IAEA Report - Iran Devloping Nuclear Weapons

[TheBear]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/19/world/middleeast/19iran.html

[Loren Pechtel]

Where are the deniers?

[Jet Black]

No they aren't, because their glorious leader said they aren't, and he would never lie.

[frazier]

Where are the deniers?In the Iranian government, obviously. :rolleyes:

[TheBear]

Where are the deniers?Good question.

Over 60 views, and just a few replies. One might be led to believe that Ahmadinejad having nuclear weapons is no big deal.

[frazier]

One might be led to believe that Ahmadinejad having nuclear weapons is no big deal.
One might be led to believe that by posting a link to a well-known liberal rag, with no comment of your own, you are in favor of Ahmadinejad's actions.

See how easy it is to make ridiculous assertions in the absence of evidence?

I think most everyone has known, for years now, that Iran is working on nuclear capability. This report only confirms what has been known, or at least suspected. The question then is, what to do about it?

Since this is your thread, you go first.

[rog]

I think a land war is right out and they probably won't be a push over from the air either.http://en.rian.ru/world/20070405/63153397.html Don't forget that they have long range missiles aswell and would almost certainly use them in retaliation to any attack.

I just hope negotiations are fruitful, yet another war in the middle east could have unthinkable consequences imho; fingers crossed that this posturing is an act of brinkmanship.

[Loren Pechtel]

One might be led to believe that Ahmadinejad having nuclear weapons is no big deal.
One might be led to believe that by posting a link to a well-known liberal rag, with no comment of your own, you are in favor of Ahmadinejad's actions.

See how easy it is to make ridiculous assertions in the absence of evidence?

I think most everyone has known, for years now, that Iran is working on nuclear capability. This report only confirms what has been known, or at least suspected. The question then is, what to do about it?

Since this is your thread, you go first.

Maybe we don't have the deniers here but there are plenty over at FRDB at least.

[Ray Moscow]

If we let Iran develop nuclear weapons, soon Israel will want them, too.



Seriously: why wouldn't Iran want a few nukes? It gives them a guaranteed seat at the world power table. Of course they are trying to get them.

[Loren Pechtel]

If we let Iran develop nuclear weapons, soon Israel will want them, too.



Seriously: why wouldn't Iran want a few nukes? It gives them a guaranteed seat at the world power table. Of course they are trying to get them.

Of course they want them--they don't want to be held accountable for their terrorists like Afghanistan was.

[laughing dog]

If we let Iran develop nuclear weapons, soon Israel will want them, too.



Seriously: why wouldn't Iran want a few nukes? It gives them a guaranteed seat at the world power table. Of course they are trying to get them.

Of course they want them--they don't want to be held accountable for their terrorists like Afghanistan was. Or like Israel? Or noticing that we don't invade North Korea but we did invade Iraq?

[Loren Pechtel]

If we let Iran develop nuclear weapons, soon Israel will want them, too.



Seriously: why wouldn't Iran want a few nukes? It gives them a guaranteed seat at the world power table. Of course they are trying to get them.

Of course they want them--they don't want to be held accountable for their terrorists like Afghanistan was. Or like Israel? Or noticing that we don't invade North Korea but we did invade Iraq?

Every war Israel has been involved in has been instigated by the Arabs either directly or in one case by making it look like the Arabs were going to attack and Israel preempted them.

[laughing dog]

If we let Iran develop nuclear weapons, soon Israel will want them, too.



Seriously: why wouldn't Iran want a few nukes? It gives them a guaranteed seat at the world power table. Of course they are trying to get them.

Of course they want them--they don't want to be held accountable for their terrorists like Afghanistan was. Or like Israel? Or noticing that we don't invade North Korea but we did invade Iraq?

