Iran hands over copy's of blueprints for nuke warheads

Originally posted by dk3000
Whether or not Iran's nuclear intentions are for peace or not is not the historic relevant issue. Iran has not invaded another country or started a war in over 100 years- the same cannot be said for America.

Well said! history is a very important thing as it is based on history that one can predict possible outcomes for the future - they say that things change - but fact is they still use this in military profiling because they believe that true to form people do and fail at what they have always done and failed.

Originally posted by dk3000
I do not think any human being is truly capable of handling such volatile nuclear materials. Tesla proved we can do just fine without them- we all know what happened to him.

aggreed - the only way we can all be safe is if EVERYBODY gets rid of the nukes. end of story - for it is not up to somebody to say you can't have these because i have them and i want all the power that comes with having them. Lead by example and get rid of your own arsenel then you have some respect worthy of being followed.

Originally posted by dk3000
Eventually we will all be sitting as Nostradamus said- amongst piles of rubble conducting WW4 with sticks and stones.

No one knows what they are doing and there are no enlightened world leaders today- which means- the fireworks show is about to start- so wave your flags and sing your songs because the finale is almost here.

I sure hope your wrong on that one friend.

Originally posted by CX

Originally posted by willywagga
Go back to primary school, or at least check your own pathetic sentence structure and punctation before you complain about mine, tosser.

Just a friendly tip, if you enjoy being on ATS, i'd cut the abusive words towards people.

The management are pretty hot on it and keep the board as clean as poss.

CX.

Sure, mea maxima culpa, I was out of line sorry. But the poster was deriding my post on the basis of my poor use of english, by using very lousy english. I was irate. I couldn't resist.

Originally posted by blurryoneI sure hope your wrong on that one friend.

I so agree with the sentiments you express here but unfortunately I cannot see a time in the future, at least in our lifetime, when the powers that be, remove nuclear weapons from the political equation, and as long as they're there, there is no hope.
All of Humanity are in this great big room busily working together, painting the floor, unfortunately we've painted ourselves into a corner, and the door is impossibly far away. We can't even see the door.
The religious among us believe we can prey the door closer, or the paint dry. The rich believe they might buy passage across the floor. But the door is always receding, and the paint never dries.

The sooner those damn UFOs show up the better !! seriously.

-----------------------------
Trimmed quote

please read ABOUT ATS: Warnings for excessive quoting, and how to quote

www.abovetopsecret.com...

BTW... you have a U2U




[edit on 14/11/07 by masqua]

Originally posted by willywagga
I so agree with the sentiments you express here but unfortunately I cannot see a time in the future, at least in our lifetime, when the powers that be, remove nuclear weapons from the political equation, and as long as they're there, there is no hope.
All of Humanity are in this great big room busily working together, painting the floor, unfortunately we've painted ourselves into a corner, and the door is impossibly far away. We can't even see the door.
The religious among us believe we can prey the door closer, or the paint dry. The rich believe they might buy passage across the floor. But the door is always receding, and the paint never dries.

The sooner those damn UFOs show up the better !! seriously.

Hehehe

Good analogy - I beleive we have the power to do what ever we wish - set your sights high and you will accomplish great things - set them low however and ... you know know the rest..

We the people can control this - as they were created for our protection were they not? therefore they can be abolished for our protection too.

[edit on 14-11-2007 by blurryone]

reply to post by NJ Mooch


NJ Mooch thanks for getting back me.

Now that I just read everything all over again I think I may have misunderstood your opening post. It was late for me when I read it so more than likely that is what happened. You make some valid points but I do think there are two ways to look at it. Maybe Iran is not "prepping" their scientist. Is it possible that it could simply be a case of why allow them to be questioned? I wouldn't expect the US to agree to something like that.

I would like to say the the "new info" that doesn't match up the original story I could have swore I saw it when this thread first started in the OP's article which according to the site was updated today at 2:37 am so who knows what happened. Maybe it was left out intentionally? Its also possible I read it elsewhere, I can't really say for sure but anything is possible.



[edit on 14/11/2007 by section8citizen]

The first Post is always important, I want to make a stong ground shaking impact because I watched this site for nearly over a year.
I read many crazy stories and no one is near the truth at all.
You guys writing about some problems here in this forum, some are really weird. I was alone in the dark and holding back some answer`s.
Maybe I could help to see some things clearly.
Like my user name said it, I see things from a different point of view.
The best thing about it, I know it for sure.
I will break the silence, now its time to speak!

