Reply 4):
The only way you'll see a nuke attack on Iran is if they use it on the US first. Period, end of story.

If they fire on a site that makes nuclear material and release a lot of nuclear waste in the air that drifts and kill hundreds of people, does thast count as a nuclear attack ???
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:17 am

Quoting TWISTEDWHISPER (Thread starter):

IMO, the only country that should not be allowed to have nukes is the US. At least until November 5:th 2008... then we'll take it from there.

What an absurd article. The prospect of a nuclear "first strike" against Iran is NO WHERE near being in the plans. I don't think you realize how concerned the US is with Iran. 150,000 American troops are a few hundred miles to the west, and 10,000+ are to the east. Iran doesn't have to strike American home soil to kill thousands of Americans, all they have to do is gaze their eyes to their boarders.


And if you did a little research before opening your mouth and making such an ignorant comment - you would have known that Nov 5th means nothing when it comes to nuclear launches. The hand over of power isn't until noon on 20th day of January.

-UH60
 
DrDeke
Posts: 807
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 7:13 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:18 am

Quoting Boeing nut (Reply 4):
The only way you'll see a nuke attack on Iran is if they use it on the US first. Period, end of story.

Hopefully.

There was a time, not so long ago, when most people would have said the only way you'll see the United States take over a foreign country is if they attacked the US first...

-DrDeke
 
satx
Posts: 2781
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 7:26 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:21 am

Quoting Boeing nut (Reply 4):
The only way you'll see a nuke attack on Iran is if they use it on the US first. Period, end of story.

Isn't that why Bush wanted a new 'mini-nuke' program so we could actually nuke somebody without so much backtalk from all those damn liberal countries that value human lives and the environment?

Quoting Alberchico (Reply 6):

If they fire on a site that makes nuclear material and release a lot of nuclear waste in the air that drifts and kill hundreds of people, does thast count as a nuclear attack ???

Not to an American it's not.
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:21 am

Quoting Boeing nut (Reply 4):
The only way you'll see a nuke attack on Iran is if they use it on the US first.

 checkmark 

Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 5):
And many more consider Bush to be the American Hitler. All the facism without the funny moustache.

So what are you doing on an american internet connection voicing your disagreement? Prepare to have the Secret Service at your door to send you to a concentration camp.

Oops, the US does not have any.

Nor does it have any kind of policy of forcing dissent into submission. Just look and the newspapers and talk to your friends, and that should prove it.

Now, in places like Iran, Venezuela and Cuba, such policies are in place. Face it, you couldn't recognize fascism if it bit you on the nose.

Quoting SATX (Reply 9):
Isn't that why Bush wanted a new 'mini-nuke' program so we could actually nuke somebody without so much backtalk from all those damn liberal countries that value human lives and the environment?

A nuke is a nuke is a nuke, no matter what the size. That has been American policy since the 1950's. That's why the US created the daisy cutter - pretty much the same explosive power of a mini-nuke, but without the political ramifications.
 
Derico
Posts: 4505
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 1999 9:14 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 10):
So what are you doing on an american internet connection voicing your disagreement? Prepare to have the Secret Service at your door to send you to a concentration camp.

Hmmm... This kind of statement is why Europeans and Asians are pushing ahead with their own internet and GPS.

I mean, this kind of thinking.
 
AsstChiefMark
Posts: 10465
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 2:14 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:29 am

It's like a group of kids standing in front of a pile of snowballs. The teacher has stated that no one is allowed to throw any. But there's always one undisciplined kid that will throw the first one. Guess what. Within seconds, everyone is throwing snowballs. Nukes will be no different.

The minute someone nukes someone else for any reason, it's WWIII.

Mark
 
b757300
Posts: 3914
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:27 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:30 am

The U.S. war games stuff like this all the time and those war games include the use of nuclear weapons.

This is just another non-story that is being trotted out to bash Bush.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:37 am

Quoting Derico (Reply 11):
I mean, this kind of thinking.

No, the point he is making is that you won't see that.

The US is often rightly criticised for its actions, but I do think that when people accuse them of being the world's worst they should think, really think, what the world would have been like it been another country that had been a superpower these last sixty years. China? The Soviet Union on its own?

