View Full Version : Have we the right.
Do we, the people of the west, have the right to dictate to Iran or any other counry whether or not they can build Atomic Power Stations or even to make bombs?Are our leaders going to force the Iranians to put up or shut up?We have many troops on the Iraqi side of Iran and we are sending more troops into Afgahnistan. What is shaping up?Is Bush going to go all the way?
So many people in Pakistan are going to die this winter and so many people made homeless by the Tsunami are not being helped in any way.Countless people in the third world are dying from hunger when one of the biggest health problems in our society is obesity. Would it not be better if the money wasted on arms and armies was spent on the well being of those who are alive instead of venturing into new killing fields?
We should look to ourselves before dictating to any other country what they can or cannot do.
I didn't know we were dictating to Iran. I thought it was the United Nations that were doing that under the Nuclear Arms Proliferation Treaty. The UN would, by the signals they ae sending out, put a lot more pressure in the Iranian Leadership to comply with the monitoring they previously agreed to.
The stumbling block is China which is protecting it's oil supplies and Russia which is trying to raise it's influence with the Iranians. Both have said they will veto any attempts by the UN to place sanctions on Iran.
An Iranian Government spokesman has said that if the UN acts against then then they will enrich tons of Uranium instead of the small amounts they claim to be enriching. I don't think it takes a genius to interpret what they are threatening. The only serious Sabre Rattling I have heard reported so far has come from the Iranians themselves without any provocation by anyone.
With respect to the Tsunami, things might move a little faster if the Countries which suffered got on with using the aid they already have instead of playing Politics with it.
The current situation in Sudan where there is a terrible refugee problem is again being worsened by the Chinese blocking any further help being sent there because they do not want to lose trade with the Government there.
The Chinese could also put a lot of pressure on North Korea to stop it's sabre rattling and also help improve the situation with regard to food shortages in that Country.
When are the Media going to do in depth reports on the killings in Chechnya and the human Rights abuses carried out there by Russian Troops under Putin’s orders. Afghanistan and the problems there are a hangover from the Russian invasion in the 80s. But we are supposed to be to blame for that as well.
It's time we stopped believing that everybody in the World is wonderful and that we alone are responsible for all the worlds ills.
Do we, the people of the west, have the right to dictate to Iran or any other counry whether or not they can build Atomic Power Stations or even to make bombs?Are our leaders going to force the Iranians to put up or shut up?We have many troops on the Iraqi side of Iran and we are sending more troops into Afgahnistan. What is shaping up?Is Bush going to go all the way?
There is no imminent problem with Iran and nuclear weapons, there isn't even any evidence that they intend to build any and even if they did it would be years, perhaps decades before they could.
What is a problem is that Iran is due to open its own oil bourse in March trading in euros not dollars. If that happens the oil importing nations will not need to keep large reserves of dollars to buy oil with and America will not be able to keep printing money without devaluing its currency.
I can't see America invading Iran like they did Iraq, they could however take control of Khuzestan which is on the Iraqi border and holds 90% of Irans oil. To do this they would have to wipe out Irans military to prevent retaliation, America could well use nuclear weapons for that purpose.
USA has been dictating to the rest of the world for a fair length of time and has used bully tactics more than once to achieve its own way.Protecting the Kurds and the Iraqi people from Saddam's murdering ways was a reasonable excuse for the invasion of Iraq but you know,as well as I ,that it was America's addiction to oil that really lay behind it and no-one can say that the people of Iraq are better off now than they were before the invasion.On the other hand,absolutely nothing was done to protect the people of Chechnya or the people of Palestine from regimes that were slaughtering them becuse they demanded the right to be free from oppression.Protect the weak when it suits but let them die when it doesn't.Afghanistan's problems were there long before the Russian invasion.Britain and Russia tried their best to take control for hundreds of years and failed. The problems with Afghanistan are the Afghanis.They are following the life of the warrior as they have done for thousands of years.BTW the Afghans invited the Russians in so there was technically no invasion.
It does not matter a whit what the reasons are for the problems with the Tsunami and earthquake survivors.The problems are there and the much vaunted United Nations are not achieving much to alleviate the situation.We walk arround wallowing in our own milk fed bulk when thousands of people are dying from hunger in the Sudan,Niger,Congo,Ethiopia,Erirtea and all the other countries in Africa which have been plundered and destroyed to keep the West fat and then abandoned to their fate when it is no longer in the interests of the oppressors of the West to hold on to them.Mugabe is a monster but do we see an army knocking on his door?
We have people like Geldorf collecting for charity to help the hungry. What a sad reflection upon our society that people have to beg for handouts from common people when the combined military budget for one week in Iraq would probably feed all the hungry in Africa for a long time.
No one in their right mind would believe that everyone in the world is wonderful. I speak as a citizen of planet Earth and a member of the human race.I would rather leave national pride and the casting of blame out of the frame entirely.Whatever is being said by the powers that be and their lackeys in the media business, it does not take much of a seer to predict the near future from the obscurity of todays media coverage.
I am not seeking to blame anyone for the present situation but the situation exists and I would like to know what we can do about it. You can say what you want about Bin Liner and his gang but they have killed a lot less people than Bush!!!!
No moves were made to stop India,Pakistan,China and possibly Korea from using atomic power and making A bombs. So my original question still stands.
