Enough farting around on Iran & Nukes
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
I agree with Petros. I don't support any nation possessing nukes, including Iran. Iran's peaceful nuclear program is not the problem. The current double standards and non-uniform application of the NPT to all nations, contributes towards NPT becoming a worthless piece of paper.
In the current situation, Iran would be completely justified in unsigning itself from the NPT and developing nuclear weapons. They face an existential threat from nuclear armed and NPT violating Israel and the US while the IAEA interferes with Iran's NPT compliant efforts to develop peaceful nuclear technology in violation of their mandate. The US and other western nations have a proven record of infiltrating UN inspection teams with spies. While Iran hasn't proven this, I suspect they are probably right that IAEA has been compromised by US and western spies. If Iran is able to prove the IAEA has been compromised, then they have a sovereign right to deny the IAEA access to their nuclear facilities. The fault would lie with those nations which perverted the IAEA and not Iran which tried to work with the IAEA and respect most of the voluntary NPT protocols.
As someone already posted here, if Iran wanted nukes, then they would have them by now. Iran's nuclear scientists have demonstrated their competence by mastering the nuclear enrichment process, which is the most difficult part of building a primitive nuclear weapon. Iran could easily enriched uranium to the point where it could be used to build nuclear bomb components. Instead they have respected the 20% enrichment limit, indicating that their program is NPT compliant. Could Iran have other active undeclared nuclear sites? Sure. But until these allegations by Iran's detractors are proven, they remain unsubstantiated allegation and cannot be treated the same as proven facts.
Each day that goes by without a Iranian nuclear weapon test weakens the case of Iran's detractors who claim they intend to develop nukes. At some point, even Iran's detractors are either going to have to admit Iran is not attempting to develop nuclear weapons, or claim that Iran's nuclear scientists are completely incompetent. Either way, Iran would not be a credible nuclear threat.
In the current situation, Iran would be completely justified in unsigning itself from the NPT and developing nuclear weapons. They face an existential threat from nuclear armed and NPT violating Israel and the US while the IAEA interferes with Iran's NPT compliant efforts to develop peaceful nuclear technology in violation of their mandate. The US and other western nations have a proven record of infiltrating UN inspection teams with spies. While Iran hasn't proven this, I suspect they are probably right that IAEA has been compromised by US and western spies. If Iran is able to prove the IAEA has been compromised, then they have a sovereign right to deny the IAEA access to their nuclear facilities. The fault would lie with those nations which perverted the IAEA and not Iran which tried to work with the IAEA and respect most of the voluntary NPT protocols.
As someone already posted here, if Iran wanted nukes, then they would have them by now. Iran's nuclear scientists have demonstrated their competence by mastering the nuclear enrichment process, which is the most difficult part of building a primitive nuclear weapon. Iran could easily enriched uranium to the point where it could be used to build nuclear bomb components. Instead they have respected the 20% enrichment limit, indicating that their program is NPT compliant. Could Iran have other active undeclared nuclear sites? Sure. But until these allegations by Iran's detractors are proven, they remain unsubstantiated allegation and cannot be treated the same as proven facts.
Each day that goes by without a Iranian nuclear weapon test weakens the case of Iran's detractors who claim they intend to develop nukes. At some point, even Iran's detractors are either going to have to admit Iran is not attempting to develop nuclear weapons, or claim that Iran's nuclear scientists are completely incompetent. Either way, Iran would not be a credible nuclear threat.
Found my own link - HHMM Dated Nov, 2010 - Read on McDuff - I prefer to go to the Horses Mouth, you have chosen an opposing end of the Horse.
Narrow Minded - Me - Best think that one over again.
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Focus/IaeaIran/iaea_reports.shtml
A. Enrichment Related Activities2. Contrary to the relevant resolutions of the Board of Governors and the Security Council, Iran hasnot suspended its enrichment related activities.
