Iran could be year from nuke

One Year?

One year from now, Iran could possess the means of producing a nuclear bomb - that was the chilling message delivered by Ambassador Dore Gold during an interview with Ynetnews Tuesday.

Here is Israel talking talking about the possibility of Iran having a Nuke withh in a year. Does this mean Israel is going to put the kybosh on Irans plan? I am currently watching any news on Iran and more and more has been coming out lately.

We Must Attack Iran


Iran is stepping up Nuclear



Lakewood

So, what you want to say, we start World War 3, Christians vs. Muslims and involve China and Russia. After we kill 2-4 billion and leave others irradiated we will say how we must not let this happen again, and how war is not the answer. Similar to what they said after WW2 and before that after WW1.

Seriously, if you want peace start looking at good inside people and work on that. Stop with political propaganda which is run by people who are under corp and banking influence and they want war so they profit more.

Israel, thats a country I trust

VIENNA, May 11 (Xinhua) -- The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Friday said Iran has not hampered the IAEA's inspection of Iran's nuclear facility.
"The information... is untrue," IAEA spokesman Marc Vidricaire told a press conference when asked about recent reports that last month Tehran refused to give IAEA inspectors access to its Natanz uranium enrichment base.
"We have not been denied access at any time, including in the past few weeks," he said.
"Normally we do not comment on such reports but this time we felt we had to clarify the matter," he said.

news.xinhuanet.com...

This is like DejaVu, remember Saddam kept telling he didn't have WMDs, but the US kept telling that he did.

Is the same old same.

Exactly Marg6043, It's clear now that the current US administration doesn't care what the actual facts are, they only care what they believe... err... what they want their public to believe.

Simply put, the current US administration wants war... whether it's a diversion tactic, or whether they are making a play for dominance is beside the point. They have proven it already, they are war hungry.

George Bush himself has often stated that he is a war-time president, he's quite eager to point it out, and quite happy to be one.

What can the public do though? You've elected him for another 4 year dictatorship, and we'll just have to wait it out... or, if he really is hell bent on war, how about giving him a civil one?

Frankly, I have not a problem with Iran having a few nukes. Why? its called deterence and balance. We all know that Israel has nukes.. maybe hundreds of them. So what is Iran going to do with a nuke or two? Not much but it will force Israel to moderate its behaviour because now they can be hurt by someone else.

In other words, the main reason that Israel wants the west to go a die to bring down Iran is not because it fears being struck by Iran's bomb but because Israel loses the 4 aces in its hand.

Originally posted by denythestatusquo
Frankly, I have not a problem with Iran having a few nukes. Why? its called deterence and balance. We all know that Israel has nukes.. maybe hundreds of them. So what is Iran going to do with a nuke or two? Not much but it will force Israel to moderate its behaviour because now they can be hurt by someone else.

In other words, the main reason that Israel wants the west to go a die to bring down Iran is not because it fears being struck by Iran's bomb but because Israel loses the 4 aces in its hand.

WOW! I can't believe you really think it is OK fro Iran to have nukes. Deterence and balance? - Give me a break!! It must be nice to live in a fantasy world where there are no evil people other than George Bush.

I'm sorry to have to upset your little fantasy but we will all know exactly when Iran gets a nuke because they will immediately start blackmailing anyone and everyone who doesn't bow to their wishes. The great world powers like Britan and France (I'm so scared) will all line up to promise all kinds of goodies to avoid a "conflict." I wish I could say that the US would stand up to Iran but I am starting to have my doubts. In any case, we should know in a year or less. I suggest you enjoy your fantasy world as much as you can for as long as you can.

By the way - I'm not really anti-British or anti-French. Its only your governments that I hate.

Originally posted by denythestatusquo
Frankly, I have not a problem with Iran having a few nukes. Why? its called deterence and balance.

As par, nothing has changed.

According to you, denythestatusquo, it would simply wonderful if EVERY nation in the world, that did not have nukes or nuclear offensive/defensive capabilites, had nukes, huh, just for the mere pittance of hailing to the world the cliche': "deterence and balance"?

One might want to consider reading up on world/international politics, their arrangements, non-proliferation, and balance of power theory. Iran can ill-afford to play 'Cold War' with the US and some other countries. Iran having a nuke destablizes the Middle East Region, much as when Pakistan and India did when they acquired nukes. But yeah, unlike me, you might be one of those folks who likes breathing in radiation vapors. There's no doubt in my mind that other than the fall of the Musharref regime--nukes being taken over by a hostile and extremist sub-regime--Iran is a loose cannon of the worst sort. "Deterence and balance"? Oh my.....how ludicrous to even think such.

[edit on 22-5-2007 by Seekerof]

posted by itguysrule
The great world powers like Britan and France (I'm so scared) will all line up to promise all kinds of goodies to avoid a "conflict."

Firstly, spell it right. it's Britain.

Secondly, what's your beef? We're the only dozy bugger's to follow you into this mess you've created and stick with it.

So why the swipe at the UK?

C'mon, I want to hear it.

And lastly, it's European countries that have taken the lead in dealing with Iran's nuclear programme. The US refuses point blank to be involved.