No, thanks. I'll criticise the US often and freely, but I'll also thank God it was them and not someone else.
 
satx
Posts: 2781
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 7:26 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:39 am

Quoting B757300 (Reply 13):
This is just another non-story that is being trotted out to bash Bush.

Just another GOP apologist trotting out another non-answer to protect Bush?
 
wrighbrothers
Posts: 1807
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:15 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 3:19 am

This is a nuclear war that your thinking of, this isn't something which you can do lightly, it's not a conventional bomb, you saw what happened to Japan and they are still dealing with the affects, also bear in mind that today's nuclear weapons are much stronger. But no mater how big or small the bomb itself is, the affects are the same, if you drop conventional bombs, they explode, and kill people, nuclear bombs explode, and release radiation into the sky, then comes down black rain etc. A nuclear bomb is a whole different story to a normal bomb that's dropped out of an F-16 or B-52.

Of course, the threat of nuclear war is real enough, N.Korea have them, they could lash out at anytime, why are we only looking at Iran ?, N.Korea has had them for decades.

So to recap:
It's very unlikely to happen- a pack of B-52's loaded with bombs is much more likely, IF it happens.
2- If nuclear weapons are dropped, we will all face the consequences, Nuclear war is no game.

Wrighbrothers
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 3:24 am

Quoting Banco (Reply 14):
No, thanks. I'll criticise the US often and freely, but I'll also thank God it was them and not someone else.

Banco, great thinking quote. You definetely have the right to criticize the US, but everything has to be placed in perpective. If Bush was like Hitler, Israel wouldnt exits by now, for one.
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 3:49 am

Quoting Banco (Reply 14):
The US is often rightly criticised for its actions, but I do think that when people accuse them of being the world's worst they should think, really think, what the world would have been like it been another country that had been a superpower these last sixty years. China? The Soviet Union on its own?

No, thanks. I'll criticise the US often and freely, but I'll also thank God it was them and not someone else.

Thank you God, for putting someone here who can put things into perspective.

Imagine if Stalin had the Bomb at the end of WWII. I don't think he would have stopped at Berlin.

Imagine if the peaceniks of the 1980s had gotten their wish and the US had unilaterally eliminated their nuclear stockpile.

And what if the US military had not been downsized by a third under Clinton - it might have been easier to send more troops to Iraq.
 
Derico
Posts: 4505
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 1999 9:14 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 5:32 am

Quoting Banco (Reply 14):
No, the point he is making is that you won't see that.

I don't know either way (if there is censorship or not), but myself, I guess because I have an over-active conscience, would be aware of this fact and it would make me unconfortable to say certain things if they are critical, based on the facts about who 'owns' the infraestructure.

I will be glad if other countries developed alternate internet systems for that reason, for the most part.
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 7:51 am

Quoting Boeing nut (Reply 4):
The only way you'll see a nuke attack on Iran is if they use it on the US first. Period, end of story.

I'm am no Bush fan, but this article seems to me to be more of an editorial than a story

Seymour Hersh used to be a responsible journalist. He's now just an irresponsible rabble rouser.
 
User avatar
gunsontheroof
Posts: 3738
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:30 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 7:52 am

Quoting Agill (Reply 2):
Well I'm more concerned with Iran having nukes than USA to be honnest.

Which is pretty ridiculous considering that Iran is only pursuing them out of fear of the United States and its overwhelming military power. Bush has already demonstrated that he won't hesitate to use preemptive force, and Iran's pursuit of nuclear arms is largely an effort to deter the United States from invading them as well. I'm not saying that the Iranian regime's actions are justified, but it's not like the United States hasn't given them every reason to be concerned about an invasion similar to what we've seen in Iraq. I'm very concerned about the prospect of Iran developing nuclear weapons, but as long as the United States continues to harbor and develop them, we have no business telling other nations that they can't.
 
bushpilot
Posts: 1674
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:37 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 7:55 am

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?050124fa_fact
This is a link to the article in question.

