TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Iran Joins Nuclear Club
Pages (5): « 1 2 3 4 [5]

quote:

Originally posted by Lepanto THEY ARE GIVING THE US A BIG FUCK YOU.

GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD

quote:

Originally posted by Lepanto THEY ARE GIVING THE US A BIG FUCK YOU. They are provoking an attack. They are practically gagging for it.

That quite true you know, dunno about the gagging, probably Bush is getting a gagging of his own in the janitors closet by Rumsfeld but the bottom line is, this Iran government knows that the US government won't attack. The facilities of the nuclear plants are much deeper than 30 metres people have said and the Iranians have set up decoy facilities, they have also setup secret facilities to do the bigger stuff in areas people aren't concentrating, not saying Weapons.

We fall down to the NPT, Iran has permission to make nuclear fuel. Isreal has not signed it, and they have nukes but they haven't told the public about.. first sign of illegal acts. Thats why US will never attack, it has too much double standards happening. India didn't sign it and America got a contract ready to sell them uranium, another Illegal act. And why hasn't these issues been brought up, cause they are all wimps.

One other comment i heard that is true for these situations is that "If Nuclear Weapons are bad, then no country should have it"

The whole India backing with US against Iran to all of a sudden turn back and buy into a 22 billion dollar deal with Iran just shows how much the pestering of the Government is present, but some countries i guess are dead tired of them.

Also another reason why US can't attack Iran is because Iran has been invited by the SCO to join them as full members for backing from Russia and China.

quote:

Originally posted by Lemonad That quite true you know, dunno about the gagging, probably Bush is getting a gagging of his own in the janitors closet by Rumsfeld but the bottom line is, this Iran government knows that the US government won't attack. The facilities of the nuclear plants are much deeper than 30 metres people have said and the Iranians have set up decoy facilities, they have also setup secret facilities to do the bigger stuff in areas people aren't concentrating, not saying Weapons. We fall down to the NPT, Iran has permission to make nuclear fuel. Isreal has not signed it, and they have nukes but they haven't told the public about.. first sign of illegal acts. Thats why US will never attack, it has too much double standards happening. India didn't sign it and America got a contract ready to sell them uranium, another Illegal act. And why hasn't these issues been brought up, cause they are all wimps. One other comment i heard that is true for these situations is that "If Nuclear Weapons are bad, then no country should have it" The whole India backing with US against Iran to all of a sudden turn back and buy into a 22 billion dollar deal with Iran just shows how much the pestering of the Government is present, but some countries i guess are dead tired of them. Also another reason why US can't attack Iran is because Iran has been invited by the SCO to join them as full members for backing from Russia and China.

30 meters is nothing, the new non-nuclear weapon the US is testing is designed to destroy bunkers that are shielded by concrete at depths of 60m.

Maybe the US will share this technology with Israel? Or maybe just drop it themselves.

China and Russia hate the US but have a much bigger stake in it than Iran.

Bottom line is, Iranian bunkers are at the most 20-25 meters underground according to every intelligence estimate. You do the math.

quote:

Originally posted by Lemonad That quite true you know, dunno about the gagging, probably Bush is getting a gagging of his own in the janitors closet by Rumsfeld but the bottom line is, this Iran government knows that the US government won't attack. The facilities of the nuclear plants are much deeper than 30 metres people have said and the Iranians have set up decoy facilities, they have also setup secret facilities to do the bigger stuff in areas people aren't concentrating, not saying Weapons. We fall down to the NPT, Iran has permission to make nuclear fuel. Isreal has not signed it, and they have nukes but they haven't told the public about.. first sign of illegal acts. Thats why US will never attack, it has too much double standards happening. India didn't sign it and America got a contract ready to sell them uranium, another Illegal act. And why hasn't these issues been brought up, cause they are all wimps. One other comment i heard that is true for these situations is that "If Nuclear Weapons are bad, then no country should have it" The whole India backing with US against Iran to all of a sudden turn back and buy into a 22 billion dollar deal with Iran just shows how much the pestering of the Government is present, but some countries i guess are dead tired of them. Also another reason why US can't attack Iran is because Iran has been invited by the SCO to join them as full members for backing from Russia and China.