What right has anyone to dictate to another country as to what they can or can't do. If a rule is so strong that countries will go to war to enforce it then it should apply to all countries. Get rid of the atomic weapons world wide and give up on domestic Atomic power.We don't need the threat and we don't (don@t) need the pollution.
Gleber2, fred, what a simplistic way of presenting things.
If only the “Stop America” and the “Bush the Butcher” Brigades were right.
Every problem in the World could be solved overnight. Isn’t it comforting to have a scape-goat you can blame for everything. It brings to mind the chap who ranted on a call-in that Regan was to blame for the collapse of the Soviet Union because he made them spend too much on Arms. I knew the CIA were supposed to be behind every plot in the world but I didn’t realise they were good enough to get Regan a seat on the Polit Bureau especially as the Soviets never even noticed.
How to invade a Country without invading a Country.
First build and International Airport for a Country, then install a puppet ruler, wait for the 'invite', send in the Antonovs.
Prior the that the Afghans had been quietly getting on with being Afghans.
The UN is a complete waste of time when it comes to taking urgent action it is made up of many Countries who are busy feathering their own nests.
The International Atomic Energy Authority is a UN body and the Chairman's name is Mohammed al-Baradei, so I hardly think he was put there by the Americans. The IAEA, who initiated the concern over Iran are currently trying to get the UN to impose sanctions on Iran and is fully supported in this by the EU. If the problem is between Iran and using the Euro instead of the Dollar then I would expect the EU to encourage Iran to benefit it's own currency. The Euro/Dollar dispute is nonsensical, the Iranians are obviously playing the game of 'divide and conquer' in the hope that the EU and the USA will start fighting one another. The EU is not going to fall for that trick.
If Iraq was all about oil then why did the Americans block the lifting of sanctions? Saddam was only to ready to export oil and indeed was exporting more than he was supposed to be doing. Lifting the sanctions would have opened the floodgates not sealed up the supply so claiming it was to protect America's oil supplies does not hold water.
If 90% of Iran’s oil supply is in Khuzestan then it surely is Khuzestan's oil, not Iran’s.
Most of the Countries you mention in Africa have also been in the sphere of the influence of the old Soviet Union. In fact I would go so far as to say all of them so saying that their situation is caused only by the west is, to say the least, blinkered. Most of their problems are caused by the treatment of the people by their own Governments who are prone to diverting aid to their own supporters and ignoring everyone else.
Mugabe is a monster but every time an attempt has been made to get even the Commonwealth to stop him the attempt is blocked by other African Countries.
The west is not the only area which could help with all the problems you mention but whilst we at least do something other areas in the World sit on their hands and do nothing whilst haranguing us for not doing enough.
With respect to Iraq, am I to believe that it is the cause for all these problems because I seem to remember them being there before Saddam had ever been heard of, let alone in charge there.
Picking on one particular incident which you find unacceptable and trying to convince the world that it is the cause of all the worlds problems is a nonsense. If everybody stopped going to pubs, clubs and restaurants for a month then there would probably be the same amount money that you mention over Iraq. I'm willing to do that, If anybody finds me in a pub, club, or restaurant during this month I'll give a hundred pounds to charity.
Any body else willing to say the same, come on, Gleber2, fred, will you start!
USA has been dictating to the rest of the world for a fair length of time and has used bully tactics more than once to achieve its own way.
When the global map was 25% red, were we any different?
Do we, the people of the west, have the right to dictate to Iran or any other counry whether or not they can build Atomic Power Stations or even to make bombs?Are our leaders going to force the Iranians to put up or shut up?We have many troops on the Iraqi side of Iran and we are sending more troops into Afgahnistan. What is shaping up?Is Bush going to go all the way?
So many people in Pakistan are going to die this winter and so many people made homeless by the Tsunami are not being helped in any way.Countless people in the third world are dying from hunger when one of the biggest health problems in our society is obesity. Would it not be better if the money wasted on arms and armies was spent on the well being of those who are alive instead of venturing into new killing fields?
We should look to ourselves before dictating to any other country what they can or cannot do.Absolutely, I am ashamed to be 'part' of the Atlantic Alliance and would never vote labour again.
If Iraq was all about oil then why did the Americans block the lifting of sanctions? Saddam was only to ready to export oil and indeed was exporting more than he was supposed to be doing. Lifting the sanctions would have opened the floodgates not sealed up the supply so claiming it was to protect America's oil supplies does not hold water.
America doesn't need Iraqi oil, 90% of their oil comes from the Americas and the rest from Saudi. The reason for the sanctions was because Iraq did a deal with Russia to develop their oil fields and supply the developing countries in the East. The reason for the invasion was because Iraq demanded payment in euros for the oil they sold under the oil for food program. America has a huge trade deficit with China and it's only the fact that China needs dollars to buy oil which allows America to pay them with worthless pieces of paper.
As I said, if Iran were to start enriching uranium now in ten years they might have enough to make one bomb, provided they had the technology to build one by then, what's the panic for?
Will America bully enough countries into voting for sanctions against Iran before March and prevent them selling oil for euros? Will they manufacture some incident on the Khuzestan border to give them an excuse to take control of Irans oil? Will the incident be imaginary as it was when they entered the Vietnam war? We will have to wait and see but I bet we won't have to wait long.
landmarker
02-Feb-06, 20:50
Iran does not really need nuclear power with all the oil reserves it's sitting upon.
