Follow God or vanish, Ahmadinejad tells West

Ya know... I was thinking about his statement in terms of history and the Collapse of Empires.

Assuming that "following the path of God" means existing as a morral nation and that greed is fundamentally imorral, can we tie a common thread through all the major collapses?

Rome: Became decadent, corrupt, and Aristocratic. It then died.
The French Empire: Same deal
The British Empire: Didn't quite die... did a LOT of back-peddling, and managed to save some of itself.

It seems to me that when a nation stops being moral (ie, for the good of the people) and instead becomes greed driven, it is doomed to "vanish from the Earth".

Feel free to debate this idea... It's sorta half-baked at the moment and I haven't really thought about all it's implications.

Originally posted by BitRaiser
Ok, let's get some things straight here...

Originally posted by ferretman2
this guy should be allowed nuclear weapons?

The world will experience a grave tragety if Iran is allowed to go nuclear.

Iran has stated over and over that they are NOT INTERESTED IN NUCLEAR WEAPONS!

My friend, you are sadly mistaken. Iran insisted on heavy water nuclear reactors, do you know why?

Heavy water reactors can be used as breeders for plutonium. There is only one use for plutonium.

They have multiple centrifuges, these can be explained by reactor fuel enrichment, but why do they need so many?

What do you want to bet they are enriching uranium to a far greater percentage than just 5%?

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
My friend, you are sadly mistaken.

You have to prove a mistake before you can claim that one has been made.
I'm not wrong simply because I disagree with you or because you say I'm wrong.
Sorry 'bout that.

Iran insisted on heavy water nuclear reactors, do you know why?

No, I don't. And neither do you.
We can both speculate. I choose to speculate from the view of logic. Apparently you choose to speculate based on your personal fears and bias.

Heavy water reactors can be used as breeders for plutonium.

CAN be used... CAN!
They can also be used for MUCH more efficent power generation, causing less enviromental damage and resulting in better output.
It makes logical sence that if you are trying to build a nuclear power base, you would use technologies that are going to give you the best results... like heavy water reactors.

There is only one use for plutonium.

Here, you've commited a double offence against logic. First, you've gone from assuming that the heavy water reactors are intended to produce plutonium to implying that they will be used to make plutonium. That's the worst kind of assumption one can make in logical terms.
Second, it's a fallacy... wrong... utter BS.

The plutonium isotope 238Pu is an alpha emitter with a half-life of 87 years. These characteristics make it well suited for electrical power generation for devices which must function without direct maintenance for timescales approximating a human lifetime. It is therefore used in radioisotope thermoelectric generators such as those powering the Cassini and New Horizons (Pluto) space probes; earlier versions of the same technology powered seismic experiments on the Apollo Moon missions.

238Pu has been used successfully to power artificial heart pacemakers, to reduce the risk of repeated surgery. It has been largely replaced by lithium-based batteries recharged by induction, but as of 2003 there were somewhere between 50 and 100 plutonium-powered pacemakers still implanted and functioning in living patients.

Source

They have multiple centrifuges, these can be explained by reactor fuel enrichment, but why do they need so many?

Maybe because they know that the US is going to be causing them major headaches trying to get nuclear fuel. Maybe they are interested in the kinds of research that can only be done with these massive centrifuges. Maybe they are looking at the technology being used in ITER and working to replicate it.
Who knows?
They have their reasons, but we have no PROOF that these are to be used in the production of weapons grade matireals.

What do you want to bet they are enriching uranium to a far greater percentage than just 5%?

Why would I want to bet on factors that are both unknown and unknowable? That's called gambling and it has no place in logical debate.

Originally posted by BitRaiser

Back ON TOPIC:

There's still not a single shread of proof that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. If anyone can find any proof otherwise, post it!
The single most telling fact in all this is that while Iran has never said anything about building nukes, North Korea has openly been beaking off about their weapons development program for years.

Obviously, there is none available to the general public. How much proof was available to the general public when the US, USSR, UK, France, Israel, Pakistan, India were developing their respective weapons programs? The only things we can base our opinions on regarding Iran's nuclear intentions are:

1) Iran's statements;
2) The opinions of other nations governments regarding Iran's nuclear intentions;
3) The opinions of world governement/policy watchers/experts;
4)The apparent lack of logic in developing a nuclear power program in a country awash in oil and Uranuim poor.
5) Iran's position regarding Israel and Western governments in general. In fact with regard to Iran's position on Israel and it's nuclear arsenal, wouldn't it be foolish of Iran to develop a nuclear power program and not extend it into weapons development?