Originally posted by blurryone
Incorrect - the hostage crisis was actually done by a bunch of students - please provide links to information that would link the current president (who wasn't even in power then) - to the hostage crisis. the 5 day hostage 'incident' where they captured british sailors in no way makes him a terrorist as im sure any enemy country coming near US or for that matter any western powers waters would be captured - better to urr on the side of safety.

According to some of the hostages, Ahmadinejad was one of those students. It's been stated that his job was to report to Ayatollah Khomeini about the status of the hostages. These claims have been denied or questioned by several sources, including the CIA, however they have neither been proven nor disproved. Whether or not you believe he was involved depends on who you believe, I guess. I'm going with the witnesses on this one.

en.wikipedia.org...

How is this any different to the western version of Patriotism where by somebody must be willing to lay down their life for the greater good of the country - although in this case it is not a particular country but is a religious idiology which is far greater than any one country - from their point of view it would be far greater to die for a religion than to die for a set of puppet leaders who are currently in power.

Excellent point; however, patriotism allows one to survive a battle and still be a patriot, whereas martyrdom requires that one dies in battle.

Actually - the IAEA was created in 1957 for the benefit of UN countries and has only recently encaptulated the wider world - i can think of a couple of countries than already had this technology BEFORE the IAEA was even created and thus didn't have anybody to give said information to should they have decided to go down that track.

I was mainly talking about North Korea. Although they did pull out of the NPT before announcing their nuclear status and testing a bomb, their "peaceful" nuclear program existed long before that withdrawal.

Yes, I'm still undecided on how I feel about this issue, I merely wished to clarify some of my points that were called into question.

Originally posted by mattifikation
According to some of the hostages, Ahmadinejad was one of those students. It's been stated that his job was to report to Ayatollah Khomeini about the status of the hostages. These claims have been denied or questioned by several sources, including the CIA, however they have neither been proven nor disproved. Whether or not you believe he was involved depends on who you believe, I guess. I'm going with the witnesses on this one.

en.wikipedia.org...

Great! that is where i points of view differ. So i retract the incorrect statement from previous post as from your point of view it is entirely correct.

Originally posted by mattifikation
Excellent point; however, patriotism allows one to survive a battle and still be a patriot, whereas martyrdom requires that one dies in battle.

This is true - however neither gaurantee life/survival so while Patriotism allows one to survive depending on the cercumstances, the risk of death is still there. Thus one must be willing to accept that death may be a part of the mission/job/whatever and hence is preparred to die for Patriotism just the same as one would for Martyrdom should they succeed in their task.

Originally posted by mattifikation
I was mainly talking about North Korea. Although they did pull out of the NPT before announcing their nuclear status and testing a bomb, their "peaceful" nuclear program existed long before that withdrawal.

Ahh seen - however NK and Iran are as you know seperate entities - what right do we have to say that because of NK, Iran are to be tarnished by the same brush?

Originally posted by mattifikation
Yes, I'm still undecided on how I feel about this issue, I merely wished to clarify some of my points that were called into question.

I too am undecided on the issue the OP raised however there is no doubt in my mind that there is something brewing.

I really think this "Iran will Nuke the US or Israel " is total BS. Israel has the most advanced anti- missile tracking system in the world (Arrow missile defense system). It enables them to track a missile launch within 2 minutes and destroy it within 5. The Shahab-3 is the only missile that Iran has capable of carrying a nuclear weapon. Is outdated and very very slow. Israel would obliterate Iran in a second if they felt truly threatened and had no way out. Israel has plenty of nuclear weaponry at their disposal. It's a scare tactic to once justify the oil war. A nuclear missile fired at the US wouldn't make it past Syria before easily being shot down. The same goes for North Korea do you really think that we the US would just sit and watch a ballistic missile head over the Pacific without blasting it the second it got over the ocean...think again . Its not easy to enrich uranium let alone transport a ballistic warhead over a border with it being pickup by satellite surveillance. The "Threat" of us being susceptible to a nuclear attack is total BS. Its just another way for us to get into Irans oil reserves. We monitor Irans and North Korea's every move. We the US are the most advanced and powerful military in the world as far as WMD's are concerned no one can hurt us from outside only from the inside.

reply to post by blurryone


A patriot would view the destruction of his beloved country as a crushing defeat; nothing but a loss. However, a believer in Islamic martyrdom would see the destruction of his Muslim nation as the martyrdom of all that nation's people, which would be a loss physically but a victory when considered from a spiritual standpoint.

MAD fails because one side sees its destruction as the ultimate loss while the other only sees it as a partial one.