There can be little doubt this is all a front to mask development of a nuclear weapons system. Given that the Iranian leader has vowed to 'wipe Israel off the map' it doesn't bode well really does it?
Iran is a country governed by fanatical clerics. An uneasy youth are repressed and a very large proportion of the population want closer ties with the west. Repressed yet by the legacy of Ayatollah Homeini, another of the leaderships remarks was 'I wish to oversee the end of the wordl' !
We should use the diplomatic, or the economic route to deter further nuclear devlopment. If all else fails then bombing of strategic targets (Isfahan?) will surely follow. I'd support this. We cannot allow nutcases to obtain nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them.
Your post is simplistic gleeber, though well intentioned.
Incidentally, the winte rin Oakistan has so far been a little milder than usual. I heard a report today from the BBC. They'd found people who had not had shoes for fifteen years. I think they had summised that they did not really need them. This is a serious comment and not made flippantly. Think about it. We should not try to impose western values and customs on people who can do without them. That includes democracy in my opinion.
Do we, the people of the west, have the right to dictate to Iran or any other counry whether or not they can build Atomic Power Stations or even to make bombs?Are our leaders going to force the Iranians to put up or shut up?We have many troops on the Iraqi side of Iran and we are sending more troops into Afgahnistan. What is shaping up?Is Bush going to go all the way?
We should look to ourselves before dictating to any other country what they can or cannot do.
As far as I know, most countries in the world signed an agreement to non proliferation. NON PROLIFERATION. If a country like Iran does develop nuclear weapons, how long do you think it would take for a dirty bomb to go off in Picadilly Circus during peek hour traffic?
When it came to Saddam and Iraque, I was ( and am ) against going in.The country was on it's knees and the UN were not backing intervention.
With Iraq, there is no secret on their designs. They have even threatened proliferation, so yes, UN, please do intervene before we get the fist dirty bombing sice Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
wickerinca
02-Feb-06, 21:57
A bit of a sideways jump...........but do you think that some countries/cultures aren't ready for democracy?. I have stopped giving money to some of the charities that are supposed to be helping and feeding people who really need it because of the corruption in those countries. I refuse to line the deep, deep pockets of every Tom, Dick and Harry that has control over the aid distribution. I hope that you understand what I am saying:confused ...it is not easy to verbalise. I have written to each charity that I supported and explained my position and until they can give me an assurance that my money is actually going to help those that need help then they won't be hearing from me. Gosh.....that is me off on a digressing rant again!! Sometimes I just want to go over there and do something myself.....but my father is quite convinced that I would be shot in the first week!!
You asked at the start if we had the right to etc etc. I don't know if we have the right....but do we have a moral obligation to try and right the wrongs of the world, Seems to be we are damned if we do and damned if we don't :(
landmarker
02-Feb-06, 22:55
As far as I know, most countries in the world signed an agreement to non proliferation. NON PROLIFERATION. If a country like Iran does develop nuclear weapons, how long do you think it would take for a dirty bomb to go off in Picadilly Circus during peek hour traffic?
When it came to Saddam and Iraque, I was ( and am ) against going in.The country was on it's knees and the UN were not backing intervention.
With Iraq, there is no secret on their designs. They have even threatened proliferation, so yes, UN, please do intervene before we get the fist dirty bombing sice Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
I had to read this twice but I know what you mean and for once we are in agreement, apart from your last sentence. Those bombs probably saved a quarter of a million lives, many of them American. Who knows how many millions since have been preserved simpky because of this demonstration of awesome destructive power?
Iran does not really need nuclear power with all the oil reserves it's sitting upon.
Oil which they can sell to generate revenue rather than burn themselves.
There can be little doubt this is all a front to mask development of a nuclear weapons system. Given that the Iranian leader has vowed to 'wipe Israel off the map' it doesn't bode well really does it?
He didn't vow he "called" for Israel to be wiped off the map. Sounds like the ideal solution to me, better altering a load of maps than killing a load of people and Israel hasn't been on the maps all that long anyway, never should have been there in the first place.
Iran is a country governed by fanatical clerics. An uneasy youth are repressed and a very large proportion of the population want closer ties with the west. Repressed yet by the legacy of Ayatollah Homeini, another of the leaderships remarks was 'I wish to oversee the end of the wordl' !
In August 2005 those fanatical clerics you talk of issued a fatwa forbidding the production of nuclear weapons, which is very much against the Islamic religion.
Iran has no nuclear weapons nor the capability to produce them, Israel does, more than Britain has and most of them pointed at Iran. Israel has not signed the NPT as Iran has, Israel does not allow UN monitoring of their nuclear sites as Iran does, they refuse to even admit they have nuclear weapons.
Why is Israel not being reported to the Security Council?
Landmarker,the difference between Gleeber and Gleber2 is the same as chalk and cheese.It would hurt him more than it hurts me to get us mixed up.I have read the posts up to now and will have to think a while before replying at length.
One point,Jaws,I don't care if you are white or black,East or West,British or Yank,right or left and I am not casting blame.The simplest of pictures carry a lot of imformation if viewed with an eye that is looking for truths rather than faults.
If it is wrong for religious fanatics to have nuclear bombs there are Jews,Hindus.Muslims,Koreans and Christian fanatics who shouldn't have them also. Do we have the right to decide which fanatics have them and which don't?