Quoting DrDeke (Reply 8):
There was a time, not so long ago, when most people would have said the only way you'll see the United States take over a foreign country is if they attacked the US first...

Well put you can thank the Bush doctrine for that.
That being said, Iran is quite a ways from having nukes, but I dont want them to have them. An airstrike package possibly a special forces raid on Iranian nuke facilities I could see happening. But an American nuclear strike is out of the question, a non starter.

Quoting TWISTEDWHISPER (Thread starter):
IMO, the only country that should not be allowed to have nukes is the US

This is utter BS.
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:26 am

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 10):
So what are you doing on an american internet connection voicing your disagreement?

Are you telling him to get off a joint British & European www? ARPA didnt create as much of the internet as people seem to think.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 30175
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:13 pm

I doubt if Nuclear weapons would be used.
Lets hear what the Iranians have to say.
regds
MEL
 
PIA777
Posts: 1841
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 9:39 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:32 pm

Quoting TWISTEDWHISPER (Thread starter):
The US is planing a "nucular" attack on Iran, Seymour Hersh says.

Typical. I would not be surprised. Nuke someone because that are thinking
about making nuclear weapons. Yes, thats about right. I wonder why the
mideast hates America so much. I just can't think of it. What can it be???????

PIA777
 
PIA777
Posts: 1841
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 9:39 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:34 pm

Quoting Agill (Reply 2):
TWISTEDWHISPER: Well I'm more concerned with Iran having nukes than USA to be honnest.

Its the other way around for me. A guy with a C average in School has access
to the nuclear Bomb. DAAAAA what does this button do?

PIA777
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:54 pm

The thread title ought to be "The Twisted Perspective from Twisted Whisper". At least it'd be a hell of a lot more accurate. . . .

Did anyone notice this article was written in Jan 2005????

What the Pentagon can now do in secret.
by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
Issue of 2005-01-24 and 31
Posted 2005-01-17


George W. Bush’s reëlection



Any reason, TwistedWhisper, you wanna bring up an article that is 15 months old, without making mention thereof???? Hmmmm, I can think of a few . . .

Anyone bother to READ the article before posting here? Small details - like the fact that it's 15 months old - should be cause for deletion immediately.

C'Mon, if you're going to Slag on the US and Bush at least do it in real time . . . .


There's no secret I despise Dumsfeld, and I'm concerned about the situation in Iran, but damn . . . . straw grasping like this is assinine.
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 4:04 pm

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 23):
Are you telling him to get off a joint British & European www? ARPA didnt create as much of the internet as people seem to think.

No, of course not. He's an american, and he is not afraid to slag the american government on its own turf. Try that in China or Iran, and I understand that Hugo Chavez is talking to China about importing their censorship technology.

What I am saying is that calls of the US being a fascist state are 99.9% exagguration. They have no idea what fascism is like.
 
agill
Posts: 1102
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 4:49 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 1:41 am

Gunsontheroof: Well The whole wiping Israel off them map thing makes it a bad idea that Iran gets nukes. Nomatter what he meants by it, thats not a way for a statesman to talk if he wants his country to be respected.

Quoting PIA777 (Reply 26):

Its the other way around for me. A guy with a C average in School has access
to the nuclear Bomb. DAAAAA what does this button do?

Yes compared to wanting to wipe other countries off the map a C grade is much worse, you are absolutely right.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 15863
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 10:11 am

I do take the Hersh story seriously, as look at what Bush and Chenny have done in Iraq and their lack of wanting to deal with Iran in an realistic way. Now part of this could be a leak by them to scare Iran into making a deal, but it may backfire.
One scenerio in possible planning by Pentagon leaders - and many in the Pentagon object to any such plan - is to use 'tactical' nuclear weapons as it is believed to be the only way to destroy the hardened and deeply buried nuclear processing facilities in Iran.
Any bombing in Iran, even using conventional weapons, would be the start of WWIII, the leveling of Israel, oil to $200/bbl., devesting terrorism, the murder of most of our troops in Iraq and a worldwide economic depression. All good thinking people should tell their members of Congress and Senate to say no to ANY bombing of Iran, unless they bomb first.
 
