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.
I mean look at it, if you were a little country and had the worlds super powers and half the globe trying to bully you and breathing down your neck wouldn't you vamp up your ability to defend yourself or create a deterrent?
Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
More propaganda without substance. Exactly like Iraq, there will a lot more people dead with this if we do not remove the traitors within our government.
Originally posted by charles1952
These are some of the strangest responses I've seen to an otherwise serious thread. Is anyone offering any evidence that Iran did not prevent inspections? Or that Iran has a perfectly logical explanation for its missing material?
Instead posters are claiming that IAEA took bribes, the US and the Security Council control the UN forcing the report to come out the way it did, that the report will help Israel by destabilizing the Middle East, and that the US will benefit economically from a war. All contentions with so little supporting evidence as to be silly..
But the most frequent, and ludicrous, response is that ten years ago IAEA, with the same people, said Iraq had nuclear weapons and they were wrong, so they can't be believed now. That response is invalid logically and factually.
IAEA didn't say that Iraq had nuclear weapons, it is not saying that Iran has nuclear weapons, and the IAEA has different leadership. Even if all of the assumptions were true, it is a fallacy to say that an error ten years ago means there must be an error today.
Consider also the stand of many posters who say they won't believe the IAEA evidence. They certainly won't believe American evidence. (Unless as one poster makes clear, that evidence can be used to support their position.) So what evidence would the posters believe? Will they wait until Iran announces the existence of a bomb? What if Iran never does, will it never be believed?
The IAEA is concerned, it should be, it has evidence supporting that concern. Can we please have a resonable discussion?
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
We have multiple news reports that Iran has refused the inspectors. We have the IAEA report with sources indicated. There is no evidence that Iran is limiting itself to peaceful energy, or that it is allowing inspections, other than Iran government press releases.
We do know that they are violating the NPT. There are reasons for concern.
Originally posted by Xcathdra
If there program is peaceful why the stonewalling of the IAEA? They flip flop with regards to stating they want to resolve outstanding concerns, and when the time comes Iran changes their mind.
They invite the inspectors back, no preconditions, and change their mind.
Its looking like a stalling tactic and nothing more.
As far as peaceful nuclear energy goes im all for the Iranian people having that (although I have serious concerns about the Iranian government and their constant, wreckless actions).
Iran has a few different types of nuclear generation abilities. The new LWR are efficient and safer, not to mention requiring less maintenance while generating the same if not more power. The enrichment of Uranium is the sticking point.
* - SEU requires 2%-5% enriched uranium, and the newest technology allows that level to power heavy water reactors now.
* - LEU - For power generation it requires enrichment of 4% - 5%.
For a research reactor, which is what they are using to justify higher enrichment levels, only requires 12% to a max of 19%. Since Irans infrastructure in the area of nuclear medicine is still coming into its own rights, their requirements will be on the low end.
That brings us to -
* - Highly enriched Uranium. Generally a nuclear bomb requires enrichment to 85%. However, 20% enrichment is high enough to still get a nuclear explosion out of it. Highly enriched uranium category starts at the 20% mark up to the 99.95%.
That brings us to IR-40. This site will be coming online between now and 2014 if I remember right. IR-40 is a newer heavy water reactor, which will prduce about 20-35 pounds of plutonium each year (enough for a couple of nukes).
The West and the IAEA have maintained the same position since the beginning - That Iran has a right to pursue a peaceful civilian nuclear power program. The concern is the enrichment levels and the reason Iran cites or needing it.. Then we have Iran building secret facilities for their nuclear power program, which actually violates the IAEA guidelines, which require=s a nation to notify the IAEA of the plans and locations before construction begins.
The site outside of Qom was not disclosed until after Western Intelligence agencies released the information.
Their actions just don't fit the claims they are making. Thats the concern...
Would it not make sense for Iran to confront the accusations? If they could then the western nations pushing for more sanctions / military actions would lose credibility.edit on 24-2-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Ralphy
UN team has 'serious concerns' about Iran's nuclear program
worldnews.msnbc.msn.com(visit the link for the full news article)
The U.N. nuclear agency says Iran has rapidly ramped up production of higher-grade enriched uranium over the last four months, in a confidential report that feeds concerns about how quickly the Islamic Republic could produce an atomic bomb.
Friday's report by the International Atomic Energy Agency also said Iran had failed to give a convincing explanation about a quantity of missing uranium metal. Diplomats have said the missing amount could be used for experiments used to arm a warhead.
edit on 24-2-2012 by Ralphy because: (no reason given)edit on 24-2-2012 by Ralphy because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle
wall of text but let me ask you this,
Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle
why hasn't Israel joined the NPT and allowed inspectors into their country?
Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle
i'm fairly certain the zionist regime in israel is just as bat chit crazy as the one in iran, so why no focus on them?
Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle
if you don't see the game being played then you are either a shill or ignorance has found you.
Good luck with that. Keep in mind if "they" win, they are not going to care about your viewpoints. You will either convert, pay extortion not to convert and to keep them from killing you, or outright refuse it all and be put to death just the same.
They are two examples of the same issue for me. The issue being that the UN inspection team's findings are not credible after the way they were used in the lead up to the Iraq War.
They have "serious concerns", well so do I. I'm concerned about a whole bunch of innocent civilians dying because of faulty and misleading intelligence, like they did in Iraq.
Originally posted by anarky1965
reply to post by TsukiLunar
The NNPT does not give the UN the right to inspect every Iranian military base, or "witch hunt" until they find something.
Article III
1. Each non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes to accept safeguards, as set forth in an agreement to be negotiated and concluded with the International Atomic Energy Agency in accordance with the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Agency’s safeguards system, for the exclusive purpose of verification of the fulfilment of its obligations assumed under this Treaty with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. Procedures for the safeguards required by this Article shall be followed with respect to source or special fissionable material whether it is being produced, processed or used in any principal nuclear facility or is outside any such facility. The safeguards required by this Article shall be applied on all source or special fissionable material in all peaceful nuclear activities within the territory of such State, under its jurisdiction, or carried out under its control anywhere.
ARTICLE XII: Agency safeguards
A. With respect to any Agency project, or other arrangement where the Agency is requested by the parties concerned to apply safeguards, the Agency shall have the following rights and responsibilities to the extent relevant to the project or arrangement:
1. To examine the design of specialized equipment and facilities, including nuclear reactors, and to approve it only from the view- point of assuring that it will not further any military purpose, that it complies with applicable health and safety standards, and that it will permit effective application of the safeguards provided for in this article;
2. To require the observance of any health and safety measures prescribed by the Agency;
3. To require the maintenance and production of operating records to assist in ensuring accountability for source and special fissionable materials used or produced in the project or arrangement;
4. To call for and receive progress reports;
5........................