17. As previously reported, in Iran’s initial declaration regarding the purpose of FFEP, contained in aletter dated 2 December 2009, Iran stated that, “The location [near Qom] originally was considered asa general area for passive defence contingency shelters for various utilizations. Then this location wasselected for the construction of [the] Fuel Enrichment Plant in the second half of 2007”.11 The Agencyhas asked Iran on a number of occasions, most recently in the aforementioned letter of10 November 2010, to provide additional information regarding the chronology of the design andconstruction of FFEP, as well as its original purpose.12 The Agency has, on several occasions, alsorequested access to companies involved in the design and construction of FFEP. The Agency informedIran that it had received extensive information from a number of sources alleging that design work onthe facility had started in 2006.13 Iran has stated that there are “no legal bases” upon which the Agencycan request information on the chronology and purpose of FFEP, and that the Agency is “not mandated to raise any question beyond the Safeguards Agreement”.14 In a letter of 16 November 2010,Iran said that its statements concerning the chronology and purpose of FFEP should be considered “asa fact” by the Agency, and that the Agency’s request to have access to companies involved in thedesign of the facility and to further design documents was not only not in accordance with theSafeguards Agreement but was also “beyond the Additional Protocol”. The Agency considers that thequestions it has raised are within the terms of the Safeguards Agreement, and that the informationrequested is essential for the Agency to verify the chronology and original purpose of FFEP to ensurethat the declarations of Iran are correct and complete.15
Who wants to explain why they haven't made and dropped a uranium bomb by now? They had that tech 20 years ago.
They won't drop the bomb. Nukes aren't used for warfare - they're used as bluffs for negotiations.
The UNSC is free to pass resolutions regarding Iran, but ultimately Iran is a sovereign nation and the Iranians will decide what's in their best interest. If Iran chooses to ignore UNSC resolutions, that's their choice. Iran has stated they will defy the UNSC demands which violate the NPT. While China and Russia have agreed to limited economic and military sanctions against Iran, I doubt either would authorize force against Iran without definitive proof that Iran has a nuclear weapon program.
As a result of UNSC resolutions, Russia canceled their multi-billion dollar contract to supply Iran with advanced Surface to Air Missiles. But that changes nothing since Iran can also develop it themselves or possibly get it from China. In the long term, the Iranians are probably more secure if they develop most of their defense technology themselves, rather than relying on another country for their defense needs.
China has a very cozy mutually beneficial trade relationship with Iran. Most likely China will not give up their energy investments in Iran and become more dependent on energy from US allies like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. I doubt China views Iran as a threat.
Regarding the IAEA. Their mandate is to assist countries like Iran who seek to develop peaceful nuclear technology.
About IAEA: IAEA Statute
Iran signed the NPT and some of the voluntary confidence building protocols. Iran has no obligation to sign additional voluntary NPT protocols or provide the IAEA with additional information beyond their NPT agreements. The IAEA can request additional information, but Iran can refuse to provide it and still remain compliant with the mandatory parts of the NPT. The IAEA's purpose regarding Iran appears to be a violation of their mandate to assist Iran's peaceful nuclear program. Instead the IAEA appears more focused on assisting Iran's adversaries and looking the other way as Iran's adversaries infiltrate the IAEA inspection teams with spies. Unless the IAEA starts respecting their own mandate to assist Iran's peaceful nuclear program and seriously investigates Iranian charges that some IAEA inspectors are spying on behalf of their adversaries, Iran would be justified to stop cooperating with the IAEA.
IMO, the Iranians have achieved their most of their nuclear objectives. They can build and fuel nuclear reactors, enrich uranium and if they wanted, build primitive nuclear weapons within a relatively short time. I sincerely doubt Iran will attempt to build nuclear weapons until they are attacked by a nation which possesses nuclear weapons. Effectively Iran has a nuclear deterrent, without building a single nuclear weapon or violating the NPT.
As a result of UNSC resolutions, Russia canceled their multi-billion dollar contract to supply Iran with advanced Surface to Air Missiles. But that changes nothing since Iran can also develop it themselves or possibly get it from China. In the long term, the Iranians are probably more secure if they develop most of their defense technology themselves, rather than relying on another country for their defense needs.
China has a very cozy mutually beneficial trade relationship with Iran. Most likely China will not give up their energy investments in Iran and become more dependent on energy from US allies like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. I doubt China views Iran as a threat.
Regarding the IAEA. Their mandate is to assist countries like Iran who seek to develop peaceful nuclear technology.