Why is Iran's peaceful development of nuclear power a bigger threat than North Korea building nuclear weapons?

They are both threats, but the attention is on Iran at present because NK apparently already has weapons capabilities thanks primarily to the negligence of our last President. It's much easier to prevent a weapons program prior to development, than to dismantle one that already exists. I'm sure the logic here speaks for itself.

You seem willing to take Ahmdenejad at his word. Most do not. Why should we? Here is some recent history. In the 1990's Bill Clinton and his uber Secretary of State Albright struck a deal with Kim. Kim promised not to enrich Uranium or produce plutonium if the United States would build him a light water reactor and supply him with fuel. We did...and so did he (produce plutonium.

This is where you end up when you accept the word of an untrustwothy leader of an advesarial nation. And please don't suggest that Iran is not adversarial with the US and most western states with a backbone. We're fighting a proxy war with them right now in Iraq. Isreal is fighting a roxy war with them in Lebanaon and Gaza right now. Yeah right, they only want to enrich Uranium for "peaceful purposes".

Originally posted by BitRaiser
Ya know... I was thinking about his statement in terms of history and the Collapse of Empires.

Assuming that "following the path of God" means existing as a morral nation and that greed is fundamentally imorral, can we tie a common thread through all the major collapses?

Rome: Became decadent, corrupt, and Aristocratic. It then died.
The French Empire: Same deal
The British Empire: Didn't quite die... did a LOT of back-peddling, and managed to save some of itself.

It seems to me that when a nation stops being moral (ie, for the good of the people) and instead becomes greed driven, it is doomed to "vanish from the Earth".

Feel free to debate this idea... It's sorta half-baked at the moment and I haven't really thought about all it's implications.

I'll agree with you here. I can't defend the US in this area. Our popular culture is in the midst of an unprecedented moral and ethical decay, as is much of the west.

It worries and sickens me.

Well he isn't really threatening the US now is he? He's merely pointing out that following the current line of actions will bring about the downfall of the US. And I think he might be right. As for following the path of God, that simply means to do the morally right thing (in my opinion). Iran got their first nuclear reactor and fuel from the US anyway, so I don't see how you can complain now!

The problem here is that Bush insists that Iran comply with his demands BEFORE they can start any talks. That's like insisting on having a UFO before you can investigate wheter UFO's exist or not. First you try diplomacy, then you can consider using force... And I really don't think you'd get anywhere with force in Iran.

If you are so affraid of Iran nuking you, then perhaps you should stop giving them reasons to do it?

Iran can proof to the world that it's program is for 'peaceful' purposes by allowing the IAEA to have unfettered inspections.

LIKE THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO DO AS PER THE NPT TREATY!

Why is Iran dening access?

Ummm... because the US keeps blocking the inspections too?

Iran will allow snap inspections of its nuclear facilities if the U.N. Security Council does not get involved in the country's nuclear program, a senior Iranian official has said.

But Washington was quick to reject the offer.

"Today's statement does not change our position that the Iranian government must give up its nuclear ambitions, nor does it affect our decision to move forward to the United Nations Security Council," The Associated Press reported White House spokesman Blaine Rethmeier as saying.

Source

They want to deal with the International Atomic Energy Agency (the organization formed to do this sort of inspection under the NNPA), but the US keeps insisting on involving the Security Council (who's job this isn't).

Iran has on several occassions offered to allow inspections and even collaboration/oversight of their nuclear program... but it's constantly rejected by the US.

Why is that?

Iran is spouting a bunch of BS. Before the SC was going to get involved they were blocking and denying inspections; That's why the security council is noew going to get invloved.

Originally posted by ferretman2
Iran is spouting a bunch of BS. Before the SC was going to get involved they were blocking and denying inspections; That's why the security council is noew going to get invloved.

thats what billions all over the world think about the BS your country and goverment speaks every day.
last time i checked Iran were willing to allow inspections
even have live feed from the reactors so they can be monitored,

the only BS is the us not getting its own way

Can you possibly be any more dense.