Wrong on all account. First off it doesn't matter how deep the facilities are, i seriously doubt they've built 400 feet of reinforced concerete on the bunkers so as others have said, bunkbusteres and conventional weapons will blow them to bits. and no one attacks based on PICTURES, the sattelite images that they use are alot more complex than that. Russia is the only one in the SCO backing Iran just to oppose the west. They have the middle east just as much as anyone else who's plagued by terrorism. China is using them while they build up their nuclear reactor program. Israel hasn't told the public but they have also not denied it so you don't know if they have it, saying either/or would be seriously dumb on Israel's part. And for anyone to think that they should disclose that fact, they are seriously on the IQ level of a toilet seat.

Yes, nuclear weapons are bad, hence countries like the US and Russia have been dismantling them for years.

Let Iran keep pushing, they think that no one will support the US, but in fact the European countries are more worried about this than us. The US is worried about Irans up and coming oil market that will fuck them in the bonghole.

quote:

Originally posted by Verona^My I'll chime in hear about propaganda on the emotional level. The intellectual level is mere peanuts compared to the emotional level.

Ahh OK I guess.

quote:

Fanaticism is on the emotional level, not the intellectual level.

Yeah I guess so, if you include pro-war intellectual fanatics in that statement.

quote:

Effective propaganda directs the emotions of people. In dangerous cases, propaganda creates a fanaticism so intense, that people just act without thinking.

Perfect. Which explains the cause for war without end in Iraq over non-existent WMDs. But who's counting.

quote:

Think about how fanatical someone has to be, to hijack a plane with boxcutters and fly it into a giant tower. It's quite interesting, how emotions can totally hijack rational thought.

Disclaimer: No neocons were harmed in the hijacking of this airplane.

quote:

People dont wake up one day and go... "gee, I'm gonna fly a plane into a large building" The mindset is more interesting than that. It's about complex emotional states, not simple logic.

Pavlov got his dog to salivate. What bell rang for you to respond?

quote:

The columbine school shooting has a similar emotional makeup. Kids dont simply wake up and spontaneously think of blowing up the school. There are complex emotions involved. It's about more than cause and effect, it's about the person's whole environment, their upbringing from their nation and their parents.

People are diluting themselves if they think that they have their "environment" or "upbringing" under some sort of control.

quote:

Back to terrorists. Terrorists are made, they are created by their enviroment, the political tone of fanaticism and hatred. Their own anger is used by their leaders to motivate them to ACT on their anger. Thus a terrorist is born.

Interconnecting intelligence agencies create the terrorist.

quote:

As an example, Hitler did a marvelous job of using the German publics anger over the Versallies treaty.

I thought it was the Depression coupled with war reparations that helped Hitler and National Socialism ascend to power after the end of the Weimar Republic. After which the fire at the Reichstag and the Decree (invoking Article 48) thereafter did solidify Hitler's rise.

But who am I to argue your "facts".

quote:

Originally posted by Lepanto Wrong on all account. First off it doesn't matter how deep the facilities are, i seriously doubt they've built 400 feet of reinforced concerete on the bunkers so as others have said, bunkbusteres and conventional weapons will blow them to bits. and no one attacks based on PICTURES, the sattelite images that they use are alot more complex than that. Russia is the only one in the SCO backing Iran just to oppose the west. They have the middle east just as much as anyone else who's plagued by terrorism. China is using them while they build up their nuclear reactor program. Israel hasn't told the public but they have also not denied it so you don't know if they have it, saying either/or would be seriously dumb on Israel's part. And for anyone to think that they should disclose that fact, they are seriously on the IQ level of a toilet seat. Yes, nuclear weapons are bad, hence countries like the US and Russia have been dismantling them for years. Let Iran keep pushing, they think that no one will support the US, but in fact the European countries are more worried about this than us. The US is worried about Irans up and coming oil market that will fuck them in the bonghole.