As for the Iran/North Korea issue, I don't think we should judge Iran based on the actions of North Korea. Rather, I feel that we should be mindful that we have seen firsthand that claiming something is peaceful is not the same thing as it actually being peaceful.

Originally posted by luxor311
I really think this "Iran will Nuke the US or Israel " is total BS. Israel has the most advanced anti- missile tracking system in the world (Arrow missile defense system). It enables them to track a missile launch within 2 minutes and destroy it within 5. The Shahab-3 is the only missile that Iran has capable of carrying a nuclear weapon. Is outdated and very very slow. Israel would obliterate Iran in a second if they felt truly threatened and had no way out. Israel has plenty of nuclear weaponry at their disposal. It's a scare tactic to once justify the oil war. A nuclear missile fired at the US wouldn't make it past Syria before easily being shot down. The same goes for North Korea do you really think that we the US would just sit and watch a ballistic missile head over the Pacific without blasting it the second it got over the ocean...think again . Its not easy to enrich uranium let alone transport a ballistic warhead over a border with it being pickup by satellite surveillance. The "Threat" of us being susceptible to a nuclear attack is total BS. Its just another way for us to get into Irans oil reserves. We monitor Irans and North Korea's every move. We the US are the most advanced and powerful military in the world as far as WMD's are concerned no one can hurt us from outside only from the inside.

We are discussing the posibility of Iran having nuclear weapons and the legality of the document that has apparently been supplied to the media - nothing more.

I wouldn't say it is BS more a point of view held by some people who dont have a clue about anything and believe everything the media spoon feeds them.

Also just because something is unlikely does not mean it is impossible. To say something is an outright lie(BS) is to say that there is abosolutely no way that there could be any truth in it. How do you know that Iran doesn't have missle than can defeat the Arrow missle defence system? How do you know they aren't friends with some friendly neighbourhood aliens that as we are speaking are infecting the population of Isreal so that when Iran decide Isreal will fall without any missle being lauched?.. Not likely i know - but it is not outside the realm of possibility.

[edit on 14-11-2007 by blurryone]

Originally posted by mattifikation
A patriot would view the destruction of his beloved country as a crushing defeat; nothing but a loss. However, a believer in Islamic martyrdom would see the destruction of his Muslim nation as the martyrdom of all that nation's people, which would be a loss physically but a victory when considered from a spiritual standpoint.

Fantastic response - While i agree whole heartidly with the above statement - But i feel that the similarities between the two are very strange - they are both VERY powerful words which are used to get the people of said country to do something extraordinary. While technically they are not similar at all.

One mans Patriot is another mans Martyr - Go to a country, kill 100 Arabs - be a 'Patriot'. Go to a country, kill 100 Infidels - be a 'Martyr'.

While one is destinct to a Country or home the other is to a Religion. So we can not really compare the two. As there are Christian Martyr's also which are similar to Islamic Martyr's.

What i am getting at is that some countries could because of their religious idiologies use the word Martyr instead of Patriot. Where as western countries could not because Democracy should not be based on religion so the next best thing is Patriot - while not having technically the same meaning they are used in the same sense.

Originally posted by mattifikation
MAD fails because one side sees its destruction as the ultimate loss while the other only sees it as a partial one.

How do you defeat an enemy like that? You don't allow them to get Nuclear Weapons in the first place. I guess is the argument that it all boils down to.

Originally posted by mattifikation
As for the Iran/North Korea issue, I don't think we should judge Iran based on the actions of North Korea. Rather, I feel that we should be mindful that we have seen firsthand that claiming something is peaceful is not the same thing as it actually being peaceful.

Innocent untill proven guilty. Sometimes we forget that - but when large numbers of lives are at stake i think it is even more important to hold closely to the true values of ones life.

Better to be dead and never have broken your morals that to be alive with none - IMO...

[edit on 14-11-2007 by blurryone]

[edit on 14-11-2007 by blurryone]

Originally posted by not a U.S fanboy
The first Post is always important, I want to make a stong ground shaking impact because I watched this site for nearly over a year.
I read many crazy stories and no one is near the truth at all.
You guys writing about some problems here in this forum, some are really weird. I was alone in the dark and holding back some answer`s.
Maybe I could help to see some things clearly.
Like my user name said it, I see things from a different point of view.
The best thing about it, I know it for sure.
I will break the silence, now its time to speak!

Well speak up.... I would love to hear this information. What could you help us see clearly? There are alot of different points of view on this board so you will have to explain it in a way that does not offend anybody or anything like that - not an impossible feat though.