You're are actually saying Iran is willing to let inspectors in?

What have you been smoking?

Iran is unwilling and has been unwilling to allow unfetter access to their site as they are requied to under THE AGREEMENT THEY SIGNED

They can withdraw from the agreement then they can do anything they want, but otherwise they are in violation of the agreement.

Don't make 'facts' up just because your muslim and an anti-american.

Originally posted by ferretman2


Don't make 'facts' up just because your muslim and an anti-american.

Well you just lost any sort of respect from me and i expect a few others around here. Iran is willing to allow the IAEA in there country thats already been made very clear, its the US government your government that wont allow it unless its under there terms, they have rejected everything not under there own terms. Also remember it was Iran not the US that opened talks after 20 odd years but the US don't want talks they want everyone to do as there told or else.

And for the record im not Muslim or anti-American.

Originally posted by ferretman2
Can you possibly be any more dense.

You're are actually saying Iran is willing to let inspectors in?

What have you been smoking?

According to Bitraiser's source they haven't blocked scheduled inspections:

Earlier this year, Iran blocked snap inspections after the Security Council began taking up the matter. Scheduled inspections, however, were not stopped.

Care to throw around any further insults?

Don't make 'facts' up just because your muslim and an anti-american.

But we can allow you to make facts up because you're an American and anti-muslim?

Originally posted by ferretman2
Can you possibly be any more dense.

Kinda funny how that kind of comment is a double edge sword, eh?
I'm fairly certain there are several people reading your posts and thinking the same thing about you.

How about you back away from the personal attacks and focus on some rational discussion?

You're are actually saying Iran is willing to let inspectors in?

What have you been smoking?

Iran has been saying it from the get-go. They've been willing to undergo inspections all along... they just want them to be preformed by the people who are supposed to be doing them, not by the Security Agency.

Iran will allow snap inspections of its nuclear facilities if the U.N. Security Council does not get involved in the country's nuclear program, a senior Iranian official has said.

But Washington was quick to reject the offer.

Source

Iran has resisted UK pressure to open up its nuclear sites to tougher inspections, saying it would expect "positive steps" in return.

"We are ready for talks and co-operation. But Iran's transparency should be reciprocated," Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi said.

Source

Iran has agreed to allow nuclear inspectors from the United Nations into a major military complex that the United States has long suspected of being a secret site for nuclear weapons development, officials from the International Atomic Energy Agency said Wednesday.

Source

Iran is unwilling and has been unwilling to allow unfetter access to their site as they are requied to under THE AGREEMENT THEY SIGNED

The agreement they signed allows for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to preform inspections, NOT the Security Agency. The UN made an "additional protocol" to the NPT after-the-fact wich Iran has NOT signed.

Mr ElBaradei, who heads the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), will renew his call for Iran to sign the so-called additional protocol to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), allowing such inspections.

But Iran - which denies charges by the United States and Israel that it is trying to develop nuclear weapons - insists that a ban on the country's access to nuclear technology will have to be lifted before it can agree to such a move.

Source
The fact is, they are not obligated to submit to Security Consel inspections and they are using this fact as a bargening chip in an atempt to lift this clearly un-fair ban on their right to explore new technologies.

Until there's clear PROOF that there is weapons research being done, the Security Counsel has no business demanding inspections.

They can withdraw from the agreement then they can do anything they want, but otherwise they are in violation of the agreement.

As pointed out above, they are NOT in violation of the treaty they signed. They are refusing to sign an addition to that treaty that was writen after the fact.

Don't make 'facts' up just because your muslim and an anti-american.

You haven't shown a sing "fact" in all your agruments. Before you start acussing others of making stuff up, how about you knock it off yourself?

It's easier to label someone as "anti-American" than it is to accept the fact that your country could be in the WRONG here.

Once again, the bottom line is there is not a single shred of proof that Iran is working on nuclear weapons. What they are doing is breaking away from corporate control by providing themselves with an energy technology that is not based on oil.

Instead of freaking out about it, we should all be following their example.

Originally posted by ferretman2
Can you possibly be any more dense.

You're are actually saying Iran is willing to let inspectors in?

last time i checked

link 1

list of site

Originally posted by ferretman2
What have you been smoking?

i sufferd from astma so i dont smoke
why what crack or drug do you smoke?

