PDA

View Full Version : Iran's Nuclear Ambitions?



Rheghead
26-Nov-09, 18:28
Should Iran be allowed to develop the nuclear bomb? And if not, what should the UN do about it? I can't think of anything short of an invasion would stop them so should the UN give a resolution to allow invasive military action against Iran?

Stavro
26-Nov-09, 18:45
Should Iran be allowed to develop the nuclear bomb? And if not, what should the UN do about it? I can't think of anything short of an invasion would stop them so should the UN give a resolution to allow invasive military action against Iran?

You think that Iran is the latest bogey man then? There is no evidence that Iran is trying to develop a nuclear bomb, only that they are developing nuclear energy plants, as they are perfectly entitled to do. If they wanted nuclear weapons, they could easily just buy them from the old Soviet Union states.

I hope that we are not going to be duped into another of these 45-minute-type "claims."

gleeber
26-Nov-09, 18:57
There is no evidence that Iran is trying to develop a nuclear bomb
When were you ever swung by evidence Stavro?

Rheghead
26-Nov-09, 19:00
When were you ever swung by evidence Stavro?

Right on there gleeber.

Rheghead
26-Nov-09, 19:01
they could easily just buy them from the old Soviet Union states.

I doubt it, what is your reasoning?

joxville
26-Nov-09, 19:05
Who are we to say what they can and cannot have? After the lies upon lies sprouted by Bush & Blair, (who should be tried as war criminals), about Saddam having them then being proved wrong, I think it's time we kept our bloody noses out of it. Incidentally, if they do develop Nuclear Weapons, they are ublikely to use them-Ahmadinnerjacket just wants to have a bargaining chip.

Stavro
26-Nov-09, 19:11
When were you ever swung by evidence Stavro?

All the time, gleeber, but I question the evidence that I'm presented with, rather than just blindly swallowing what may turn out to be nothing more than propaganda to serve the interests of some group or individual.

Let me ask you a question, gleeber: The Iraqis were no danger to us whatsoever, yet hundreds of thousands of them have been killed on the word of a few people who turned out to be, in my opinion, liars. Based on this fact, do you consider that Iran's business is anything to do with us?

Stavro
26-Nov-09, 19:13
I doubt it, what is your reasoning?

Ukraine holds nuclear weapons. Ukraine is financially broke (can't even pay its gas bill). Iran has money from oil. If Iran wanted nukes, then why not just buy them?

Rheghead
26-Nov-09, 19:16
Ukraine holds nuclear weapons. Ukraine is financially broke (can't even pay its gas bill). Iran has money from oil. If Iran wanted nukes, then why not just buy them?

Errr. Ukraine didn't buy nukes from the old Soviet states, it was one of the old Soviet states! :roll:

Stavro
26-Nov-09, 19:17
Errr. Ukraine didn't buy nukes from the old Soviet states, it was one of the old Soviet states! :roll:

What are you on about??

Rheghead
26-Nov-09, 19:20
What are you on about??

I ask you where your reasoning is for your assertion that Iran can buy nukes, so far I'm unimpressed.

Stavro
26-Nov-09, 19:25
I ask you where your reasoning is for your assertion that Iran can buy nukes, so far I'm unimpressed.

To be honest, Rheghead, I take it as a compliment that you are "unimpressed." :lol:

You asked for my reasoning on Iran being able to buy nuclear weapons (if it desired them) from the old Soviet Union states. When I told you my reasoning with regard to Ukraine, you came back and said that Ukraine did not buy them from the old Soviet Union states because it was an old Soviet Union state. But this is exactly what I was claiming! Get a clue, Rhegers, old bean. [lol]

gleeber
26-Nov-09, 19:26
I would prefer we lived in a world of perfect splendour. I'm glad the Americans are on our side and have shown their responsability in the way they have used their power.
Its not so easy to be an independant state with no ties to others in the modern world. I percieve Iran as a threat because of their religious ideals and hatred of America.
For that reason alone if I were the leader of any freedom loving country I would be very concerned if Iran had the capability to make Nuclear weapons.

Rheghead
26-Nov-09, 19:34
You asked for my reasoning on Iran being able to buy nuclear weapons (if it desired them) from the old Soviet Union states.

Why would Ukraine compromise its own safety and its standing with the IAEA and the international community for a quick buck? Ukraine seeks international support in the shadow of Russia's influence in its own domestic affairs. Your reasoning is nonsensical.

Phill
26-Nov-09, 19:40
I honestly don't know if they should or shouldn't be allowed.

Part of me thinks what is it to do with us to tell another nation what to do, but then it does make me nervous just what controls would be in place should they do develop them, Ahvehadmedinnerdad probably does want the bargaining chip and a better seat at the world dinner table.
But is the rest of the hierarchy in the upper echelons of Iran's chain of command stable enough for the us to be confident there isn't going to be a breakaway loon with his finger on the button?