Every war Israel has been involved in has been instigated by the Arabs either directly or in one case by making it look like the Arabs were going to attack and Israel preempted them. This does not address my point at all.
I know you believe what you write. Just like when you argued that 8 year old boys who threw stones at the IDF were not children. That doesn't make your beliefs are more valid. Until you take the gov't of Israel's metaphorical cock out of your mouth, these discussions reveal more about your biases than anything about reality.

[Loren Pechtel]

If we let Iran develop nuclear weapons, soon Israel will want them, too.



Seriously: why wouldn't Iran want a few nukes? It gives them a guaranteed seat at the world power table. Of course they are trying to get them.

Of course they want them--they don't want to be held accountable for their terrorists like Afghanistan was. Or like Israel? Or noticing that we don't invade North Korea but we did invade Iraq?

Every war Israel has been involved in has been instigated by the Arabs either directly or in one case by making it look like the Arabs were going to attack and Israel preempted them. This does not address my point at all.
I know you believe what you write. Just like when you argued that 8 year old boys who threw stones at the IDF were not children. That doesn't make your beliefs are more valid. Until you take the gov't of Israel's metaphorical cock out of your mouth, these discussions reveal more about your biases than anything about reality.

Your "point" was simply to bash Israel despite having no context to do so.

[cape_royds]

I've been an ardent proliferationist for years. I damn well hope the Iranians get a deployable nuclear weapon!

The NPT is an obsolete treaty, no longer suited for today's geopolitical realities. It served a useful purpose during the Cold War by limiting the superpowers' possible use of nuclear-armed proxies. Since the end of the Cold War, however, the NPT is simply being used by the sole remaining military superpower to preserve its own ability to intervene at will anywhere in the world--an ability it fears would be checked if a number of minor powers acquired a means of potent retaliation.

BTW, there is nothing in the NPT that forbids the enrichment of uranium or breeding of plutonium. Even under that ridiculous outdated relic of a treaty, Iran does nothing wrong by insisting on its right to enrich uranium.

[rog]

If we let Iran develop nuclear weapons, soon Israel will want them, too.



Seriously: why wouldn't Iran want a few nukes? It gives them a guaranteed seat at the world power table. Of course they are trying to get them.

Of course they want them--they don't want to be held accountable for their terrorists like Afghanistan was. Or like Israel? Or noticing that we don't invade North Korea but we did invade Iraq?

Every war Israel has been involved in has been instigated by the Arabs either directly or in one case by making it look like the Arabs were going to attack and Israel preempted them. This does not address my point at all.
I know you believe what you write. Just like when you argued that 8 year old boys who threw stones at the IDF were not children. That doesn't make your beliefs are more valid. Until you take the gov't of Israel's metaphorical cock out of your mouth, these discussions reveal more about your biases than anything about reality.

Your "point" was simply to bash Israel despite having no context to do so.

Who needs a context? :D

[columbus]

If we let Iran develop nuclear weapons, soon Israel will want them, too.



Seriously: why wouldn't Iran want a few nukes? It gives them a guaranteed seat at the world power table. Of course they are trying to get them.

Of course they want them--they don't want to be held accountable for their terrorists like Afghanistan was. Or like Israel? Or noticing that we don't invade North Korea but we did invade Iraq?

I don't see what's complicated about this. Iran wants nuclear weapons so it can be a world power. Once they have them they know that they will be treated differently, like Pakistan, India, Israel, and all of America's other nuclear armed friends. When Bush all but declared war on the "Axis of Evil", everybody noticed that the government of NK did rather well and Saddam Hussien was hung. The difference is that Hussein had no credible military threat and NK did. Of course Iran stepped up their nuclear weapons program when they had American military forces on two of their biggest borders.

America has been trying to bully Iran for decades. From the Shah to Saddam we've supported every enemy they have, we practically forced them to acquire nuclear muscle in self-defense.

Tom

[rog]

North Korea is only a threat to Americans, because they are in South Korea; however, I think it suits the Chinese quite nicely to have a million man army led by a lunatic defending that peninsula.

