BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 06:23 PM

If not, what?

The man next door might break into my house and murder me in me bed... And you face the same risk yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 06:13 PM

"On the other hand there are no reasons whatsoever to imagine that Iran would pass nuclear weapons to Hezbollah. "


You seem willing to bet 7.5 billion lives or so on that. I hope you are correct- if not...

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 05:55 PM

There were plenty of reasons to expect that Germany might invade Poland. For that matter there are plenty of reasons to think that Isreal or the United States might attack Iran.

On the other hand there are no reasons whatsoever to imagine that Iran would pass nuclear weapons to Hezbollah.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Royston
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 05:50 PM

Teribus,

France? You may be right. I will go and read some more. In any event my point is that one of the permanent 5 gave WMD toys to one bunch of cranky religious fundamentalists so obviously the others are going to want it as well.

Beardedbruce, deep breaths. You're losing it a bit. North Korea has proven, as did Pakistan before It, that you have to go nuclear as it is the only way to be taken seriously, and not get invaded.

Britain developed its own nuclear technology. We were a manhattan project partner. The USA dealt us in on a fast track to a deliverable, mass produced weapon.

The radioactive material released from Chernobyl was way beyond anything a middle of the road fission bomb can do. I'm not saying that's good, but we have to have some perspective here.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 04:31 PM

"It's the last hing they be likely to do "

And Chamberlain achieved "Peace in ( His) time" because Herr Hitler has no intention of invading Poland...

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 04:19 PM

the test will probably be giving it to Hezboallah

What possible reason would they have to do that? It's the last hing they be likely to do - the reason for having the bomb, if they ever did have it, would be to deter attacks on Iran.   The difference between what happened to Iraq and what happened to North Korea.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 01:05 PM

From my post in the other Iran thread:




Iran denies any interest in developing nuclear arms. But the confidential report, made available to The Associated Press, said Iran's resistance to agency attempts to probe for signs of a nuclear cover-up "give rise to concerns about possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear program."

The language of the report — the first written by Yukiya Amano, who became IAEA head in December — appeared to be more directly critical of Iran's refusal to cooperate with the IAEA than most previous ones under his predecessor, Mohamed ElBaradei.

It strongly suggested that intelligence supplied by the U.S., Israel and other IAEA member states on Iran's attempts to use the cover of a civilian nuclear program to move toward a weapons program was compelling.

"The information available to the agency ... is broadly consistent and credible in terms of the technical detail, the time frame in which the activities were conducted and the people and organizations involved," said the report, prepared for next month's IAEA board meeting.

"Altogether, this raises concerns about the possible existence in Iran of past or current undisclosed activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile," said the report.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 09:57 AM

"Artist: Tom Lehrer
Song: Who's next?
Album: That Was the Year That Was

One of the big news items of the past year concerned the fact that China, which we called "Red China," exploded a nuclear bomb, which we called a device. Then Indonesia announced that it was going to have one soon, and proliferation became the word of the day. Here's a song about that:

First we got the bomb, and that was good,
'Cause we love peace and motherhood.
Then Russia got the bomb, but that's okay,
'Cause the balance of power's maintained that way.
Who's next?

France got the bomb, but don't you grieve,
'Cause they're on our side (I believe).
China got the bomb, but have no fears,
They can't wipe us out for at least five years.
Who's next?

Then Indonesia claimed that they
Were gonna get one any day.
South Africa wants two, that's right:
One for the black and one for the white.
Who's next?

Egypt's gonna get one too,
Just to use on you know who.
So Israel's getting tense.
Wants one in self defense.
"The Lord's our shepherd," says the psalm,
But just in case, we better get a bomb.
Who's next?

Luxembourg is next to go,
And (who knows?) maybe Monaco.
We'll try to stay serene and calm
When Alabama gets the bomb.
Who's next?
Who's next?
Who's next?
Who's next? "




1967, I think.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 08:34 AM

"The point about Israel, Beardedbruce, is that Israel did not develop its own nuclear weapon. It was gifted the technology and the nuclear charge-material in kit form by the USA. The same USA that was so concerned about proliferation. Strange, innit? "


We help Britain get WMD, and the Soviets stole it from us.So, your comments on them?



LOOK AT THE DATE OF THE NPT-

Israel had WMD BEFORE the NPT.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 08:27 AM

Except the test will probably be giving it to Hezboallah, and starting WW III.