And, if "we" did decide not to allow it what can we do? Send a strongly worded letter, we certainly can't entertain military intervention in yet another country can we................oh, forgot, can't expect this government to make a sensible decision :eek:

Let's keep cutting back the MoD and send more poorly kitted troops to Afghanistan & Iraq and then pile into Iran while trying to keep the Russians under guard as well.

Yes I can guess what Gordo will do[disgust]
whatever the yanks tell 'im too

Rheghead
26-Nov-09, 19:43
If World Peace is the omelette then Iran is one of the eggs, no?

Stavro
26-Nov-09, 19:44
Why would Ukraine compromise its own safety and its standing with the IAEA and the international community for a quick buck? Ukraine seeks international support in the shadow of Russia's influence in its own domestic affairs. Your reasoning is nonsensical.

I suppose that we're getting somewhere now, because at least you have responded to the actual claim.

Such weapons can (and do) go "missing," as you will no doubt remember that the United States "lost" some nukes a short time back.

Rheghead
26-Nov-09, 19:51
So if Iran builds a nuclear weapon and blows up Tel Aviv, who is too blame? Iran or the UN for not acting when it had the chance?

Rheghead
26-Nov-09, 19:52
Such weapons can (and do) go "missing," as you will no doubt remember that the United States "lost" some nukes a short time back.

Actual weapons or just weapons grade materials?

golach
26-Nov-09, 20:06
Kaitness has its own wee nukey bomb still sitting near you Rheg, look out the Gaelic National Liberation Front, may yet decide to blame you for Vulcan lol

Stavro
26-Nov-09, 21:20
Who are we to say what they can and cannot have? After the lies upon lies sprouted by Bush & Blair, (who should be tried as war criminals), about Saddam having them then being proved wrong, I think it's time we kept our bloody noses out of it.

After being proved 100% wrong now their agenda is to terrify the US public into believing that the nonexistent WMD are in Iran or maybe Syria and the nuclear weapons and missiles are going to be used to destroy American cites. Watch out for false flags to blame the Iranians!

Cedric Farthsbottom III
26-Nov-09, 21:24
I voted yes(Iran should have them).For to have them is a different question to use them.Protect your own.The system is set up that if one was ever used the backlash would be like the scenario in the film "War Games".Tic tac toe.....no winners only losers....for when nuclear weapons are finally used the human race is knackered.The earth and all the rest of its intelligent animals will keep going on though,will recover as it always has.:)

Rheghead
27-Nov-09, 03:08
shocking

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8382008.stm

NickInTheNorth
27-Nov-09, 09:44
I voted The UN should allow invasive military action if needed.

The problem with nuclear weapons is that unless your neighbours believe that you will use them they are worthless as a bargaining chip.

Therefore the argument that Iran only wants them as a bargaining chip is self defeating. If they real want them but not genuinely would never use them they are worthless.

As Stavro has pointed out they have a lot of oil - an unbelievable amount of oil, the third largest reserves in the world! That oil is effectively free for their use. Developing / building / running a nuclear power plant is a pretty expensive business. If you are sitting on almost unlimited oil, why would you develop nuclear power?

Let's do what the Israeli's did to Osirak, but let's do it with what international authority is available - the UN. Nothing more, no invasion, no troops on the ground, a simple surgical excision to remove their nuclear ambition.

Lets send a message to the world that nuclear proliferation will not be tolerated by the international community, and let's hope that further inroads can be made into destroying the ridiculous stockpiles of such weapons still in the hands of many countries.

Rheghead
27-Nov-09, 13:47
It looks like things are mounting up against Iran

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8382486.stm

Perhaps the US is finally back up to strength with her long range cruise missiles?

One of the nasty bits about nuclear power is the reprocessing of fuel rods so why is Tehran passing up the opportunity of having it taken care of by willing volunteers?

tonkatojo
27-Nov-09, 14:23
Did anyone expect them to comply fully ??, I remember another neighbour of theirs played the same game with dire results.
To me it seems they cannot help themselves in not telling the truth, is it in their genetic make up or what. I do not know all the ins and outs of there country but it seem to me whenever an Islamic republic is run by extremist clerics and fanatic followers banging their foreheads with their fists chanting anti western drivel and government officials threatening a UN recognised state, trouble is not far away. :(

Stavro
27-Nov-09, 19:51
Did anyone expect them to comply fully ??, I remember another neighbour of theirs played the same game with dire results.
To me it seems they cannot help themselves in not telling the truth, is it in their genetic make up or what. I do not know all the ins and outs of there country but it seem to me whenever an Islamic republic is run by extremist clerics and fanatic followers banging their foreheads with their fists chanting anti western drivel and government officials threatening a UN recognised state, trouble is not far away. :(

In my opinion, the blood of 1.33 million Iraqis is on the hands, not only of Bush and Blair, but of all those that are and were complicit in the lies and warmongering that went on and still goes on.

The Iranians have been telling the truth and they have been fully compliant with the obligations placed upon them. It is the Western powers, yet again, who are telling lies. :(

J C Denton
27-Nov-09, 20:55
UN: "Here, Iran, you aren't allowed to have nuclear weapons."
Iran: "Why not?"
UN: "We don't think you should have them."
Iran: "Lots of UN members have nuclear weapons though."
UN: "Yes, umm, but that's alright because, erm, because we say so. So there."