The whys and wherefores of the situation world wide is of no consequence.It does not matter how we got here but it matters what we are going to do about it.
I'll take up the challenge,Jaws, because you will never find me in a pub or restuarant.As a vegerarian,non-drinking misanthrop I rarely go out.Anyway,when are you away from the Forum long enough to go out[lol]
landmarker
02-Feb-06, 23:15
Why is Israel not being reported to the Security Council?
Israel has never signed the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty. Iran has.
landmarker
02-Feb-06, 23:21
Furthermore: To allow the leaders of Iran to get anywhere near possession of a nuclear weapon would be tantamount to a dereliction of duty by any western government.
I'm sorry, but those who lead Iran (not the majority of population) glory in death. They love death as much as we love life. I rely on the Americans, ultimately to bomb any nuclear facility if sanctions fail.
Those who think otherwise are gullible in the extreme. Do you wish to appease those who would destroy you? For goodness sake wake up.
Iran has enough oil to keep her people warm and make a decent wedge flogging the rest to the west Fred.(no serial killer pun intended)
landmarker
02-Feb-06, 23:22
Landmarker,the difference between Gleeber and Gleber2 is the same as chalk and cheese.]
I presume you live together. It must be lively !
Israel has never signed the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty. Iran has.
So if you sign the treaty and don't make any nuclear weapons you get reported to the Security Council and if you don't sign the treaty and do make nuclear weapons you don't.
Is it any wonder the world's in the state it is in.
landmarker
02-Feb-06, 23:30
So if you sign the treaty and don't make any nuclear weapons you get reported to the Security Council and if you don't sign the treaty and do make nuclear weapons you don't.
Is it any wonder the world's in the state it is in.
I can neither agree , nor disagree but the reason the west has an argument with Iran is that it signed the treaty. If it hadn't , then the bombs would probably already have been delivered.
Would you give a mad dog a shot of adrenalin Fred?
Bravo Fred. I never,at any time suggested that Iran should have nuclear capability. In a previous thread I was lambasted by the keeper of our collective conscience(who shall remain nameless) for voicing my concerns over Iran and their threats.I was told it was propoganda and not to be taken seriously.
I am saying that we do not have the right to dictate to any country what they can or cannot do.Who ever makes the first nuclear strike will set of the holocaust and will be the ones whom history will condemn.Pre-emptive bombing will be as spiritually wrong as the first bomb fired by an agressor such as Iran.
Some-one suggested that Gleeber and Gleber2 lived together.How horrible to live with that opinionated do-gooder who sees the world through Freud tinted glasses and tolerates everyone except those that disagree with him.I've known him for over fifty years and I ken him weel.:lol:
As far as I know, most countries in the world signed an agreement to non proliferation. NON PROLIFERATION. If a country like Iran does develop nuclear weapons, how long do you think it would take for a dirty bomb to go off in Picadilly Circus during peek hour traffic?
It wouldn't happen, the dirty bomb is a myth, a bogey man that governments use to scare people into letting them commit atrocities. The only part of a dirty bomb that could kill anyone is the explosive used to set it off.
The principal of a dirty bomb is to use explosives to distribute radioactive dust over a wide area, by spreading the radioactive material over a wide area you reduce the dose any individual would recieve to less than you would get from an xray. If a dirty bomb went off in Picadilly Circus they'd just evacuate the area and vacuum up the dust.
Whitewater
02-Feb-06, 23:53
I can agree with Freds post on all aspects apart from
As I said, if Iran were to start enriching uranium now in ten years they might have enough to make one bomb, provided they had the technology to build one by then, what's the panic for?
I have just done some googling typed in the words 'Atomic Bomb' and found out that the technology for building atomic, hydrogen or fusion bombs is all available, and they do not need massive amounts of enriched uranium either. The only thing that will slow them down is the availability of plants for the enrichment.
However, regarding the original question ''do we have the right''. I say no, I don't think Britain can dictate and neither should America. It should be done through the unity of all nations not just the United Nations and the IAEA.
Perhaps they are being quite genuine in building the atomic stations so that they can sell all their oil, or making a positive effort to reduce global warming, but I'm not really that nieve and neither is anybody else.
The country is run by a bunch of religious nutters who don't give a hoot about
themselves or anybody else and when you get people like that in charge anything can happen, and the Islamic hatred of the Jews has increased rather than decreased over the last 2000 years, so don't hold your breath as to their intentions.
However, regarding the original question ''do we have the right''. I say no, I don't think Britain can dictate and neither should America. It should be done through the unity of all nations not just the United Nations and the IAEA.
You are right, but the UK and the US are atm just lobbying the UN to the risks posed, they are not up to now going it alone like in Iraq.
landmarker
02-Feb-06, 23:59
Well said Whitwater.
What the Iranians would need is a 'breeder reactor' to produce weapons grade enriched uranium.
The first sign of such a facility should be met with the full force of western responses because if Israel does it first ( and she might ) there will be an even bigger fuss.
The best way to combat this is to reach out to the poor, the hungry and the educated in Iran because mos tof them are well fed up with the Government.
Support oppostion in all possible ways but if all else fails blast the threat into oblivion after giving twenty four hours warning by leaflet drop.
Fred, Iran has kept it's nuclear research hidden for 18 years. The estimates for them being able to produce a nuclear weapon ranges from two to ten years.