But since Europe is closer to the region than I am, I guess I will get the last laugh here. ( ie, I'll die a few days later than those posting from the Old World)


And don't give me any ( Since that would be suicide, they would never start it" garbage. READ your history- HOW MANY wars were started because one side thought it could get awway with some action, onlt to find that they had underestimated the other side?

LOOK at WW I and WW II. You wwant to make any bets about what China will do if the US destroys their oil supply ( Iran) when Iran supplies the WMD that destroys Israel ( and solves the Palestinian problem for all time, by killing them off)???

Look at the range of the PRESENT Iranian IRBMs. Then look at the wind patterns, and tell me where in Europe you think you will be able to live. You think the radioactivity from Chernobyl was a problem? THAT was a small accidental release.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 11:51 PM

The point about Israel, Beardedbruce, is that Israel did not develop its own nuclear weapon. It was gifted the technology and the nuclear charge-material in kit form by the USA. The same USA that was so concerned about proliferation. Strange, innit?

Certainly Royston very strange indeed especially seeing as Israel developed its nuclear programme with assistance from FRANCE

North Korea did sign the NPT which allowed its communist buddies to help it. The North Koreans then played the exactly the same game that the Iranians are playing now, they strung the international community watchdog (IAEA) along while the used the technical assistance available through the NPT to acquire the know then declared that they were withdrawing from the treaty. Next thing there is a test and Hey Presto the North Koreans have a nuclear weapon. IMO Iran will do exactly the same.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Royston
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 06:40 PM

The point about Israel, Beardedbruce, is that Israel did not develop its own nuclear weapon. It was gifted the technology and the nuclear charge-material in kit form by the USA. The same USA that was so concerned about proliferation. Strange, innit?

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Paul Burke
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 06:18 PM

I absolutely support the removal of nuclear weapons from Iran, and all other countries in the region. Starting with the ones who have got them already.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 05:17 PM

Of course North Korea also signed the NPT. No one appears too interested in attacking them for having developed nuclear weapons. Sometimes a nuclear deterrant works.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 05:03 PM

LH,

YOU are ignoring the fact that Iran was a signatore to the NPT, unlike Israel. This entitled them to assistance which they took advantage of in building their reactors- AND required them to NOT have secret nuclear programs. Since Israel did NOT sign, nor get the assistance, I don't think you make much sense.

Since Israel developed it's WMD BEFORE the NPT, IF it had signed it would have been in the same catagory as the US, Britain, France, China , and Russia ( USSR at the time).

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 04:28 PM

Quite agree BB & bubblyrat.

Show me any Arab country let alone the Iranians who have EVER given a flying fig for their Palestinian Brothers

As I have said before ever since the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, people have lived and worked there. The same would have applied to Palestine after they had taken care of the Israelis

My guess always was that both the Libyan and the Iranian nuclear weapons programmes were mean to be totally secret. Unfortunately for the Iranians they had an old "Atoms for Peace" programme that was a hang-over from the days of the Shah, Libya did not. So Iran had to, and I believe they attempted to, run two nuclear programmes in parallel.

The world was never meant to know about Natanz or Qum. Their "Peaceful" nuclear programme would have been totally transparent to the IAEA Inspectors and it would comply totally with the terms and conditions of the Nuclear NPT. Behind the scenes uranium would have been enriched to weapons grade and bombs manufactured. No need for missiles, a conventional delivery system would not be required. The bombs would be smuggled into their target city locations component by component, assembled and triggered simultaneously. My guess is that the targets would have been Tel Aviv and Haifa. With those cities destroyed Israel would be finished. The outcry in the immediate aftermath would be immense but it would die down and the IAEA would be able to prove that from their records the source of the fissile material for the bombs could not possibly have come from Iran.

Unfortunately for both the Libyans and the Iranians in 2001 an international terrorist group based in Afghanistan launched an asymmetric attack on the USA. This caused the USA to rethink the threat they faced in the light of how successful Al-Qaeda's attack had been. The threat was identified as a similar asymmetric attack this time using nuclear, chemical or biological weapons that could not be directly tied to any country or regime.

The War On Terror was declared and the US President told the world you are either with us of against us. In 2001 Al-Qaeda and the Taleban were driven from Afghanistan. In March 2003 Iraq was invaded by the US to enforce verifiable disarmament and Saddam Hussein was toppled from power. The results of these actions?