Everyone knows Israel has warheads, even people in favour of America say it and know it. There is no deny it on anyones part but it doesn't makes sense how this double standards bit is actually taking effect, corruption in favour of the American lies perhaps?

So you think if people thinking that Israel should disclose those facts have a low IQ, hmmm, i truly believe that people who DON'T want them to disclose them have a literal IQ of a turd in the toilet bowl. Who trust Israel with nukes? Who trust America with nukes? Who trust Iran with nukes? No one, but you can't single out a nation who has signed the treaty which enables them to make nuclear fuel to be under the spotlight where other nations who illegally have possession of nuclear warheads or uranium only to be supported by the over popular governments that support Israel (terrorism is a understatment for this country).

And it's funny also how you think Iran will be devastated by when oil runs out, America will literelly be bum raped if the oil runs out as much as you don't want to believe. Say if Oil runs out in less than 10 years which i doubt, with Americas consumption of 20 million barrels a day followed by 6 million from china, who do you think it will most likely affect? Oh and your IQ is based on this answer. You think by bringing in Electric cars and all that stuff people of America will change all of a sudden? What about the higher amount of poor people that won't be able to afford those stuff, what about billions of cars in the world that run on standard petrol, what will people do with them. The economy will collapse! And as much as you don't want to believe it, America will be raped first. Iran will be affected, yes but they got trillions of gas, geographical control over other countries exports and other stuff.

They can come with alternatives but i doub't people will adapt to them as quickly as they'd like.

Oh and everyone knows China is trying to monopolize the oils around the globe but one thing you must have missed is that China has NEVER hated Iran. Russia on the other hand is hit and miss. SCO was supported by China and Russia, not Russia alone.

Oh and also about the Holocaust denial, i don't think the President of Iran actually denies it, he just says to push some buttons in which he wants.

This whole thing is not about Nuclear warheads either, officials around the world have said that if Iran chose to make them, it will take 5 years or so, and yet Israel comes and says "NO" and claims they can make it this year so a attack happens. Also funny how Israel claims the Shahab can reach America just to cause panic in American for a reason to attack Iran, they also were the reason behind the invasion of Iraq... so Israel, innocent? Don't bet your bottom dollar, which will most likely go to oil anyways.

In case there was any doubt:

quote:

As expected, the International Atomic Energy Agency declared Friday that Iran has enriched uranium and is therefore in defiance of the United Nations Security Council. The finding was outlined in a report prepared by IAEA chief Mohamed Elbaradei, who has been investigating the state of Iran's nuclear arms capability for the past three years. "The existing gaps in knowledge continue to be a matter of concern," he writes in the report, a copy of which was obtained by the Associated Press. "Any progress in that regard requires full transparency and active co-operation by Iran." Such co-operation has not been forthcoming from Iran, especially since hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected president in 2005. Reacting to the report, U.S. President George W. Bush said he would continue to press for a diplomatic resolution to end growing global tension over Iran's nuclear ambitions.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/natio...lear060428.html

quote:

IAEA Report: Still No Proof Iran is Pursing Nukes In news on Iran, the International Atomic Energy Agency has said in a new report that it has uncovered no proof that Iran is secretly pursuing a nuclear weapons program. But the agency accused Iran of stonewalling inspectors and defying UN Security Council demands to freeze its efforts to enrich uranium. Iran has said it would allow international inspectors from the IAEA to make unannounced checks but only if the issue did not go to the Security Council. Iran has refused to stop its uranium enrichment program which it maintains is for peaceful purposes.

Source: Democracy Now

EDIT: Although they ought to, if they're interested in self preservation.