EDDIE
27-Nov-09, 21:01
So if Iran builds a nuclear weapon and blows up Tel Aviv, who is too blame? Iran or the UN for not acting when it had the chance?

Look at iraq they didnt have any nuclear weapons look what happened to them look at all the information which was given about iraq all false and made up for all we no iran might not have the technolgy to build nuclear weapons and the powers to be are probably making out they do when they dont another setup i sometimes wonder if america does send the 30 thousand troops and all the rest to afganistan maybey there gearing up to start on iran while there there ot probably wouldnt take a lot to send iran to the same state as iraq

Serenity
27-Nov-09, 21:12
Look at iraq they didnt have any nuclear weapons look what happened to them look at all the information which was given about iraq all false and made up for all we no iran might not have the technolgy to build nuclear weapons and the powers to be are probably making out they do when they dont another setup i sometimes wonder if america does send the 30 thousand troops and all the rest to afganistan maybey there gearing up to start on iran while there there ot probably wouldnt take a lot to send iran to the same state as iraq

I know the Org doesn't have rules against poor grammar and spelling, but could we maybe have that in English?

EDDIE
27-Nov-09, 21:50
I know the Org doesn't have rules against poor grammar and spelling, but could we maybe have that in English?

What a right negative person you are with your meaningless comments

tonkatojo
27-Nov-09, 22:11
In my opinion, the blood of 1.33 million Iraqis is on the hands, not only of Bush and Blair, but of all those that are and were complicit in the lies and warmongering that went on and still goes on.

The Iranians have been telling the truth and they have been fully compliant with the obligations placed upon them. It is the Western powers, yet again, who are telling lies. :(

Yeah, like declaring the latest installation that was covert until they were rumbled !!.
Hussain was stupid and played a poker game with an idiot called Bush and lost.The unfortunate "1.33 million" were the wronged, I totally agree, now there is another playing the same game with the UN. It is always the innocent that pay the price, as in any conflict.

Bazeye
28-Nov-09, 00:46
If Ukraine really are skint why dont they sell a duff one to Ahvehadmadinnerlady. They can agree to half the money up front and the rest when it goes off. Even half the recommended retail price of a nuke is better than nothing. They dont come cheap you know.

Stavro
28-Nov-09, 01:16
Yeah, like declaring the latest installation that was covert until they were rumbled !!.
Hussain was stupid and played a poker game with an idiot called Bush and lost.The unfortunate "1.33 million" were the wronged, I totally agree, now there is another playing the same game with the UN. It is always the innocent that pay the price, as in any conflict.


"Rumbled" by who? The New York Times and The Washington Post?

"Under the terms of Iran’s agreement with the IAEA, Tehran is required to report when nuclear material is introduced into a facility, not when construction of the facility begins. [3] Iran reiterated this point with the nuclear agency in March 2007 [4]. When centrifuges (which are used to process nuclear fuel) began to be moved into the unfinished plant, Iran let the IAEA know of the facility’s existence, in accordance with its agreement." (Source: http://gowans.wordpress.com/2009/09/27/iran%E2%80%99s-not-so-secret-secret-fuel-plant/ )

It was never "hidden," but was, as the above article points out, unannounced until it was announced. I would therefore suggest that the puppets in Washington, London, Paris and Berlin are the ones who are playing games with the lives of millions of innocent people.

We agree on who the innocent victims are, but not on who the perpetrators are.

Aaldtimer
28-Nov-09, 04:04
[quote=Stavro;
I would therefore suggest that the puppets in Washington, London, Paris and Berlin are the ones who are playing games with the lives of millions of innocent people.

It seems the Russians and Chinese are now among the puppets then!:confused

tonkatojo
28-Nov-09, 11:28
"Rumbled" by who? The New York Times and The Washington Post?

"Under the terms of Iran’s agreement with the IAEA, Tehran is required to report when nuclear material is introduced into a facility, not when construction of the facility begins. [3] Iran reiterated this point with the nuclear agency in March 2007 [4]. When centrifuges (which are used to process nuclear fuel) began to be moved into the unfinished plant, Iran let the IAEA know of the facility’s existence, in accordance with its agreement." (Source: http://gowans.wordpress.com/2009/09/27/iran%E2%80%99s-not-so-secret-secret-fuel-plant/ )

It was never "hidden," but was, as the above article points out, unannounced until it was announced. I would therefore suggest that the puppets in Washington, London, Paris and Berlin are the ones who are playing games with the lives of millions of innocent people.

We agree on who the innocent victims are, but not on who the perpetrators are.

Aye carry on with all the fancy quotes and watch the poker game with the UN played out blindly, we will see the outcome. ;)

Stavro
28-Nov-09, 18:47
It seems the Russians and Chinese are now among the puppets then!:confused

Yes, it does. :(