- 2003 Libya unilaterally renounces its WMD programme and reveals its completely secret nuclear weapons programme. A programme that up until this time nobody had the slightest inkling of.

- 2003 Iranian dissidents blow the whistle and reveal the location of the secret uranium enrichment facility at Natanz

- 2003 Iran crash stops its nuclear weapons programme and starts urgently developing its missile capabilities. There is a very good reason for this, before when nobody knew about their programme Iran did not need missiles, but now that Natanz had been revealed, Iran had to develop a means of defending herself so as to deter a possible attack from Israel.

- Dr A.Q.Khans network is uncovered and stopped in its tracks.

Far fetched?? Maybe, possible certainly. The standard reaction that nobody would ever do that because of the casualties amongst the Palestinian people only holds good if you actually believe that the Arabs care about the Palestinians. But the actions of the Arabs in their dealings with and treatment of the Palestinians for the last sixty years proves conclusively that they do not care for them in the least, they are merely convenient pawns in the game.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 04:26 PM

The main relevant matter is that they (Iran) would not survive such an attack themselves, and they know it. The only credible use for Iran to have nuclear weapons is as a deterrent to being attacked first by America or Israel or both.

So...why do we never have any threads here about Israel's many secret nukes (already built some considerable time ago) and their secret nuke building sites where those nukes were constructed? Is it because God's Chosen political entity on Earth (Israel?) can simply do no wrong no matter what they decide to do? Or is it because we have a compliant North American media who only see evil where they already wish to see it?

I rather think it's the latter...because I don't think God plays favourites. Not for Israel's sake. Not for Iran's either. And not for the USA's sake either.

I therefore disagree with the self-centred assumptions of BOTH Iran and Israel and the USA when it comes to their supposed god-given right to do anything they damn well want to to anyone they choose. But Israel already has many secret nukes and secret nuclear-related facilities built and ready. They are in no position to claim any moral high ground in regards to other nations when it comes to concealing such weapons. They have also launched several aggressive invasions of neighbouring lands in the last 60 or so years, taken portions of those lands by force, robbing many of the local people of their property, and Iran has not done so. How is it then that Iran serves as the perennial "bad guy" in our media?

And is ANY of this political posturing based on genuine morality? Or is it based on naked self-interest and sheer pragmatism? Quite clearly, it's the latter.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 06:22 AM

As I have stated repeatedly. any nuclear attack on Israel would kill far more Palestinians and Jordanians than Israelis.


But I don't see that Iran would care about that- nor that they would survive the attack themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: bubblyrat
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 06:06 AM

I very much doubt if the Iranians ( who are NOT Arabs) are ,or would be,particularly concerned about the fate of Palestinians or Jordanians ( who ARE Arabs),should it come to nuclear exchanges with Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Amos
Date: 16 Feb 10 - 04:05 PM

A thoughtful discussion with level-headed Hans Blix on the dynamics of the Iranian nuclear fuel problem. Must-read on this issue.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: sing4peace
Date: 29 Sep 09 - 03:23 PM

I think it is imperative that the citizens of the world who are equally endangered by the ever horrifying machinations of "Fear Incorporated" speak out against ALL indiscriminate ABC weaponry (atomic, biological and chemical). It doesn't matter who has them. They are all equally aberrant. As climate change causes the acceleration of geological instability, these indiscriminately destructive agents pose an ever more omni-dangerous threat.

Under the criteria being established for "pre-emptive" strike, the United States could be subject to military intervention for our continued prosecution of the "war on terror" (which, according to U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee findings was begun under false pretenses), the detention of prisoners without trial, torture, and or development of weapons of mass destruction. We had elections in 2000 and 2004 the outcomes of which are still being debated.

I don't recall anybody talking about bombing Israeli nuclear installations or South African installations while they developed their nuke programs and bombs. India and Pakistan joined the club too without anybody bombing them.

Why do we expect the people of Iran to rise up and denounce their country's nuclear programs - under the overtly repressive conditions they live under - when we, who live in supposedly "free" countries are not willing or able to hold our own governments accountable for their nuclear power plants and stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction?

I suspect the people of Iran (or anywhere else for that matter) have about as much power to determine their nation's politics as we do. (Much more than we think). I've seen the results of massive non-violent resistance campaigns that have effectively brought about huge political changes.