They are already a lot further on than most people are led to believe. It's not a matter of "if they start now", the IAEA has already found traces a couple of years ago, Iran refused to give a proper explanation of what they were doing there.
They already have the material to make the trigger mechanism (the explosive used to start the chain reaction in the bomb).
A nuclear scientist from Pakistan has sold them the design for such a bomb.
The facility at Natanz, which Iran kept from the IAEA, the development of both heavy and light water reactors, which are far in excess of their stated needs for power. The discovery of uranium metal which neither use and the undeclared enrichment of uranium added to the fact that the IAEA was prevented from taking environmental samples from site connected with enrichment basically means nobody is quite sure just how much nuclear materials they might have. Add to that the fact that if Russia provides them with the materials they need for power stations then the need for those unchecked facilities would disappear. One might wonder why they are so intent on keeping the facilities which are used for the production of bomb materials.
A check of the BBC site proves rather interesting, unless you are convinced that the CIA writes their script as well.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4134614.stm
Russia, hardly an American Stooge unless they to are secretly in the pay of the CIA, has bent over backwards to provide a solution which would satisfy everybody and to ensure Iran is supplied with enough Nuclear Fuel for it's power production, only to receive a point blank refusal from Iran.
I like the bit about Russia, China and Iraq all conspiring to stitch America up, now that is a new one, I like that one.
I'd love to know what the 'imaginary incident' was that made America get involved in Vietnam and just when it happened. No doubt there was also an 'imaginary incident' which brought them in to the Second World War as well. The rest of the World must be totally lacking in intelligence if they don't see what's happening, or rather not happening or do they all say "Shush, don't mention the Imaginary Incidents in front of the Americans."
It's almost as laughable as the theory that America never went to the moon and the Russians just happened not to notice that Nixon was actually talking to an actor on a back lot in Hollywood! I know they were only supposed to be "Dumb Ruskies", but I don't know anybody who thought they were that dumb. The height of the Cold War and Moscow just failed to notice when it was being handed Propaganda on a Silver Platter, wow, no wonder the KGB haven't said anything since.
And now we have Tony and George W. backed by France (now that’s really novel) and Germany leaning on Russia, China and the Developing Nations to put pressure on the UN so America has an excuse to invade Iran.
I don’t know who comes up with these theories but they could make a fortune in Hollywood, “Hello, I’ve got another Block Buster for you if you want to make a few more millions! I can write you one a week.”
For an Organization which is usually behaves with the delicacy of a raging elephant in a minefield the CIA don't half come up with some brilliant ideas.
I obviously take notice of the wrong propaganda sheets. Any suggestions which ones I should read to be better informed?
And has anybody found out who killed Patrice Lumumba or Dag Hammarskjold.
If a dirty bomb went off in Picadilly Circus they'd just evacuate the area and vacuum up the dust.
I'm just off to ring Dounreay, they'll be glad to know it's that easy.
All that money being wasted when all they need is a hoover!
Somebody had better tell the MOD as well so they won't have any more complaints about depleted uranium.
What have ye done wi e' Arch Enemy. He wid a shot ye doon in flames by e' now.
A check of the BBC site proves rather interesting, unless you are convinced that the CIA writes their script as well.
I remember when the BBC were telling us about Saddams weapons of mass destruction ready to wipe us out at 45 minutes notice.
Have you read the Downing Street Memos, the ones the Government wouldn't let the British papers publish? They prove that first we decided to invade Iraq and then set about creating an excuse, including trying to get the UN to make unreasonable demands which we knew Saddam would never agree to. They also talk about preparing the British public and timing the invasion for 30 days before the American congressional elections.
I'd love to know what the 'imaginary incident' was that made America get involved in Vietnam and just when it happened.
It happened, or rather it didn't happen on the 4th of August 1964 when the American ship the Turner Joy claimed to have been attacked in the Gulf of Tonkin. President Johnson used the attack to get Congress to give him control of the American forces and use them "as the President shall determin". The attack didn't happen, that is official, even the American government have admitted that the ship was never attacked and there is strong evidence if not proof that President Johnson knew it.
I'm just off to ring Dounreay, they'll be glad to know it's that easy.
All that money being wasted when all they need is a hoover!
Somebody had better tell the MOD as well so they won't have any more complaints about depleted uranium.
Anyone here works at Dounray who would like to tell us what affect exposure to a small amount of uranium for a short period of time would have on a person?
Anyone here works at Dounray who would like to tell us what affect exposure to a small amount of uranium for a short period of time would have on a person?
Gulf war syndrome is an example.... just one example
Fred, Iran has kept it's nuclear research hidden for 18 years. The estimates for them being able to produce a nuclear weapon ranges from two to ten years.
They are already a lot further on than most people are led to believe. It's not a matter of "if they start now", the IAEA has already found traces a couple of years ago, Iran refused to give a proper explanation of what they were doing there.
They already have the material to make the trigger mechanism (the explosive used to start the chain reaction in the bomb).
A nuclear scientist from Pakistan has sold them the design for such a bomb.
The facility at Natanz, which Iran kept from the IAEA, the development of both heavy and light water reactors, which are far in excess of their stated needs for power. The discovery of uranium metal which neither use and the undeclared enrichment of uranium added to the fact that the IAEA was prevented from taking environmental samples from site connected with enrichment basically means nobody is quite sure just how much nuclear materials they might have. Add to that the fact that if Russia provides them with the materials they need for power stations then the need for those unchecked facilities would disappear. One might wonder why they are so intent on keeping the facilities which are used for the production of bomb materials.