I agree with fanboy. There is a lot of speculative unreality here.


Back to my Iran point. "I" or "we" really dont know what Iran really has as far as weaponry, but simple logic and a bit of reality will make it clear that they "most likely" dont even have anything close to a nuclear weapon or we would all be vacationing in the new U.S. hotspot Teran with our friends the Isrealies..

[edit on 14-11-2007 by luxor311]

reply to post by section8citizen


As far as the Iranian officials go, you might be right. There are many reasons as to why Iran would stop anyone from being interviewed. Because of the secrecy behind this program I assess that Iran is still holding back info and these officials know that info. They might release it if the IAEA asks the right questions. Who knows for sure since nobody is able to talk to them. That won't help Iran one bit.

I also don't understand why there are 2 different stories out there. The fact that some sources say that these blueprints can only be used for a nuclear weapons program while the other says it can be for nuclear weapons or nuclear power.

That is why I asked about the spherical uranium mold. So I found this little article:
www.ipcs.org...

These documents consist of technical drawings relate to the process of 'casting and machining' uranium into 'hemispherical forms'. The only known application for such technology is for producing the pit, or spherical core, of a nuclear weapon

After I read that info the blueprints can have one reason, nuclear weapons program.

I had to make sure about this so I found this link:
nuclearweaponarchive.org...

The fission primary is located in the larger diameter cylindrical part of the body, the aft section of which contains the firing electronics, tritium reservoir, and pulse neutron initiator tube. The spherical thermonuclear secondary is in the smaller diameter rounded "nose" of the warhead.
The outer weapon casing is made of aluminum and is lined with uranium to form the radiation case.
The primary consists of a spherical IHE shell surrounding the pit which is made of a hollow bonded beryllium/plutonium double shell with a two-point air lens to create the implosion. The void inside the hollow pit is filled with deuterium-tritium gas at detonation time.
The secondary is a sphere consisting of an outer pusher/tamper layer of oralloy (highly enriched uranium) and an inner shell of lithium-6 deuteride. The secondary is hollow and is filled with deuterium-tritium gas at detonation time to produce "hot spot" ignition at the moment of maximum compression.

Reading that you will notice the word sphere come up many times. This only backs up the idea of spheres shapes being used in nuclear weapons.

If there is a source that lists a shperical shape that is used for nuclear power then this idea is negated. I can't find one yet.

I just watched a show the other day on the history channel or nat. geo. that was about how the CIA gave the Iranians a nuclear weapon blueprint that was phony and riddled with mistakes so that if Iran ever built one it would be a dud. Of course the double agent guy the CIA hired to give Iran the blueprints told the Iranians that the blueprints were not correct and so it backfired on the CIA. Iran is just probably giving us back our phony blueprint as a slap in the face. I'm pretty sure that is the blueprint we are talking about here.

Put yourself in Irans shoes. You are sitting on top of tons of crude oil in a oil thirsty world. You have Russia to the north, China to the east, U.S. ground troops to the west in Iraq and U.S. naval exercises going on in the water to the south. Even with the most benevolent of administrations, I could see why a nuclear deterrent might seem necessary. Imagine if every country had the bomb and you were in charge of one of those countries. Wouldnt you be a little reluctant to use it? Wouldnt you be a little reluctant to attack another country that had it. Maybe we should pass them around like candy at halloween with the warning,use it and LOSE IT.

The CIA gave those plans to Iran several years back. Has everyone already forgotten this?

How can you call this news?

Documents on how to build a bomb proves they have a bomb. What utter crap. All the plans in the world are of no use whatsoever without the material to build a bomb. I'm sure there are internet hackers all round the world with nuke plans but this does not mean they have a bomb.

Why are some people round here so naively led by the bull# from their government ? You are being led into a situation that will make you support an attack on Iran. This will ensure that rich people stay rich. At the end of the day throughout history the masses are fed bull# to ensure the rich and powerful remain rich and powerful. You would have thought 21st century education would have allowed the masses to read history books, learn and THINK!

Luxor311 says " A nuclear missile fired at the US wouldn't make it past Syria before easily being shot down. The same goes for North Korea do you really think that we the US would just sit and watch a ballistic missile head over the Pacific without blasting it the second it got over the ocean...think again ."

Unless of course it would be in the interests of the US to let the missile through, think of the repercussions, think of the mandate Mr Bush and his ilk would have then.
A direct strike on the US would give them all the excuses they need to persue their ambitiions. Think 911, think Hurricane Katrina, think Pearl Harbour, think again !!