Perhaps we should focus on our own back yards. That might help the people in Iran (Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc. etc.) to focus on theirs.

So far, I see that Obama is doing what he said he would do in many of his campaign statement: He has broadened Bush and Co's. "war on terror" into Pakistan and is posturing to do the same in Iran; he is expanding the use of nuclear power - ie: Hilary Clinton's recent trip to India to promise two nuclear power plants and sophisticated weaponry; and in his speech to the U.N. regarding climate change discussions, endorsed the expansion of nuclear power.

At this time, we are all up to our necks in gasoline, caught in a world wide trap where mad men (and women) are playing with matches. At some point, we must realize that this is a lose/lose situation and take the risk of peacemaking and cooperation rather than military dominance and exploitation.

How can we break the "us" and "them" cycle as we teeter totter on the axis of mutual destruction?

----

Joyce Katzberg

(who would be happy to take you on a tour of nuclear weapons related industries in Rhode Island, where our state economy depends upon the production of weapons of massive and indiscriminate destruction)

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 07:05 PM

There used to be a country called Persia. You won't find it on any map today. The same goes for Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, the GDR, the USSR, Siam, the United Kingdom of Great Britain andn Ireland, the Dominion of Newfoundland...

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 04:10 PM

Somebody mentioned "balance of power" - well this is just what kept the peace in the 19th century, when the great powers were not at war - which was not for long!

In fact our A Level history teacher was nicknamed BOP.

My goodness, AJP Taylor would have a view on all this!

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 02:34 PM

I am not allowed to refer to posters either directly, or by name. I have to do everything obliquely. My use of the word "they" in that context refers to the person who posted the quote from the article. It's confusing, I know, but if anyone has a problem with it, they need to take it up with Mudcat management.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Wolfgang
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 02:16 PM

You have a funny way of expressing yourself, Carol.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Wolfgang
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 02:13 PM

Who then is "they" in your 01.18 pm post, Carol?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 02:10 PM

BTW, when I said "they" are trying to divert people's attention away from the absence of the words "Israel" and "map", by "they", I didn't mean the Times article, but rather the person who posted only that one part of the article while not also mentioning the absence of the words Israel and map.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 01:56 PM

I provided a translation from a respected person who is fluent in Persian. It is posted above.


No, I'm quite right. The speech does not contain the words Israel or map, and the Times article backs me up on that. Nowhere does the Times article say that those words are in the speech.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Wolfgang
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 01:40 PM

while trying to make the reader not notice that the word "Israel" never appears in Ahmadinejad's speech. (Carol)

Wrong, the article addresses three points of the translation one by one, and states clearly: The final translation issue is Mr. Ahmadinejad's use of "occupying regime of Jerusalem" rather than "Israel."

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Bill D
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 01:40 PM

ummm-hmmmm. Right...sure..

I don't speak the language, but several quite competent folks who DO agree that he was saying essentially what he is accused of.

Like I said, anyone who speaks that way needs to be watched closely.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 01:33 PM

But he does not even metaphorically suggest killing anyone. He suggests that the Zionist regime should go the way of the apartheid South African government or the Soviet Union. Both of these were wiped from the pages of time, and yet, the people are still there.

Trying to make it look like Ahmadinejad was advocating killing anyone is just a great big fat lie.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Bill D
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 01:27 PM

"..."the correct translation" does not exist."

Indeed...but useful, practical translations by competent bi-lingual experts can allow basic attitudes and intent to be discerned.

Any politician who makes even metaphorical remarks such as Ahmadinejad did should be watched cautiously. Even halfway intelligent politicians are beginning to learn that one does NOT make direct threats in public speeches...his followers can 'read between the lines'.

Those who 'metaphorically' advocate killing abortion doctors have learned this well.

Ahmadinejad has 'almost' admitted that he was serious in a couple of interviews.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 01:22 PM

The word "map" isn't there, either.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 01:18 PM

That's a dandy little bit of verbal sleight of hand. They get the reader to focus on whether or not the translation of the words, "wipe off", "wipe away", or "vanish" are the correct ones, while trying to make the reader not notice that the word "Israel" never appears in Ahmadinejad's speech.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Wolfgang
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 01:06 PM

Just How Far Did They Go, Those Words Against Israel? (New York Times)

If Mr. Steele and Mr. Cole are right, not one word of the quotation — Israel should be wiped off the map — is accurate.