For more information: IAEA on Iran

quote:

Transcript of Interviews Diplomacy and Force NEWSWEEK Interview with Mohamed ElBaradei 12 January 2006 See NEWSWEEK Magazine (23 January 2006 edition). "The man in the middle of the escalating tensions between Iran, Europe and the United States is Mohamed ElBaradei, Director-General of the United Nations� International Atomic Energy Agency. ElBaradei and the IAEA, recipients of last year�s Nobel Peace Prize, are charged with verifying Iran�s compliance - or lack thereof - with international safeguards against nuclear-weapons proliferation. In his first interview since Iran broke the seals on nuclear research equipment last week, ElBaradei spoke bluntly at his Vienna headquarters with NEWSWEEK�s Christopher Dickey about his frustrations with Tehran, and his ideas on how to avoid further escalation. DICKEY: You�ve said you�re running out of patience with Iran. What does that mean? MOHAMED ELBARADEI, DIRECTOR GENERAL, IAEA: For the last three years we have been doing intensive verification in Iran, and even after three years I am not yet in a position to make a judgment on the peaceful nature of the [nuclear] program. We still need to assure ourselves through access to documents, individuals [and] locations that we have seen all that we ought to see and that there is nothing fishy, if you like, about the program. DICKEY: At one site called Lavizan, facilities were bulldozed by Iran before you could look at them, and you weren�t allowed to run tests in the area. ELBARADEI: We clearly need to take environmental samplings from some of the equipment that used to be in Lavizan. We need to interview some of the people who have been engaged in Lavizan. We have [also] gotten some information about some modification of their missiles that could have some relationship to the nuclear program. So, we need to clarify all these things. It is very specific. They know what we want to do, and they just have to go and do it. I�m making it very clear right now that I cannot extend the deadline, which is... March 6. DICKEY: With all due respect, the Iranians don�t seem to care what you think. ELBARADEI: Well, they might not seem to care. But if I say that I am not able to confirm the peaceful nature of that program after three years of intensive work, well, that�s a conclusion that�s going to reverberate, I think, around the world. DICKEY: Do you have any indication that there is some other completely separate Iranian nuclear-weapons program? ELBARADEI: No, we don�t. But I won�t exclude that possibility. DICKEY: But there�s another problem. Even if the declared nuclear research is all that Iran has going, there�s nothing in the Non-Proliferation Treaty itself to prevent them from enriching uranium - which they say is their right. They could get to the point of producing their own nuclear fuel, or bomb material, then tell you, "We�re pulling out of the treaty." ELBARADEI: Sure. And if they have the nuclear material and they have a parallel weaponization program along the way, they are really not very far - a few months - from a weapon. We need to revisit the treaty, because that margin of security is unacceptable. But specifically on Iran, the board is saying, "You have a right under the treaty to enrich uranium, but because of the lack of confidence in your program and because the IAEA has not yet given you a clean bill of health, you should not exercise that right. In a way, you have to go through a probation period, to build confidence again, before you can exercise your full rights." DICKEY: That was the basis of the European and Russian negotiations with Iran. But that�s been declared a dead end, and tensions are escalating. There�s probably going to be an emergency meeting of the IAEA Board in the next couple of weeks. Washington and now Europe have called for the U.N. Security Council to take up the issue. ELBARADEI: I�ll tell you, nobody wants to go to the Security Council - if they can avoid that... [But] even if it goes to the Security Council, it will be a graduated approach. If [the Iranians] decide to go the confrontation route, everybody will be hurt, there is no question about it. But at the end of the day, in my view, they will hurt more because there is a more united international community. DICKEY: Iran has been observing a protocol, which it didn�t actually sign, allowing your inspectors to visit many sites on very short notice. Now Tehran is threatening to stop that. ELBARADEI: Of course that would be another escalation. It also would backfire on Iran, because at least if we are on the ground we... can see what�s going on. We are there on the ground and we are saying we don�t see a clear and present danger. If there is no inspection, people can have as wild an imagination as they want [about Iranian activities], and that will hurt Iran. DICKEY: You talk about "confidence building," but at least since President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came to office last June, Iran�s activities have been mostly confidence destroying. ELBARADEI: It is very frustrating because everybody invested a lot of time and effort in building this confidence. It�s a very slow process. You can have a crash overnight. I hope the Iranian authorities will understand, again, that if they lose this nascent confidence building it will become even more complicated in the future to [restore]. It is very frustrating. But if you are in a business like mine you have to be very, very patient. DICKEY: What if the Iranians are just buying time for their bomb building? ELBARADEI: That�s why I said we are coming to the litmus test in the next few weeks. Diplomacy is not just talking. Diplomacy has to be backed by pressure and, in extreme cases, by force. We have rules. We have to do everything possible to uphold the rules through conviction. If not, then you impose them. Of course, this has to be the last resort, but sometimes you have to do it. DICKEY: You�re angry. ELBARADEI: No, I�m not angry, but I�d like to make sure the process will not be abused. There�s a difference. I still would like to be able to avoid escalation, but at the same time I do not want the Agency to be cheated; I do not want the process to be abused. I think that is clear. I have a responsibility, and I would like to fulfill it with as good a conscience as I can."