[laughing dog]

If we let Iran develop nuclear weapons, soon Israel will want them, too.



Seriously: why wouldn't Iran want a few nukes? It gives them a guaranteed seat at the world power table. Of course they are trying to get them.

Of course they want them--they don't want to be held accountable for their terrorists like Afghanistan was. Or like Israel? Or noticing that we don't invade North Korea but we did invade Iraq?

Every war Israel has been involved in has been instigated by the Arabs either directly or in one case by making it look like the Arabs were going to attack and Israel preempted them. This does not address my point at all.
I know you believe what you write. Just like when you argued that 8 year old boys who threw stones at the IDF were not children. That doesn't make your beliefs are more valid. Until you take the gov't of Israel's metaphorical cock out of your mouth, these discussions reveal more about your biases than anything about reality.

Your "point" was simply to bash Israel despite having no context to do so. Your deepseated biases force to bash anyone who you irrationally fear is "bashing" the gov't of Israel. That was not point as anyone with a 1st grade level of reading comprehension and reasoning abilities could see.

It is quite reasonable for Iran to want nuclear weapons as cape royds points out.

[rog]

It is quite reasonable for Iran to want nuclear weapons as cape royds points out.

understandable, but I still don't think they should have them.

[laughing dog]

It is quite reasonable for Iran to want nuclear weapons as cape royds points out.

understandable, but I still don't think they should have them. I don't think anyone should have them. And, I don't think it is reasonable or right to attack Iran in order to prevent them from attaining nukes - that will only make them increase their efforts.

[TheBear]

I think most everyone has known, for years now, that Iran is working on nuclear capability. This report only confirms what has been known, or at least suspected. The question then is, what to do about it?I agree.

Israel has nuclear weapons already. The nuclear face-off between the US and the USSR had a major inhibitor to actually using the weapons - Mutually Assured Destruction. Seeing all the suicide bombers of the 'religion of peace', seeing how much they exalt martyrdom and treat it as the pinnacle of their faith, and seeing how they despise Israel, I doubt M.A.D. would have much influence.

[rog]

seeing how much they exalt martyrdom and treat it as the pinnacle of their faith, and seeing how they despise Israel, I doubt M.A.D. would have much influence.

A question regarding M.A.D. if Iran had attacked Israel with any sort of NBC weapon, could anyone see a retaliatory strike against a population centre as a justifiable response?

[TheBear]

seeing how much they exalt martyrdom and treat it as the pinnacle of their faith, and seeing how they despise Israel, I doubt M.A.D. would have much influence.

A question regarding M.A.D. if Iran had attacked Israel with any sort of NBC weapon, could anyone see a retaliatory strike against a population centre as a justifiable response?All I know is, if ever anyone launches nuclear weapons to anywhere, the planet will be in a world of shit.

[Azrael]

One might be led to believe that Ahmadinejad having nuclear weapons is no big deal.
One might be led to believe that by posting a link to a well-known liberal rag, with no comment of your own, you are in favor of Ahmadinejad's actions.

See how easy it is to make ridiculous assertions in the absence of evidence?

I think most everyone has known, for years now, that Iran is working on nuclear capability. This report only confirms what has been known, or at least suspected. The question then is, what to do about it?

Since this is your thread, you go first.

I agree. Iran is not fooling any one. And its obvious the International community is not fooled by this threat.

[munnki]

Given the absolute cuntiness of the nations that do already have nuclear weapons I'm not prepared to get all that pissed off about Iran having them. If the US, the UK, France, Pakistan, India, North Korea, Russia, China and Israel can have nuclear weapons given their respective foreign policies, leaderships and erratic behaviour then why is it such a big deal that Iran should have them? I'm just not convinced that any reason I could be given could not also be used as a reason against one of the other nuclear club nations not also having them. And the reason of non-proliferation doesn't really stand because if they really really want them then they're going to get them. And nor am I convinced that they'd instantly launch a salvo towards Israel should they have them. Although I think that the threat of a nuclear attack would be a positive threat with respect to Israel rather than a negative one.