But translators in Tehran who work for the president's office and the foreign ministry disagree with them. All official translations of Mr. Ahmadinejad's statement, including a description of it on his Web site (www.president.ir/eng/), refer to wiping Israel away. Sohrab Mahdavi, one of Iran's most prominent translators, and Siamak Namazi, managing director of a Tehran consulting firm, who is bilingual, both say "wipe off" or "wipe away" is more accurate than "vanish" because the Persian verb is active and transitive. ...

So did Iran's president call for Israel to be wiped off the map? It certainly seems so. Did that amount to a call for war? That remains an open question.

In my eyes, "the correct translation" is a statement that goes far too far. Whoever has written in or translated to or from a foreign language knows that such a thing as "the correct translation" does not exist.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 11:54 AM

I would suggest that that website is a forgery. Here is the website for the Iranian Broadcasting Company...

http://www.irib.ir/English/

And here is the website found in the URL that the forged page gives as its own URL in the banner at the top of the page...

http://english.iribnews.ir/

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Wolfgang
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 11:38 AM

it suits their purposes of trying to drum up support for an attack on Iran. (Carol)

Huh? Do you really think the Iranian Broadcasting Company is trying to drum up support for an attack on Iran?

Wolfgang (puzzled)

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 11:21 AM

It's definitely a mistranslation, and it suits their purposes of trying to drum up support for an attack on Iran. Here is the correct translation...


"He made an analogy to Khomeini's determination and success in getting rid of the Shah's government, which Khomeini had said "must go" (az bain bayad berad). Then Ahmadinejad defined Zionism not as an Arabi-Israeli national struggle but as a Western plot to divide the world of Islam with Israel as the pivot of this plan.

The phrase he then used as I read it is "The Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] from the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad)."

Ahmadinejad was not making a threat, he was quoting a saying of Khomeini and urging that pro-Palestinian activists in Iran not give up hope-- that the occupation of Jerusalem was no more a continued inevitability than had been the hegemony of the Shah's government.

Whatever this quotation from a decades-old speech of Khomeini may have meant, Ahmadinejad did not say that "Israel must be wiped off the map" with the implication that phrase has of Nazi-style extermination of a people. He said that the occupation regime over Jerusalem must be erased from the page of time."

http://www.juancole.com/2006/05/hitchens-hacker-and-hitchens.html

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Wolfgang
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 11:03 AM

other people chose to mistranslate it and interpret it to suit their own propaganda purposes as "wipe Isreal off the map", which is not what was said at all. But they wish it was! (Little Hawk about the "wipe off the map" translation)

The Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting English language report about Ahmadinejad's speech

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Wednesday called for Israel to be "wiped off the map".

Now tell us, Little Hawk, why did these people chose to mistranslate the speech and how does this mistranslation suit their own propaganda purposes? To me it looks as if that is what Iran wants the world to know.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 10:29 AM

If someone can find that language in that article, perhaps they would like to quote it in the thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 09:57 AM

Oh dear

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 09:15 AM

I just read that whole "Ahmadinejad Threatens Israel with Destruction" article, and I don't see any language in there that threatens Israel with destruction other than the headline, which is hardly evidence of his having done so.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 09:12 AM

I'm not ignoring that at all. That's part of my argument about why Iran would never attack Israel. And I would suggest that the above poster stop calling Jews evil. It makes them look like an anti-Semite.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 06:59 AM

CarolC

You keep ignoring the fact that the Iranian nuclear bombs will kill ALL the Palestinians, in Gaza, the West Bank, and Jordan, when they are used against Israel. Look at the map and the wind patterns.

But then, as long as those evil Jews are killed, I guess that will be ok.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 28 Sep 09 - 05:11 AM

There's none so blind, as those who will not see.

Ahmadinejad Threatens Israel with Destruction

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Sep 09 - 09:28 PM

Iran doesn't need to destroy Israel. Israel is doing an excellent job of destroying itself, and the Iranian leadership knows it. I note appreciatively the "I think" part that precedes the speculation about Saudi Arabia above. Fortunately, I think the Obama administration is too level headed to start any new wars in the region on the basis of such speculation.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Sep 09 - 08:24 PM

Well, Robo, expresso 'er not, yeah, I'll be the first to admit that Obama took that fast ball and put it over the fence... Bush never hit one so clean...