A check of the BBC site proves rather interesting, unless you are convinced that the CIA writes their script as well.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4134614.stm
Russia, hardly an American Stooge unless they to are secretly in the pay of the CIA, has bent over backwards to provide a solution which would satisfy everybody and to ensure Iran is supplied with enough Nuclear Fuel for it's power production, only to receive a point blank refusal from Iran.
I like the bit about Russia, China and Iraq all conspiring to stitch America up, now that is a new one, I like that one.
I'd love to know what the 'imaginary incident' was that made America get involved in Vietnam and just when it happened. No doubt there was also an 'imaginary incident' which brought them in to the Second World War as well. The rest of the World must be totally lacking in intelligence if they don't see what's happening, or rather not happening or do they all say "Shush, don't mention the Imaginary Incidents in front of the Americans."
It's almost as laughable as the theory that America never went to the moon and the Russians just happened not to notice that Nixon was actually talking to an actor on a back lot in Hollywood! I know they were only supposed to be "Dumb Ruskies", but I don't know anybody who thought they were that dumb. The height of the Cold War and Moscow just failed to notice when it was being handed Propaganda on a Silver Platter, wow, no wonder the KGB haven't said anything since.
And now we have Tony and George W. backed by France (now that’s really novel) and Germany leaning on Russia, China and the Developing Nations to put pressure on the UN so America has an excuse to invade Iran.
I don’t know who comes up with these theories but they could make a fortune in Hollywood, “Hello, I’ve got another Block Buster for you if you want to make a few more millions! I can write you one a week.”
For an Organization which is usually behaves with the delicacy of a raging elephant in a minefield the CIA don't half come up with some brilliant ideas.
I obviously take notice of the wrong propaganda sheets. Any suggestions which ones I should read to be better informed?
And has anybody found out who killed Patrice Lumumba or Dag Hammarskjold.
Once again I am in full agreement with you Jaws, I think we as the west should monitor Iran, but can we trust the UN to do it? The UN fell for G Dubbya and Tonys lies and issued the mandate to invade Iran, were any WMD ever found, No , its approx 1006 days since our allies and us invaded Iraq and nothing has been found. I think we should withdraw all our troops NOW, Americans included. the main 3 letter word at the head of this conflic is not WMD but OIL, and oh boy what did G Dubbya say at the "State of the Nation" speech, America has to become less reliant on imported oil. He does not want to be there now either.
Once again I am in full agreement with you Jaws, I think we as the west should monitor Iraq, but can we trust the UN to do it? The UN fell for G Dubbya and Tonys lies and issued the mandate to invade Iran, were any WMD ever found, No , its approx 1006 days since our allies and us invaded Iran and nothing has been found. I think we should withdraw all our troops NOW, Americans included. the main 3 letter word at the head of this conflic is not WMD but OIL, and oh boy what did G Dubbya say at the "State of the Nation" speech, America has to become less reliant on imported oil. He does not want to be there now either.Lol golach, you must be in a bit of a state over this business -- which country is which? :lol:
For the record, the UN didn't issue an explicit mandate to invade Iraq.
A few months ago, I spoke to a friend who's a high-ranking military officer who recently spent something like 9 months working with his American equivalents in Iraq. He says the US won't invade Iran like they did Iraq -- they're not that stupid -- but he reckoned that they wouldn't hesitate to bomb nuclear sites in Iran. The only country they might invade in the near future is Syria.
by spreading the radioactive material over a wide area you reduce the dose any individual would recieve to less than you would get from an xray
Care to share the maths with us on that Fred? Also back them up with some hard figures please. As your source term for the radioactive part us the standard inventory for a radioisotope thermoelectric generator (several of which are lying around in "uncontrolled" conditions).
Lol golach, you must be in a bit of a state over this business -- which country is which? :lol:
For the record, the UN didn't issue an explicit mandate to invade Iraq.
A few months ago, I spoke to a friend who's a high-ranking military officer who recently spent something like 9 months working with his American equivalents in Iraq. He says the US won't invade Iran like they did Iraq -- they're not that stupid -- but he reckoned that they wouldn't hesitate to bomb nuclear sites in Iran. The only country they might invade in the near future is Syria.
OOOPs beeg typo I'm so ashamed [lol]
Gulf war syndrome is an example.... just one example
I thought gulf war syndrome was attributed to chemical weapons, or the drugs used to combat them.
But even if it wasn't stop and think. If you are a trerrorist and you have some explosives do you search round the world to find someone who will give you radioactive material, risk taking that radioactive material across borders and smuggling it into Britain to mix with your explosives, set it off in Picadilly Circus where it will do no lasting damage except there is a slight possibility a few people might start feeling ill in years to come?
Or do you just take your explosives and blow up a tube train full of people?
wickerinca
03-Feb-06, 21:58
I thought gulf war syndrome was attributed to chemical weapons, or the drugs used to combat them.
But even if it wasn't stop and think. If you are a trerrorist and you have some explosives do you search round the world to find someone who will give you radioactive material, risk taking that radioactive material across borders and smuggling it into Britain to mix with your explosives, set it off in Picadilly Circus where it will do no lasting damage except there is a slight possibility a few people might start feeling ill in years to come?