About IAEA: IAEA Statute
Iran signed the NPT and some of the voluntary confidence building protocols. Iran has no obligation to sign additional voluntary NPT protocols or provide the IAEA with additional information beyond their NPT agreements. The IAEA can request additional information, but Iran can refuse to provide it and still remain compliant with the mandatory parts of the NPT. The IAEA's purpose regarding Iran appears to be a violation of their mandate to assist Iran's peaceful nuclear program. Instead the IAEA appears more focused on assisting Iran's adversaries and looking the other way as Iran's adversaries infiltrate the IAEA inspection teams with spies. Unless the IAEA starts respecting their own mandate to assist Iran's peaceful nuclear program and seriously investigates Iranian charges that some IAEA inspectors are spying on behalf of their adversaries, Iran would be justified to stop cooperating with the IAEA.
IMO, the Iranians have achieved their most of their nuclear objectives. They can build and fuel nuclear reactors, enrich uranium and if they wanted, build primitive nuclear weapons within a relatively short time. I sincerely doubt Iran will attempt to build nuclear weapons until they are attacked by a nation which possesses nuclear weapons. Effectively Iran has a nuclear deterrent, without building a single nuclear weapon or violating the NPT.
Last edited:
Those were the last nukes you'll ever see. Any nukes coming out from Iran or Korea will basically result in the complete destruction of their homelands. Though, it would more probably be more profitable for us if we sent Nato in, lol.
You are well informed on this, what would be the damage from 1 or 2 U Bombs. Worst to Minimum case scenarios? 1 or 2 bombs
Wrong - Pakistan's relationship with terror groups
Next - If the US thought that N Korea would use Nukes - They would nuke - small mega tonnage - every site that they had identified. To think otherwise is bogus. Check the US Policy on First Use to familiarize yourself.
As was written above, the world needs to employ a UNIFORM, not a double standard. So who cares if certain people fear Iran? The entire world fears the USA which has been proven to be an imperialist in Iraq and Afghanistan. But that hasn't meant disarming the USA. Just leave Iran alone.
Tell you what.....I'll go along with leaving Iran alone when:
1. They stop exporting terror against Israel by shipping arms to Hezbollah, Hamas, and every other bloody bunch of Islamist genocidal maniacs in the ME. ( (Yep, them Persians sure LOVE Jews!)
2. They STFU about Israel , and stop threatening that nation by hinting (lol) that it should magically "disappear" from the pages of history .
3. They stop using their proxy Hezbollah to murder Jews worldwide, such as those that used to go to a Jewish Community Centre in Buenos Aries, Argentina... (Yep, them Persians sure LOVE Jews!)
4. When theyu stop accentuating their hatred of Israel by lunatic Holocaust denial. (Yep, them Persians sure LOVE Jews!)
Meet "Little Boy"
He contained 64 kg of uranium, of which less than a kilogram underwent nuclear fission, and of this mass only 0.6 g was transformed into energy.http://forums.canadiancontent.net/#cite_note-4
He looks like this on the inside (very very simplistic).
He did this to Hiroshima
So why haven't they built a U bomb yet? That'll level Tel Aviv will it not?
Any ideas why they haven't or anyone else hasn't?
If that don't curl your hair....
This will.
I don't see how one side is more moral that then other.
The US starts unprovoked wars based on lies to seize control of Iraq's oil wealth, resulting in hundreds of thousands of violent deaths and millions of refugees.
Both the US and Israel hold political prisoners, family members of people of interest including women and children and practice torture and murder.
Both the US and Israel abduct and assassinate people all over the world. They use everything from exotic poisons to car bombs. They've both blown up apartment buildings and shopping centers in blatant disregard for the safety of civilians.
The US and Israel both recently used chemical weapons against civilians. Fallujah and Gaza for example.
Both US and Israeli leaders and military personnel have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Both Israel and the US practice their own versions of religious intolerance and Israel practices ethnic cleansing and uses civilians including children as human shields..
Last edited:
We have already refuted all that bullsh*t several times so I won't bother re-posting those refutations again.
Still, it is the USA that killed over 1 million Iraqis, killed thousands more in Afghanistan, made all kinds of threats against Iran, supported a tyrannical butcher in Uzbek, and exported more terrorism than any other country in modern history. You and others of your ilk have side stepped those truths. Therefore, if you want your ''principles'' to be respected you need to apply them on a consistent basis.