PIA777
Posts: 1841
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 9:39 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 4:12 pm

Quoting Agill (Reply 29):
Yes compared to wanting to wipe other countries off the map a C grade is much worse, you are absolutely right.

You know, its real simple to sit up there in Sweden and say what you want when you are not a target. Us Americans will get hit again and nothing Dubya
can do about it. They knew something was up in 2001 and could not stop
them.

PIA777
 
windshear
Posts: 2268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 4:45 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 4:38 pm

Quoting PIA777 (Reply 31):

So what you are saying is, that the US should let Iran get nukes, out of fear?
Isn't that just the logic that was posted further up, but going the other way?

Listen this country signed a legel agreement, stating that they would not persue any nuclear path.
Now they are threatening Israel, and they've even threatened their Gulf neighbors, if they try to stand in their way.
Now there are even rumours about Saudi Arabia starting a program of its own, this is an excelation we really do not need!

We've all seen before here in Europe, we were front lines back then in the cold war, two sides were competing for a terrible prize, this is not something the rest of the world want to happen in the Middle East!

Quoting Banco (Reply 14):

No, thanks. I'll criticise the US often and freely, but I'll also thank God it was them and not someone else.

 bigthumbsup 

Boaz.
 
PIA777
Posts: 1841
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 9:39 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 4:42 pm

Quoting Windshear (Reply 32):
So what you are saying is, that the US should let Iran get nukes, out of fear?

What I am saying is that US has no right to do anything. They have
Nukes themselves and still to date, the only ones to use them and you have
have no proof that Iran is making weapons.

PIA777
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:45 pm

Quoting PIA777 (Reply 33):
What I am saying is that US has no right to do anything.

We have the right to defend ourselves against a nation that has declared the US as the Great Satan, the root of all evil etc etc., and who have proven in the past to be irrational in their hatred, and have proven to have no qualms at all about supporting logistically and financially terrorist groups whose main strategy is to kill civilians in as large numbers as possible for the past 25 years.

Quoting PIA777 (Reply 33):
They have
Nukes themselves and still to date, the only ones to use them

Yep, to end a war that someone else started. And for 60 years after that, the US restrained itself, not using nukes even if the opponent could not effectively fight back. It is practically impossible for a secular democracies to launch a nuclear first strike, for political reasons. But when a nation is led by unelected religious hardliners with visions of sainthood or martyrdom, and guided by a religion that has plenty of literature pushing for the extermination of non-believers, there are no such restrictions.

Quoting PIA777 (Reply 33):
you have
have no proof that Iran is making weapons.

Someone has been living in a hole. If their program was peaceful, why did they conduct it in secret for over a decade? Why are they afraid of IAEA inspections? Why are they ademant that they must process their own nuclear fuel (which would give them weapons grade fuel) instead of purchasing it from Russia or France, who have offered to sell them all they need for peaceful purposes, but not weapons grade? It seems to me that there is no question that Iran wants weapons grade material above all else, and there can be only one reason for that - they want bombs.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:54 pm

Quoting PIA777 (Reply 33):
and you have
have no proof that Iran is making weapons.

Well this is difficult, and there's no point trying to second-guess here and say the US is automatically wrong. How long do you wait? 'Till they test one? 'Till they drop one on Tel-Aviv? Pre-emptive strikes are always difficult to justify because you simply don't know what would have happened.

Can anyone say that the Israeli attack on Osirak was wrong? Yet they were castigated around the world for that attack. There's no definitive right or wrong to it. You have to go with what you think at the time.
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:06 pm

Quoting Banco (Reply 35):
Well this is difficult, and there's no point trying to second-guess here and say the US is automatically wrong. How long do you wait? 'Till they test one? 'Till they drop one on Tel-Aviv? Pre-emptive strikes are always difficult to justify because you simply don't know what would have happened.

Allow me to toss a caveat in here as well . . .

If anyone out in A-Net land doesn't think the US has continually planned, replanned and planned again for an eventuality in Iran (or anywhere else) in the last, oh - say fifty years - then you've concept of military planning on the tactical or strategic level and should not even be in this conversation.