EDIT: You said this:

By the way - I'm not really anti-British or anti-French. Its only your governments that I hate.

Why do you "hate" our Government's?

posted by Seekerof
Iran having a nuke destabilizes the Middle East Region, much as when Pakistan and India did when they acquired nukes.

I disagree, Seeker. Israel destabilizes the ME with the blatant disparity in military power provided by the US and it's continued development of Nuclear Weapons. If Iran had nuke's, I doubt Israel would be so aggressive, like it has been over the past.

As for India and pakistan, your way off base there.

Since both announced they had nukes, they came close to war twice but backed down precisely because of fears of nuclear war.

Now they are quite friendly, all things considered. Seems to me that having the ability to utterly destroy each other has made them see sense.

That could work with Israel and Iran.

But first we have to get Israel to actually live up to it's obligations and Iran to stop meddling in other countries internal affairs.

Both are as bad as each other and, in my opinion, could both do with a slap.


[edit on 22/5/07 by stumason]

Well, i dont get why the dude is bashing Britian, they are my country's most trusted ally and very good friends and I disagree what Carter said about Blair being subservient to Bush. I dont think its that way at all..
During WW2 Patton said something like this.. America and England are destined to rule the world.. It could just be a legend but according to the legend, Russia was really pissed
Iran is not responsible to have a Nuke ever! They constantly threaten Irael and pray they are wiped off the map. It is bad enough that Pakistan has the bomb and I say that because that country is always in danger of having its current, responsible leader, Musharef take out at anytime by a fanatical suicide bomber.
If the wrong type of people seized power after that, things could go wrong.
Back to Iran though. I dont know why these countries always have to take such a rogue status. Iran's president actually seemed like he had some sense when dealing with the British hostages a few months ago, as well as being very short j/k
Im actually sick of the US being at war and I cant wait for it to end, im sure others do as well, especially the poor people that we are fighting with. I'ts good that Europe is taking the lead in this Iran/Nuke problem.
Its actually probably planned that way so if it does come down to going to war then maybe the heat for starting it wont be laid on America (at least not as much) lol.



[edit on 5/22/2007 by Kr0n0s]

Originally posted by denythestatusquo
So what is Iran going to do with a nuke or two?

Drop one on Isreal.... then be annihilated the next day by Israel and the US

Originally posted by stumason

posted by itguysrule
The great world powers like Britan and France (I'm so scared) will all line up to promise all kinds of goodies to avoid a "conflict."

Firstly, spell it right. it's Britain.

Secondly, what's your beef? We're the only dozy bugger's to follow you into this mess you've created and stick with it.

So why the swipe at the UK?

C'mon, I want to hear it.

And lastly, it's European countries that have taken the lead in dealing with Iran's nuclear programme. The US refuses point blank to be involved.

EDIT: You said this:

By the way - I'm not really anti-British or anti-French. Its only your governments that I hate.

Why do you "hate" our Government's?

Sorry, I didn’t mean to misspell Britain – that was just an error. In all honesty the reason I “took a swipe” at Britain was just a little payback for all of the “swipes” against the US from British folks that I see here on ATS. How does it feel to have your country bashed by someone from thousands of miles away who may or may not have good information?

As for saying “it’s only your governments that I hate” that is just a slightly modified version of a statement I have seen many times on these forums. I often see members say “I am not anti-American, it is only your government that I hate.”

As for taking the “lead” in dealing with Iran’s nuclear program I see that as only more well-meaning but useless negotiations. How many times must Iran blatantly lie, deceive, break their commitments, help our enemies or take hostages before you realize that negotiations aren’t going to get them to give up their nuclear program? Isn’t it obvious that Iran is using negotiations to put off any serious actions until they have nuclear weapons and it is too late? If Iran is really only one year from having a nuclear weapon they can take up that much time by offering just one more round of negotiations before they once again change their mind, blame Israel or the US for some offense, and go back to square one. If my count is correct, there are already three UN resolutions against Iran that are having no real affect – Iran is even bragging about how the sanctions aren’t stopping them. What happens when UN resolutions and sanctions don’t work? Is there some unwritten rule that you have to have at least 17 resolutions on the books before you can do something more persuasive?

A lot of people on this forum think it is somehow “fair” for Iran to have nuclear weapons because other countries have them. That argument of deterrence and balance works until you add in the possibility of using terrorist tactics with such weapons. How does deterrence work when you don’t know where a nuclear attack comes from? If a suicide bomber were to set off a nuclear device in New York City and kill 500,000 innocent people who would we attack in retaliation? There are a number of countries who could be responsible or it could be no country at all. Would we attack all of them or none of them? How could we justify killing thousands or hundreds of thousands of people in retaliation for an attack if we didn’t know for sure who did it? This is the problem with Iran and nuclear weapons – deterrence doesn’t work if the attack has no return address that is obvious or can be proved.

Lastly, let me say that Britain is a great country with terrific people and, in my mind, a great friend and ally of the US. My direct ancestors emigrated from England in 1635 and settled in Boston. My blood is British too and I am very proud of that.