I am not debating the purpose of the IAEA, but all that is doesn't matter now that Iran will soon be processing their own uranium not accountable to anyone. Hope your right, but if your not you have to live with the consequences of supporting them. Would never have joined the NPT, easy for have nots to support.
There is a case for Nukes in a civilized world as it keeps all the civilized players at arms length
from wanting to engage in anything that would or could develop into a world war, without boundaries.
The word civilized is of prime importance here. China, America, the countries of Europe, even the
States of India and to a degree, Pakistan could in one form or another be regarded in the civilized
world, at least by international standards.
Let us look behind the mystery curtain, North Korea, and Iran, now there is a civilized lot let me tell
you. These people change like the wind, no one can make the argument that Iran or North Korea,
are nations that will abide by good neighbour status. Some have said Arab States are nervous that
Iran could or does have the bomb or capability to make it. The reason is Iran is not an Arab nation,
it is a Muslim Nation and a sharia state at that. Iranians are Persians, not Arabs. Means nothing in
the west but in the Middle East it has the same meaning as Greece not wanting Macedonia to rise
out of the ashes of Yugoslavia.
In short even within differing societies Nukes offset the other balances of power and people have to
find different ways of settling differences. Nations like Iran and North Korea, don't care about their
neighbours or anyone else, as civilized is not in their vocabulary, and playing nice has nothing to do
with it. If we don't confront Iran in the short term we will confront them in the long term, and at what
price, no one knows. North Korea is a little different, as even China has become wary of that
sinister regime.
from wanting to engage in anything that would or could develop into a world war, without boundaries.
The word civilized is of prime importance here. China, America, the countries of Europe, even the
States of India and to a degree, Pakistan could in one form or another be regarded in the civilized
world, at least by international standards.
Let us look behind the mystery curtain, North Korea, and Iran, now there is a civilized lot let me tell
you. These people change like the wind, no one can make the argument that Iran or North Korea,
are nations that will abide by good neighbour status. Some have said Arab States are nervous that
Iran could or does have the bomb or capability to make it. The reason is Iran is not an Arab nation,
it is a Muslim Nation and a sharia state at that. Iranians are Persians, not Arabs. Means nothing in
the west but in the Middle East it has the same meaning as Greece not wanting Macedonia to rise
out of the ashes of Yugoslavia.
In short even within differing societies Nukes offset the other balances of power and people have to
find different ways of settling differences. Nations like Iran and North Korea, don't care about their
neighbours or anyone else, as civilized is not in their vocabulary, and playing nice has nothing to do
with it. If we don't confront Iran in the short term we will confront them in the long term, and at what
price, no one knows. North Korea is a little different, as even China has become wary of that
sinister regime.
I support Iran's NPT right to acquire peaceful nuclear technology. Nothing more. I am against nuclear weapons in general, though I disagree with getting rid of them altogether. They create stability. We may have a need for them in the future, even if we successfully end war.
Iran has cascades of centrifuges which can enrich up to 20% fissionable uranium. The above weapon design requires enriched uranium components of a purity greater than 20%. Iran cannot reconfigure their declared centrifuges to purify above 20% without being noticed weeks in advance.
Iran's peaceful nuclear activities are beside the point as long as they are closely monitored. Our best chance of finding hidden centrifuges and component manufacturing labs is through constant IAEA monitoring.
If Iran can prove any IAEA inspectors are secretly working for one of their adversaries, then Iran can become uncooperative. That's why its important for the IAEA to maintain impartiality.
Meet "Little Boy"
He contained 64 kg of uranium, of which less than a kilogram underwent nuclear fission, and of this mass only 0.6 g was transformed into energy.
He looks like this on the inside (very very simplistic).
So why haven't they built a U bomb yet?
This will.
Iran has cascades of centrifuges which can enrich up to 20% fissionable uranium. The above weapon design requires enriched uranium components of a purity greater than 20%. Iran cannot reconfigure their declared centrifuges to purify above 20% without being noticed weeks in advance.
Iran's peaceful nuclear activities are beside the point as long as they are closely monitored. Our best chance of finding hidden centrifuges and component manufacturing labs is through constant IAEA monitoring.
If Iran can prove any IAEA inspectors are secretly working for one of their adversaries, then Iran can become uncooperative. That's why its important for the IAEA to maintain impartiality.