But the larger question to me is why take the shot in the first place...

Just follow my thinking here: It's kinda like why did the US drop a nuclear bomb on Japan??? Well, IMHO, they didn't have to... They could have just dropped it off shore and more than likely would have gotten the Japanese attention BIG time... So Obama had 2 choices this past week:

1. Jam Ackmadingaling, force Achmadingaling to dangle and twist in the wind or...

...2. Have a private talk with Ach-ie, lay out the scenerio that unfolded, look the man in the eye and ask him for his help in resolving some serious differences in solving these little problems...

The Obama I voted and worked for would have taken the 2nd option...

Yeah, I understand that Obama is trying to show the Republican base that he is some tough guy but who cares... Those folks have allready written him off as some kinda socialist Islamist terrorist...

Obama's best bets are to work one-on-one with folks and get some stuff working behind the scenes... That's diplomacy... Not show-boating...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: robomatic
Date: 27 Sep 09 - 08:03 PM

Bobert: Good to read from ya, I was a bit snappish earlier this morning as I hadn't got down the espresso that I need in order to embrace all mankind.

I think we are seeing that Obama is a practitioner of all the arts of managing information to his advantage. It is not nice, but I think it is necessary for a world leader. So I take the administration's managing of this news in a positive manner, and in going beyond that to build a consensus among other world nations, I feel he is superior in effectiveness to the previous occupant.

As for Iran's threat to Israel, I personally feel it is being managed on the Iranian side as a goad to the West, of which they regard Israel a puppet. I don't think Iran gives a sh*t about the Palestinians. However, Israel tends to get beleaguered by her neighbors, so Israel might take it a whole lot serious.

I think that Saudi Arabia takes nukes in Iran a whole lot serious as well. The Saudi ruling family can be effectively beleaguered by its own terrorists/ fanatics* and does not see a Shiite state gaining power as anything other than a threat that can lash out externally or internally at them. I think the Saudis are threatened MORE than Israel by an Iranian nuke, and they know it.


*We are on the threshhold of the thirtieth anniversary of the Siege of Mecca by armed Sunni fundamentalists. It led to armed conflict around the Holy Shrine, and the deaths of hundreds. The Iranian Ayatollah lied on the air that it was due to Americans and Zionists and the US embassy in Islmabad was overrun and razed to the ground by a mob.

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Bill D
Date: 27 Sep 09 - 07:36 PM

from today's Washington Post... C&P from longer article

"Iran, which as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty has a right to enrich uranium, has already signaled that it intends to dismiss questions about the Qom facility as a legalistic dispute of little importance. Salehi said that it was hidden to protect it from possible attacks and that Iran had actually been overly cautious within the framework of the IAEA rules. "We have to inform the agency of the building of nuclear facilities 180 days before insertion of nuclear fuel, but we informed them even sooner," he said.

U.S. and U.N. officials sharply disputed such claims. In 2003, Iran signed an amended rule under the nonproliferation treaty that required nations to reveal any new facilities to the IAEA as soon as the decision was made to build them.

The amendment, called "Code 3.1," was permanently binding. But in March 2007, Iran announced that it was withdrawing unilaterally from the agreement and would instead abide by an earlier version of the treaty, which allowed countries to delay notification until six months before a new plant became operational.

But even under Iran's unorthodox interpretation of the rules, Tehran appears to have crossed the line. According to U.S. officials with access to classified reports, Iran's work on the Qom site began long before March 2007. At the time construction began, Iran knew it was obligated to notify the IAEA immediately about the new project, the sources said.

In any case, the IAEA never accepted Iran's argument that the strict disclosure rules did not apply."

Subject: RE: BS: Iran Had Secret Nuke Building Site
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Sep 09 - 07:18 PM

Yo, Robo,

Stay tuned for the facts... They will come out that shows that the US wasn't all that surprised by this weeks "new" developements...

Might of fact, you prolly won't have to wait all that long before these facts find the surface... Of course, the Obama administartion will deny it... What else can they do now that Obma has huffed and puffed and threatned to blow Ackmadingaling's house down...

I didn't like much when Bush played war mongre and it ain't too flattering on Obama either...

I mean, can't we all just get along???

B~