Or do you just take your explosives and blow up a tube train full of people?
Think that I would just go with the explosives. Messy but gets it over and done with quicker!!
I thought gulf war syndrome was attributed to chemical weapons, or the drugs used to combat them.So did I -- until I saw a news story about a report on recent research on Gulf War Syndrome (GWS). The report claimed there was no statistical evidence whatsoever for GWS! Having read all sorts of horror stories of the suffering of Gulf War veterans, I found this hard to believe, but I never got around to reading the report, so I can't comment further.
But even if it wasn't stop and think. If you are a trerrorist and you have some explosives do you search round the world to find someone who will give you radioactive material, risk taking that radioactive material across borders and smuggling it into Britain to mix with your explosives, set it off in Picadilly Circus where it will do no lasting damage except there is a slight possibility a few people might start feeling ill in years to come?
Or do you just take your explosives and blow up a tube train full of people?I do believe the people of London (and Madrid) already know the answer to that question.
So we are going to report Iran to the UN.They continue to thumb their noses at the West.What next,one wonders.
So we are going to report Iran to the UN.They continue to thumb their noses at the West.What next,one wonders.
America will continue to bully the countries it can bully and bribe the ones it can't into backing them at the UN, I expect Turkey will get some very lucrative supply contracts for Iraq and I think Russia will do very nicely out of it possibly even getting a licence for oil exploration in the undeveloped parts of Iraq. America will do everything it can to provoke Iran, they will try and bypass the UN and get as many countries as they can to impose sanctions before they are imposed by the UN.
Menwhile the corporate owned media will stir up as much hatred and fear as they can. The Iranian leaders will be demonised, opposition parties and disidents quoted extensively and little mention made of the majority who elected them in a free and American scrutinised democratic election. There will probably be a major terrorist incident, or a minor one blown out of proportion, linked to Iran. Circumstantial evidence will be piled up and statements obtained under torture to prove to the world what untrustworthy and unreliable people the Iranians are while no mention will be made of the fact that by continuing to develop nuclear weapons America is in direct violation of the NPT agreement they signed and far more guilty than Iran of the same crimes they accuse them of.
There is a distinct possibility of a surprise preemptive air attack against Iranian missile bases, possibly under Israelie colours and as the missiles are burried deep nuclear weapons would need to be used to be certain Iran couldn't retaliate.
One thing is for certain, America will do as much as is neccessary to ensure that the oil bourse Iran is opening in March never gets successful enough for countries to start trading their dollar reserves for euros. They will do it with threats bullying and bribery, what they term diplomacy, if they can but if they can't do it that way they will attack.
So did I -- until I saw a news story about a report on recent research on Gulf War Syndrome (GWS). The report claimed there was no statistical evidence whatsoever for GWS! Having read all sorts of horror stories of the suffering of Gulf War veterans, I found this hard to believe, but I never got around to reading the report, so I can't comment further.
I do believe the people of London (and Madrid) already know the answer to that question.
GWS is an on going issue Doc, the RBL and all the other Forces organisations are putting up a brave fight against HMG and the MoD at the moment, but its a hard struggle,
How can I argue with such eloquence. A beautifully sculpted arguement wich has such a strong chance of being right.The end could well be nigh!!!
Chobbersjnr
06-Feb-06, 04:19
Keep up yur predictions an ye could become e' next Prophet:p
Keep up yur predictions an ye could become e' next Prophet:p
Bewaare the IIIIdes of Maaarch.
Chobbersjnr
07-Feb-06, 13:38
Aye March is lookan bad richt enuff.
Fred, I don’t know where to start but I’ll have a go! Stand by folks this is a long one and it's bound to bring out more Conspiracy Theories than a Freddie Forsyth Novel.
Don’t go to St Ives, you will get a higher dose of radiation there than the safe limit laid down for places like Dounreay.
Unless you wish to go so far as one Russian Scientist who held that there is no safe limit at all for radiation and that all radiation, however small the amount can do serious damage. (Somebody on the Board will probably know about him, even his name. If I memory serves me he said it long before the Second World War) Beware everybody, if they mention an X-ray at the hospital, run like hell, they are trying to kill you! The same radiation killed Madame Curie didn't it?
Vietnam, 1964? I didn’t know JFK was alive then, I thought he was killed in 1962.
It was JFK who got America involved in Vietnam. I was involved in Anti-Vietnam Protests as a student in 1964/5 and America was well involved before and during that period and had been for some time! I really am surprised you didn’t know about the CIA involvement or the “Military Advisors” for several years prior the LBJ (Remember “All the way with LBJ” as an Election Slogan?)
Your comment about the BBC and WMDs puzzles me, are you suggesting that the BBC deliberately involved itself in deceiving the Public by spreading propaganda on behalf of Bush and Blair?
France, bullied by America at the UN? I wouldn’t suggest that in France if I were you. The French can be very touchy when suggestions that they just follow American Instructions.
The Gulf War Syndrome I will leave in DrSzin’s hands as he has obviously done some quick research into the matter. The only comment I will make at the moment is that there were Military Forces from Countries other than Britain and America involve in the same War does anybody know if they had similar ailments?
There seems to be some question as to why a terrorist would go the extent of scattering radio active material when a bomb on a tube would suffice.