Originally posted by ferretman2
Iran is unwilling and has been unwilling to allow unfetter access to their site as they are requied to under THE AGREEMENT THEY SIGNED

which they have

Originally posted by ferretman2
They can withdraw from the agreement then they can do anything they want, but otherwise they are in violation of the agreement.

and what violations have they done?
if you know so much please enlighten me on what rules they have broken according to the NPT

Originally posted by ferretman2

Don't make 'facts' up just because your muslim and an anti-american.

so based on the fact that im muslim who openly will oppose the actions of the US
i am anti american , wow what a load of BS

i know a couple of americans who i get along with who can actuily debate something without trying to do your BS

also as i said many times my views and propectives are from what i see and read
my faith is who i am and how i live my life its not something that tells me how to judge others or an entire nation.

my views on the united states are solely based on the actions of your country

so in future dont bring my faith into question if you feel the urge just go and smoke what ever you smoke

[edit on 8-12-2006 by bodrul]

Please only post on topic content.

Mod Note: WOT Posting Conduct – Please Review Link.

Thanks.

Here's a crazy idea... I believe The Iranian's presidents words. If anyone believes the west is genuinely representing God's will then they need to reassess what their god is. The west is corrupt. US has been the biggest threat to everyone in the world, including the US civilians. It is the US that demonizes every other ideological country that sees it differently. Come on people, see through the mist of BS. Over and over the media has uncovered US lies and deception, yet you still believe whatever those decievers say. WHY?

Think for yourselves and figure out what is the truth. Don't let FOX dictate your truths.

You argue that Iran funds soldiers to kill americans in Iraq. Iran supports Hezzbolah because the missiles has "made in Iran" on them. I will agree, Iran wants Israel out of the region because they believe in their own rights and the rights of their people, something Israel and their backers refuse. Is it any different than the US backing Israel? What makes Israel right? Because their god make a covenant with them? What about the Iranians God that doesn't believe that?

How about when the Iraqi's got bombed by the israelis, killing their nuke program? Does that mean that we bombed Iraq? Debateable.

There has been a plan implemented for decades and we are all now seeing it manifest. remove Iraq's nuclear weapon program so that it will be possible to invade and submit.

remember the rich elitists om Nazi Germany supported the regime and scoffed at the world. Wait, then operation paperclip brought back 1,600 germans and placed them in critical positions in our governement. How does that make any sense.

In closing, I will say that I am a proud US citizen that wait for the tide of peace to come. I beg the world to look at apparent facts with more scrutiny and feel the truth.

AAC

Originally posted by AnAbsoluteCreation
If anyone believes the west is genuinely representing God's will then they need to reassess what their god is.

Consumerism is the religion of the West.
It's also why so many Islamic nations have such a bone to pick with us. We're spreading it around the globe... our greed-driven culture that absolutely cannot tollerate diversity.

Everything must be stewed down into "product" to be bought and sold by the rich and dreamed of/coveted by the masses.

Banks are our new temples.

Money is our grace.

Welcome to the age of Mammon.

Originally posted by ferretman2
Iran is spouting a bunch of BS. Before the SC was going to get involved they were blocking and denying inspections; That's why the security council is noew going to get invloved.

It's the other way around. They were cooperating with the inspectors until the US brought the case to the security council. This is another one of your prefabricated villain thing. The US is just dying to make this into something bigger, and hopefully get the support they need to go to war with Iran. But that war - like then one in Iraq - will have nothing to do with nukes, freedom, democracy or any of that #. It will be about oil. OIL people.... That's it....

Let's just get rid of this ridiculous ideology of religion and spend your time on more productive things like SPace Exploration. Something interesting and beneficial to mankind. Religion is so dull.
As for all these threads like this on ATS they say the smae thing over and over again, how boring can you get. Don't you get sick of it.
Iraq, Iran the Middle East 911 will be but a mere speck in human history completely insignificant. Tehy'll probably be laughing at us in 100 years - thinking what a waste of time and effort. Hopefully religion will be consigned to the dustbin of history as well - one can only hope. The sooner people become enlightened the better.

PS. My signature reflects my attitude

[edit on 13-12-2006 by rogue1]