Believe me when I tell you the nukular option has been on the table for a hell of a lot more countries than Iran and it's been there for decades.

The only reason this is "news" (and it isn't really) is because someone found an article published a year (+) ago and made a stink out of it . . . can anyone say upcoming election and media hype???
 
flyingbabydoc
Posts: 1059
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 6:12 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 8:39 pm

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 35):
The only reason this is "news" (and it isn't really) is because someone found an article published a year (+) ago and made a stink out of it . . . can anyone say upcoming election and media hype???

I agree with you, ANCFlyer. If and when it becomes a real issue it would be dealt with. I know (I was told) that there were plans and contingencies should the affair between India and Pakistan (when there were so many nuke testing, few years back) escalate. AFAIK, there are different scenarios and response strategy for nuclear warfare in several fronts - China x Russia, North x South Korea, China x India, India x Pakistan, Iran x Israel, etc. All these have been planned a long time ago and are updated continuously, which basically as I understand it make them independent of the administration currently sitting in.

As I said, I have been told these things by someone who works (ed) in the Pentagon. If they are true I do not know. They make sense, though.

I think that action against Iran will be taken, but coming from Israel, and not from the USA. We'll see.

Alex
 
mika
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2000 7:53 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 8:48 pm

Couldn´t we have a so called mini nuke attack against the US nuclear missile facilities? That way the world is more sure of the fact that a nuclear war will not erupt.



The rest of us could concentrate on sanctioning Iran and everyone would be happy.
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 8:50 pm

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 33):
Someone has been living in a hole. If their program was peaceful, why did they conduct it in secret for over a decade? Why are they afraid of IAEA inspections? Why are they ademant that they must process their own nuclear fuel (which would give them weapons grade fuel) instead of purchasing it from Russia or France, who have offered to sell them all they need for peaceful purposes, but not weapons grade? It seems to me that there is no question that Iran wants weapons grade material above all else, and there can be only one reason for that - they want bombs.

The program was conducted in secret for precisely the reasons the current accusations are raising - people dont want Iran to have nuclear capability, any nuclear capability. By conducting the program in secret, Iran have got a fair distance down the route, while a fully out in the open program would have run into the problems now being experienced a lot sooner.

They arent afraid of IAEA inspections, but the regime demanded by the IAEA is far in excess of those allowed under the NPT.

Iran also doesnt want to depend on other countries for fuel, because it puts them into a weakened position when it comes to bargaining - 'Do this or we cut off your uranium supply.' Nuclear power is a long term investment, who knows what the governments of France, Germany, Russian or the US is going to be like in 50 years when Iran is going to be more reliant on it.

For every question that can be answered with 'they want bombs', a peaceful answer can also be put forward.
 
mika
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2000 7:53 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 8:53 pm

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 33):
Someone has been living in a hole. If their program was peaceful, why did they conduct it in secret for over a decade? Why are they afraid of IAEA inspections? Why are they ademant that they must process their own nuclear fuel (which would give them weapons grade fuel) instead of purchasing it from Russia or France, who have offered to sell them all they need for peaceful purposes, but not weapons grade? It seems to me that there is no question that Iran wants weapons grade material above all else, and there can be only one reason for that - they want bombs.

To stand up for their own right of doing what many others do, including the US. Why would they need the blessing of others to begin with? What puts them in the position of a child supervised by the west?

I´m sure that this is the way the talk goes in Tehran.
 
windshear
Posts: 2268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 4:45 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 9:00 pm

Quoting Mika (Reply 39):

Maybe because the west has been there done that, perhaps?
We've had 30 years of nerve wrecking cold war nuke races and stand offs, and we know that this leads to nothing.
We've also had our fair share of genocide and injustice.

Don't you think it is better we try and keep others from doing the same mistakes we did?

Boaz.
 
mika
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2000 7:53 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 9:08 pm

Quoting Windshear (Reply 40):
Maybe because the west has been there done that, perhaps?
We've had 30 years of nerve wrecking cold war nuke races and stand offs, and we know that this leads to nothing.
We've also had our fair share of genocide and injustice.