The aim of the Terrorist is to spread fear and the confusion about the dangers of Radio-active Materials on this Board alone says that it is something the average person knows little about. (And I include myself in that, I am certainly not a Nuclear Scientist by any stretch of the imagination)
Spread a source of Nuclear Radiation about and you automatically spread long lasting fear. How many people will have given a thought to jumping on a bus or going on the tube in London this Morning? But if they still thought there might be a chance of radiation lingering there, what then? There isn’t a general agreement in Caithness about Sandside Beach in spite of the numbers working at Dounreay so what chance would your average Londoner have of making a rational decision about radiation?
The Euro/Dollar standoff? Has anybody let the Europeans, the Russians and the Chinese in on this dastardly plot to undermine their economies, or are they too stupid to see what is happening. Perhaps they are complicit in Americas devious plotting. The only reason that Oil is traded in Dollars is that there is a value common to all deals. The actual currency stated is largely irrelevant. What is there to stop two Countries agreeing to do deals using their own Currencies, all they have to do is settle on the exchange rate for that deal. Neither of them needs to have a single dollar bill in their possession.
Oh dear Fred, hands up all those who think we are about to Nuke Iran! Do I start digging my Nuclear Shelter now? How deep should I go and how long should I provision it for? And how do I stop the CIA stealing my plans?
We are on the verge of Armageddon and not a single Leader in the World is in the least bit concerned? China, Russia, France, India and Pakistan are all going the sit back and do nothing or will America have leaned on them to make them comply with their wishes. Perhaps this is that just another Worldwide Media Plot to spread disinformation and hide the truth from everybody?
Wow! The CIA have fooled the whole World, I never knew they were so good at their job.
Fred, you have just done the Terrorists a favour. They can stop plotting and trying to spread fear, all they have to do is take your script and convince the World it's true. Why bother with a few Bombers when you can convince people that we are on the verge of unrestricted Nuclear War. Even Bin Laden hasn't thought of threatening that. Boy, does he lack imagination! :lol:
I take it that you base all your assumptions on what you get from the media and the net and draw your conclusions accordingly.Others may well interpret the same information differently. How much of the aforementioned information can be considered true,is open to debate.The august leaders of the countries you mention would not be so honest as to let us all know exactly what they are up to here and now no matter what the situation world wide.Fred's scenario is just as likely as any that you might come up with from the same information.Nobody,I think, has stated that we are going to nuke Iran but there are countries out there who are crazy enough to do it for us. That's what worries me.:~(
I take it that you base all your assumptions on what you get from the media and the net and draw your conclusions accordingly.Others may well interpret the same information differently. How much of the aforementioned information can be considered true,is open to debate.The august leaders of the countries you mention would not be so honest as to let us all know exactly what they are up to here and now no matter what the situation world wide.Fred's scenario is just as likely as any that you might come up with from the same information.Nobody,I think, has stated that we are going to nuke Iran but there are countries out there who are crazy enough to do it for us. That's what worries me.:~(
An interesting article on the subject has just been published.
http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2006/02/1724445.php
Fred, you have just done the Terrorists a favour. They can stop plotting and trying to spread fear, all they have to do is take your script and convince the World it's true. Why bother with a few Bombers when you can convince people that we are on the verge of unrestricted Nuclear War. Even Bin Laden hasn't thought of threatening that. Boy, does he lack imagination! :lol:
That's what I say too, total lack of imagination. I mean an airline ticket and a box cutter? What damage can you do with an airline ticket and a box cutter?
I've just read the article you directed me to.Suddenly I'm more scared than before but what is being said is completely in keeping with my gut feelings.
Have you ever heard of something called Rex Deus?
That's what I say too, total lack of imagination. I mean an airline ticket and a box cutter? What damage can you do with an airline ticket and a box cutter?
The only thing new about that was that they didn't hang around to find if they were successful.
Still doesn't rank with going to within a few hours of Total Nuclear War. And that was only stopped by a guy fixing a lift or Bye Bye World.
The Euro/Dollar standoff? Has anybody let the Europeans, the Russians and the Chinese in on this dastardly plot to undermine their economies, or are they too stupid to see what is happening. Perhaps they are complicit in Americas devious plotting. The only reason that Oil is traded in Dollars is that there is a value common to all deals. The actual currency stated is largely irrelevant. What is there to stop two Countries agreeing to do deals using their own Currencies, all they have to do is settle on the exchange rate for that deal. Neither of them needs to have a single dollar bill in their possession.
I've just read an intersting article on this subject.
http://www.freemarketnews.com/Analysis/183/3744/2006-02-10.asp?wid=183&nid=3744
Did I miss the justification of the radiation dose due to a dirty bomb being the same as an average chest X-Ray? Was that a throw away remark Fred, or was it actually based upon something.....something sound?
I've just read an intersting article on this subject.
http://www.freemarketnews.com/Analysis/183/3744/2006-02-10.asp?wid=183&nid=3744
I had a look at that one Fred, funny that one person should realise what was happening when all the Finance Ministers whose Countries are being ripped off by the Americans have been too stupid to see it.
Are the Americans the only Country not using the Gold Standard? Do you know of many others who are? What happens to their Currencies when the value of gold varies, are they not affected by that?
Who was fixing the price of Gold when America came off the Gold Standard, have you any ideas?
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.