[Horrorfan]

Given the absolute cuntiness of the nations that do already have nuclear weapons I'm not prepared to get all that pissed off about Iran having them. If the US, the UK, France, Pakistan, India, North Korea, Russia, China and Israel can have nuclear weapons given their respective foreign policies, leaderships and erratic behaviour then why is it such a big deal that Iran should have them? I'm just not convinced that any reason I could be given could not also be used as a reason against one of the other nuclear club nations not also having them. And the reason of non-proliferation doesn't really stand because if they really really want them then they're going to get them. And nor am I convinced that they'd instantly launch a salvo towards Israel should they have them. Although I think that the threat of a nuclear attack would be a positive threat with respect to Israel rather than a negative one.

We heard the same about N Korea when they developed nuclear weapons. Oh no, they are part of the axis of evil and they are going to blow up S Korea. Well that nonsense has been put to rest they have not bombed anyone and I believe they never will unless of course provoked by being attacked first.

I do not believe Iran is a threat. There history is not one of attacking and bombing countries unlike a few other countries that do have nuclear capabilities.

[rog]

My reading of the current N Korea nuclear capability, it that the bomb was the size of several trucks as was of a very low yield - it was though more a bargaining chip than a real threat.

[rog]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8543897.stm
US plans 'dramatic reductions' in nuclear weapons

Let's hope that there is movement on this.

[Loren Pechtel]

I think most everyone has known, for years now, that Iran is working on nuclear capability. This report only confirms what has been known, or at least suspected. The question then is, what to do about it?I agree.

Israel has nuclear weapons already. The nuclear face-off between the US and the USSR had a major inhibitor to actually using the weapons - Mutually Assured Destruction. Seeing all the suicide bombers of the 'religion of peace', seeing how much they exalt martyrdom and treat it as the pinnacle of their faith, and seeing how they despise Israel, I doubt M.A.D. would have much influence.

I don't think the Muslim leaders are going to be the suicide bomber type. The only way I would expect a nuclear attack out of Iran is if a dying leader decided to go out with a bang.

The risk I see is the same thing that happened with Russia: They couldn't be held accountable for all the terrorism they supported.

[Loren Pechtel]

I agree. Iran is not fooling any one. And its obvious the International community is not fooled by this threat.

Not fooling anyone intelligent. I've seen plenty of leftists who don't believe Iran is after the bomb.

[columbus]

We heard the same about N Korea when they developed nuclear weapons. Oh no, they are part of the axis of evil and they are going to blow up S Korea. Well that nonsense has been put to rest they have not bombed anyone and I believe they never will unless of course provoked by being attacked first.
The nonsense has not been put to rest at all. NK hasn't had a reason to attempt to use their primitive technology yet, but they did assert that cutting off aid from the outside would be an act of war. If the rest of the world doesn't keep propping up their government they will use them. So we do keep propping up one of the most disgusting regimes in the world.

I do not believe Iran is a threat. There history is not one of attacking and bombing countries unlike a few other countries that do have nuclear capabilities. Their history is one of western oppression. As that changes, history has less and less to do with the here and now. Iran is run by people who believe that God is on their side and so their rightful place in the world is as a dominant power. Rather like the other nuclear powers you describe. I believe they will use that power, when they get it, in ways that we decadent western oil-addicted atheists won't like.

I believe that Bush' unofficial declaration of war on NK, Iran, and Iraq was one of the worst foreign policy statements made in the history of the USA. Then to follow it up by placating NK, ignoring Iran, and invading Iraq was the biggest US foreign policy disaster he could have picked. Iran was always the biggest threat, and now they are bigger than ever. Their theocratic tyranny will be armed with nuclear weapons in the near future. The USA pissed away any chance they had of preventing that.

Tom