It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by El Tiante
Gee, I don’t know… Maybe it’s because they have been threatening everyone in earshot?
Originally posted by steve99
One reason and one reason only, they will sell them one to some terrorist organization and it will end up in mid town Manhattan. I don't understand how some of you can't see this.
Originally posted by proprog
Originally posted by El Tiante
Gee, I don’t know… Maybe it’s because they have been threatening everyone in earshot?
This thread is about why US is so badly against iran acquiring nuke technology, not about iranian president.
you are so against iranian pres. acquiring nuke weapons, I could assure you he will not be able to acquire any. how do I know?
We all know iranians are at least 10 years away from building a nuke and another decade from building a delivery system. and of course, according to the iranian const., one couldnot run for presidency after 2 consecutive 4 years term, just like the US.
And back to the topic, I guess it's got more to do with iranian geopolitical position, oil and gas reserves (2nd after Saudi arabia and Russia respectively, and probably the first in terms of amount of energy), etc. us will invade iran, but not a nuclear armed iran
Originally posted by steve99
I think if the US wanted to invade Iran they would do it if it had nukes or not.
I think the US is worried about a known terrorist state dealing nuclear arms to other Islamic terrorists. That may someday end up in a western city. And when that happens all hell will break loose.
If the Iranians are 10 years away then why have they bought missles now?
Originally posted by steve99
One reason and one reason only, they will sell them one to some terrorist organization and it will end up in mid town Manhattan.
Why doesn't the US want Iran to have nukes.
Originally posted by NeoQuest
The most likely reason IMO is that the US is currently trying to restructure that area, under whatever vision it has, including Iran. Iran is ideologically and enemy of the US, and when you combine this with their policies which in many ways counters what the US wants for that region, it's obvious nukes would kill Americas current project for a future Middle East. It would strengthen them and their policies, and technically make invasion impossible. Something the US doesn't want.
In the background of the political joust about Iran, a few countries are reshaping the world. They are taking possession of the global nuclear fuel market. New IAEA regulations should keep newcomers away. The US, UK, France, Germany, Russia, China and Japan will become world’s nuclear filling stations. Under the auspices of the IAEA these suppliers will dictate the rules, the prices and the currencies they want to get paid in. Iran has become the pretext and test case for their plans. The problems of tomorrow’s world economy are being shaped today.
External Linky
1. The united states has surpassed almost all countries when it comestosponsering terrorists (when it suits its intrests) aka the teleban alqaida andso on,
Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
Originally posted by steve99
One reason and one reason only, they will sell them one to some terrorist organization and it will end up in mid town Manhattan.
They wanted a revolution and they got one. They wanted things to get better. Did they get better? Better for whom? Their goverment has gotten stinking rich at the people's expense. Are they any better than the shah? No. The choice was theirs. They made their choice and it is completely on them to deal with the consequences of their actions.
All of the students that backed a religious regime thought that they knew everything and how much better their country would be with a goverment of religion and morals and ethics. In the end, they got the very same thing that the shah gave them, but they also lost their political status at the same time. At least the shah gave them stature in the world's eyes as a powerfull regional entity with the latest technology in their hands and even the president of the the us not having a problem with them having nuclear technology. They gave that all up and have been crying about it ever since.
Well cry me a fricken river. Live with your choices. If they were bad choices, change your mind and get rid of the nutjobs that run your country and get your status back. Then you can sell your cars and oil to the entire world and make money for yourselves instead of those in power. You can live in a world where you are not afraid of someone sending their airforce to bomb your crap. Live in a place where you don't worry that you may disappear after speaking your mind.
Make your country great again and prove the west wrong instead of being a footnote in an encyclopedia that says "the nation which ended abruptly after posturing over nuclear wepons."
"During the Iran hostage crisis, the Republican challenger Ronald Reagan feared a last-minute deal to release the hostages, which would hand incumbent Jimmy Carter a goodwill vote winning the election.
Due to the release of the hostages at the precise moment of Reagan's inauguration on January 20, 1981, rumors surfaced that the Reagan campaign made a secret hostage deal with the Iranian government whereby the Iranians would hold the hostages until Reagan was inaugurated, ensuring that Jimmy Carter would lose the 1980 presidential election.
It is alleged that then-vice presidential candidate George H.W. Bush secretly visited Paris on October 19, 1980, along with several senior U.S. senators (John Tower, John Heinz) and William Casey (then Reagan's campaign chairman and later his CIA director) to meet with representatives of Iran's religious regime to exchange security assurances and arms in exchange for holding the hostages through to the end of the 1980 election campaign. Reports confirming that such a meeting did in fact take place have surfaced from former French, Russian, and Israeli intelligence agents.
The hostages were in fact released at the precise moment of Reagan's inauguration on January 20, 1981, supporting these rumors that the Reagan campaign did in fact make a secret hostage deal with the Iranian government. Two separate congressional investigations as well as several investigave journalists looked into the charges, with inconclusive results. Many of the participants in events surrounding these alleged events have died under mysterious circumstances including John Tower (airplane crash), John Heinz (airplane crash, the day before Tower), and William Casey (sudden brain hemorage). A congressional review was conducted by the Senate Armed Services Committee under the chairmanship of John Tower (see Tower Commission).