Source: IAEA (Original transcript from Newsweek)

This rhetoric reminds me of that of that Iraqi dictator...

quote:

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran threatened on Tuesday to attack Israel in response to any "evil" act by the United States and said it had enriched uranium to a level close to the maximum compatible with civilian use in power stations. The defiant statements were issued shortly before world powers meet in Paris to discuss the next steps after Tehran rejected a UN call to halt uranium enrichment. ... "We have announced that wherever America does something evil, the first place that we target will be Israel," ISNA quoted a senior Revolutionary Guards commander, Rear Admiral Mohammad-Ebrahim Dehqani, as saying on Tuesday. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for the Jewish state to be "wiped off the map". Iran's deputy oil minister said there was "some possibility" of a U.S. attack on his country over its nuclear programme.

(Source)

I understand that these threats are supposed to influence the meeting in Paris, but what I don't understand is why anyone should take them into account - after all, Iran has been threatening Israel with destruction for quite some time now. If anything this seems to be a step back (i.e. going from "we'll destroy Israel" to "if you don't behave, we'll destroy Israel").

i haven't read the whole thread and dunno if anyone put focus on this but:

Why isn't IAEA doing any inspections in Israel? As long as Israel inofficially is a nuclear nation IAEA should do inspections there. No israeli politicians have ever said that Israel got nukes. Still everyone knows they got.
And using arguments such as "Israel is a demoractic nation" is plain stupid. USA is a democratic nation as well and the only one that used nukes and even till today nothing stops them from using them again.

quote:

Former CIA Analyst Says Iran Strike Set For June Or July McGovern: Staged terror attacks across Europe, US "probable" in order to justify invasion Former CIA analyst and Presidential advisor Ray McGovern, fresh from his heated public confrontation with Donald Rumsfeld, fears that staged terror attacks across Europe and the US are probable in order to justify the Bush administration's plan to launch a military strike against Iran, which he thinks will take place in June or July. Appearing on The Alex Jones Show, McGovern was asked about the timetable for war in Iran and said that behind the diplomatic smokescreen, the final chess pieces were being moved into position. "There is already one carrier task force there in the Gulf, two are steaming toward it at the last report I have at least - they will all be there in another week or so." "The propaganda has been laid, the aircraft carriers are in place, it doesn't take much to fly the bombers out of British and US bases - cruse missiles are at the ready, Israel is egging us on," said McGovern. McGovern said Iran's likely response to a US air strike would be threefold - mobilizing worldwide terrorist cells that would make Al-Qaeda look like a girls netball team - utilizing its cruise missile arsenal to attack US ships and sending fighters into Iraq to attack US forces. "The Iranians can easily send three divisions of revolutionary guard troops right over....the long border with Iraq," said McGovern, stating that the local Sunni population of Iraq would welcome such an invasion. The turmoil caused by such an action would lead the US to tap its so-called 'mini-nuke' arsenal said McGovern, opening a new Pandora's box of chaos. McGovern highlighted President Bush's all time record low approval ratings as a reason for launching an attack on Iran to again whip up false patriotic fervour. "I can see Karl Rove saying, 'look what you need to do is become a war president again, get us involved with something pretty big here and then strut around and say you can't vote for a bunch of Democrats to pull the rug out from under me while there's a war going on'." McGovern drew a comparison with the concillatory cold war stance of Russia and JFK's decision to respond in a similar manner, and the Iranian President's letter which was immediately dismissed by the Bush administration. JFK's approach saved the US from potential nuclear anihalation while Bush's actions put the US in severe danger as Russia and China give ominous mixed signals on what their response to a US strike on Iran will be. McGovern lambasted Bush's inner circle as uniformly lacking any real military experience and characterized them as a cabal already hell-bent on war. McGovern entertained the notion that western governments and intelligence hierarchies could potentially stage terror attacks in Europe and the US either before or after an invasion of Iran. "That's altogether possible," said McGovern. "I would say even probable because they need some proximate cause, some casus belli to justify really unleashing things on Iran....I would put very little past this crew - their record of dissembling and disingenuousness is unparalleled." McGovern said that Rove, Cheney and Rumsfeld, fearing impeachment and Enron-style criminal proceedings, are urging President Bush to launch a war in order to create a climate unconducive to lengthy investigations and impeachment proceedings. Asked to cite specifically when we should expect to see an attack launched, McGovern said, "I think we all agree that an attack is likely before the election and we all agree that it has to do largely with the election - as for timing I see a likelihood that it could come as early as late June or early July, most of my colleagues predict August, September, maybe an October surprise even." "My thinking is that for it to be October that would be so crass and so transparent that even this crowd would shy away from making it so obvious," said McGovern. McGovern is set to appear along with a host of other respected and credible whistleblowers at the American Scholars Symposium at the end of this month.

http://infowars.com/articles/ww3/ir...t_june_july.htm

interview clip

Uhh.. I sure as hell hope this doesn't happen..

God bless America.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer God bless America.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by RebeL9 i haven't read the whole thread and dunno if anyone put focus on this but: Why isn't IAEA doing any inspections in Israel? As long as Israel inofficially is a nuclear nation IAEA should do inspections there. No israeli politicians have ever said that Israel got nukes. Still everyone knows they got. And using arguments such as "Israel is a demoractic nation" is plain stupid. USA is a democratic nation as well and the only one that used nukes and even till today nothing stops them from using them again.

If they were a signatory nation, then there would be an equitable system of verification and control.

But they aren't on a few of them even though they should be. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty would be one that they have never signed but Iran has. The Chemical Weapons Convention is another. The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty was signed by Israel but never ratified is another example.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z http://infowars.com/articles/ww3/ir...t_june_july.htm interview clip Uhh.. I sure as hell hope this doesn't happen..

Well lets look at what would be needed for something like this to become reality. They most certainly would need the precursors to validate war so terrorist attacks would be a must. I seriously don't see how they could get the support they need to go to war without something like that. Though even with terrorist attacks, I couldn't imagine how this country could be duped into another WMD war. The unpatriotic card has been played so many times its starting to wear. Any efforts to use it again would surely be so completely transparent. Not to mention, in order to go to war they need the approval of congress. I don't see how even a republican majority congress would approve such a thing.

All things considered, going to war with Iran would just be so obviously an act of desperation I seriously doubt the country would stand for it. But then again thats the same country that elected this yahoo into office, twice. This is also the same country in which after all things considered the largest protest rallies held in all this time have been for pro-illegal immigration. Its a sad thought to think the country might actually sit idly by shaking heads but not doing anything. Like McGovern said, I don't put anything past this crew but they couldn't, they wouldn't...

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.