Don't you think it is better we try and keep others from doing the same mistakes we did?

To force knowledge onto someone will learn them nothing i am convinced of. Equally much as speculations and/or actual plans of a nuclear attack on any country shows that we in the west have learnt squat from our mistakes.
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 9:13 pm

Quoting Mika (Reply 41):
Equally much as speculations and/or actual plans of a nuclear attack on any country shows that we in the west have learnt squat from our mistakes.

Actually, it shows we in fact learned . . . that we will not get caught "with our pants down" again . . . a flashback to Pearl Harbor and December 1941.

Like I said earlier in this thread: There are constant contingencies being planned for all corners of the globe. And not just by the countries in the west . . . if you don't believe that, or can't understand that, you're way too naive.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 10:32 pm

Quoting Mika (Reply 37):
Couldn´t we have a so called mini nuke attack against the US nuclear missile facilities?

The United States kept the peace after WWII for 60 years. Don't forget it. This is the kind of thing I'm complaining about.

Quoting Mika (Reply 37):
The rest of us could concentrate on sanctioning Iran and everyone would be happy.

Especially Iran. Sanctions won't have any effect on their nuclear programme. So once they've got them and (under your idea) the US hasn't, how do you propose to deal with them then? Send over a load of umbrellas to every neighbouring country?
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 10:36 pm

Quoting Banco (Reply 43):
The United States kept the peace after WWII for 60 years. Don't forget it. This is the kind of thing I'm complaining about.

No, just because there was no WWIII doesnt mean the 'peace' was 'kept'. There have been plenty of wideranging conflicts involving major world factions between 1945 and 2006.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 10:42 pm

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 44):
No, just because there was no WWIII doesnt mean the 'peace' was 'kept'.

Don't be pedantic. All the skirmishes around the edges were just that.
 
mika
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2000 7:53 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 10:59 pm

Quoting Banco (Reply 43):
Especially Iran. Sanctions won't have any effect on their nuclear programme. So once they've got them and (under your idea) the US hasn't, how do you propose to deal with them then? Send over a load of umbrellas to every neighbouring country?

They don´t have them and neither will they. Just because someone is not willing to be disciplined by someone else doesn´t automatically mean that they are up to something bad. Iran is seeking to develop nuclear energy and has been running that agenda only because they see it fit to not ask anyone for approval for doing that. Whether that is good or bad i won´t comment on but it sure as heck doesnt automatically mean that they are developing the oh so dreaded "weapons of mass destruction".

This is my belief.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 11:07 pm

Quoting Mika (Reply 46):
This is my belief.

OK, putting everything else aside, tell me why you believe the Iranian leadership over all the Western governments and IAEA?

I know people are understandably distrustful of the US government, but honestly, to say that Iran aren't developing nuclear weapons because Iran says they aren't is crackers. What if you're wrong? Is it a case of "oops, my mistake, sorry the maniacs in Tehran have got the bomb"?
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 11:16 pm

Quoting Banco (Reply 47):

OK, putting everything else aside, tell me why you believe the Iranian leadership over all the Western governments and IAEA?

Its not necessarily that we trust Iranian leadership, its that we believe that you need more than the current level of evidence for military action to be even acceptable as a consideration.

When Iran signed up to the NPT, they were granted the right to produce nuclear power - now they are execising that right with no evidence of a nuclear weapons program. Until there is steadfast proof to the contrary (and no, it doesnt need to be a demonstration of an Iranian nuclear weapon or even when they trundle one out, seriously why did you take it to extremes?) I will not support military action against a sovereign foreign nation.

And no, the evidence currently against Iran is far from any level required.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Nuke Attack On Iran?

Mon Apr 10, 2006 11:26 pm

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 48):
Its not necessarily that we trust Iranian leadership, its that we believe that you need more than the current level of evidence for military action to be even acceptable as a consideration.

OK, that's a logical position. But would you not accept that ruling out the possiblity of military action would remove one of the elements of compulsion to ensure they don't develop nuclear weapons?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: James67, ltbewr, Number6, petertenthije, TriJets and 25 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos