Iran enrichment capacity expanded dramatically on Obama's watch

reply to post by BenReclused

Over a period of many years, both Israel, and the United States, have demonstrated an extreme lack of willingness to use nuclear weapons. The same can't be said for Iran.

LOL you actually believe that Crap? this is exactly when John McCain ensured us that Russia, China nor Iran would ever respond when an Intervention in Syria should that threat of intervention ever occur again.

How does McCain Know they wouldn't respond? oh maybe its because the magic Israeli drone that targeted and aided the Islamist Rebels in Damascus and the Israeli drone targets were nothing more then an bulk of a food storage and ammo factory that were used by the SAA forces?

Either way you cant actually believe that statement from either Israel or the American government. Thats why your seeing several Arab gulf dictators kneeling and bowing towards the Israeli government because they know Israel has nukes and know they would use them agaisnt the Arab gulf dictators should they ever try to attack Israel.

The same can't be said for Iran.

Why? because the Shias cant be trusted on the terrorist Sunnis Saudi Arabia can be trusted with all of our Trust?

And the fact that were no Shias terrorists on 9/11? ever thought of that?

reply to post by BenReclused


If Saudi Arabia has an WMD program are you going to trust them to with that?
After all they are stuck in he 11 century.

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter


Saudi do in fact have a nuke program through Pakistan.

It is an open secret that Pakistani nuke program is funded by Saudis.

Saudis can obtain nukes from Pakistan overnight.

So Iran does in fact have a problem.

Living in 11th century? That is Islam for you my friend. Look at any Islamic country. Even the "Western" Turkey is backward in many respects.

GargIndia
reply to post by MrInquisitive

 

I would be happy if there were no nukes in the middle-east, including those with Israel.

The problem now is that Israel has a hidden arsenal. Saudis can get bombs from Pakistan at any time. So it is natural for Iran to feel insecure.

My problem with USA acting unilaterally to destroy Iran's reactors etc. is that such actions are making a mockery of UN and other international treaties. The destruction of international system is not conducive to peace on this planet.

I would be happiest if there were no nuclear weapons anywhere in the world. Nor do I disagree with anything you said here.

But what bothers me the most is that the nuclear-armed top superpower, along with its nuclear-armed ally Israel, are threatening a non-nuclear armed country for having any kind of nuclear program whatsoever and demanding that it stop enriching uranium, when the two threatening thug nuclear-armed countries have long ongoing nuclear enrichment and weapon programs, and that said two thug nuclear-armed countries attack whomever they want to in the Middle East.

Who could blame Iran if it did want to have nuclear weapons? The US occupies the two largest countries on either side of Iran, and have a nuclear-armed navy patrolling off its shore. Then there are the terrorist groups in Iran, which the US and Israel support, that are killing Iranians, including government officials and scientists. There is also the cyber war that the US and Israel have commenced against Iran. The US has stated that any cyber attack against it may well be considered and act of war, so by the US's standards it and Israel have already started hostilities again Iran.

Iran's democratically elected government was also overthrown by the US in a bloody coup in 1953, and the US installed the brutal Shah regime and supported it for many years. The US has also shot down an unarmed civilian/commercial Iranian airline full of passengers just off the Iranian coast. The US also supported a war of aggression by Iraq against Iran, and not only protected Iraq from international censure for using WMDs (chemical weapons) against Iran, but had the chutzpah to claim that Iran was the one deploying chemical weapons.

Is it any wonder should Iran want to protect itself with nuclear weapons against the hostile US and Israel, which keep making hostile threats towards it?

reply to post by MrInquisitive


Exactly. What makes America so high and noble to tell another country they aren't allowed to use nuclear weapons? Last I checked, America is the only country in the world who has ever used nuclear weapons on another country, AND they used them against civilian targets. 9/11 pales in comparison to what we did to Japan in 1945. True we were at war, but that is still no excuse to destroy two civilian cities like that. Reprehensible. America has no right to tell another country if they can or cannot have nuclear weapons. If anything some other country should be monitoring OUR nuclear capabilities.

reply to post by MrInquisitive

The US and Israel over many years have shown their unwillingness to use nuclear weapons???

Absolutely! They were only used against Japan in 1945, as a final option. We've been in possession of atomic or nuclear bombs since that time, and haven't used them in an act of war, since then.

Israel has also had nukes for many years, and hasn't used one yet. Considering the hostile actions of their neighbors, they've shown a great deal of restraint.

Ever hear of Hiroshima or Nagasaki?

Yep! I addressed that, above. If we hadn't used atomic weapons at that time, I have absolutely no doubt that many, many, more Japanese would have died. Even the Japanese tend to agree with that!

How about the Bush II regime's decision to move away from the doctrine of no first use of nuclear weapons, and the US research into small nuclear bunker-busting bombs/missiles?

If you feel that negates my statement, explain why.

What about Israel's threat to incinerate Iraq, during the Gulf War

The fact that Israel DIDN'T "incinerate Iraq", only, adds support to my comment. They, most certainly, could have...

should Iraq use chemical weapons against Israel?

Though that has nothing to do with this discussion:
I wasn't aware that Iraq had any chemical weapons. These days, many people claim that Iraq never had those type weapons, even though Iraq used them against Iran, and their own citizens. Go figure...

What about the US giving proprietary cruise missile technology, meant for nuclear armed missiles, to Israel, a rogue nuclear state.

Considering Russia's, China's, and Iran's propensity to do the same type of acts, that was, most likely, a good idea.

And just exactly what has Iran ever said or done to suggest it is willing to use nuclear weapons?

I've already addressed that:

As I see it, any attempt to gain access to those types of weapons, does, indeed, indicate a willingness to use them.

If you disagree with that statement, explain why.

And let's be clear: it's been two nuclear armed thug powers, the US and Israel, that have been threatening a non-nuclear armed Iran with military attacks if it doesn't do what these two thug nations demand of it.

I prefer even more clarity:
Show me sources verifying that the US and Israel intended to use nuclear bombs in those attacks.

See ya,
Milt

SLAYER69
reply to post by Krazysh0t

 

Interesting reply

Now, quote where and when I have said or implied Iran would do any of that? The point I was making is that the Proliferation of these weapons seems to always be based on fear. I haven't read much if anything about Israel being afraid of Iran invading them but I've read tons of stories about Iran being afraid of everybody and their brother invading Iran. Which as you've put "Never happens"

Now, whats wrong with ALL countries throwing in the towel and giving up their weapons and or continue [as the US and Russia have] to reduce their stockpiles? ?

AND

For the record, Russia has had and still has more Nukes than the US. Also, there is a rumor that sneaky China may have still more than the US and Russia. While the USSR and the US were acting out in a very public manner. China was supposedly quietly and methodically tunneling a vast under ground missile complex...

China's nuclear arsenal could be up to FORTY times bigger than thought

* Georgetown University student spent three years translating secret military documents and blogs

* Focus of research centred on 3,000 miles of underground tunnels dug by Second Artillery Corps

* Investigation launched after 2008 earthquake in Sichuan revealed existence of collapsed tunnels

* Study claims China could have as many as 3,000 nuclear warheads - far more then current estimates of between 80 and 400

China's nuclear arsenal may be many times larger than estimates suggest, a group of students have claimed after three years of painstaking researching through restricted documents.

Led by a former top Pentagon official, the students at Georgetown University, in Washington DC, have scrutinised satellite imagery, translated Chinese military documents and filtered through thousands of online files.

The focus of their extensive research has been the thousands of miles of underground tunnels dug by the Second Artillery Corps to hide China's missile arsenal.

So, Take your pick. Dem vs Repub, Commie vs Capitalist or now, Jew vs Muslim....

Same old Sh1T!

Funny stuff Slayer, you are right you never hear of them INVADING IRAN, they just always take the more dramatic claim of WIPING US OFF THE MAP...

It is indeed interesting reading your replies which are closely guarded to make it look like you believe that you are "down the middle" while your comments and intent clearly show that you are just as biased as any of the people involved in the middle east arguments.

Lather rinse repeat, just a new form of it.......

reply to post by BenReclused


I think a fight that has nuclear bombs held over the heads of the other side, whilst annihilating them with superior weapons, is funny.

Show me where they do NOT use those bombs over the heads of nations which could try and challenge them?

It makes conventional warfare easier for them as well, since they can just claim the other nations need to be smashed into a pulp because their military may be on the verge of equality, and that is not allowed!

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter

LOL you actually believe that Crap?

Of course, I do! If I didn't, I wouldn't have posted that "Crap".

this is exactly when John McCain ensured us that Russia, China nor Iran would ever respond when an Intervention in Syria should that threat of intervention ever occur again.

Nonsense! Those were my words, not McCain's. All that you're trying to do, is connect dots, that aren't, even, there.

How does McCain Know they wouldn't respond? oh maybe its because the magic Israeli drone that targeted and aided the Islamist Rebels in Damascus and the Israeli drone targets were nothing more then an bulk of a food storage and ammo factory that were used by the SAA forces?

None of that has a damn thing to do with anything that I have said, so try again. Try to focus on MY WORDS this time.

Either way you cant actually believe that statement from either Israel or the American government. Thats why your seeing several Arab gulf dictators kneeling and bowing towards the Israeli government because they know Israel has nukes and know they would use them agaisnt the Arab gulf dictators should they ever try to attack Israel.

Once again, that was my statement, and it wasn't "from either Israel or the American government"! Do you suffer from ADD?

Your, above quoted, comments were, in reality, nothing but piss poor excuses to laugh, and to dance, and TO IGNORE THE WORDS THAT I HAD, ACTUALLY, POSTED. Well done!

Why? because the Shias cant be trusted on the terrorist Sunnis Saudi Arabia can be trusted with all of our Trust?

Nope!

There are ONLY TWO WAYS to demonstrate a lack of willingness to use nuclear weapons:
1) Possess them, and not use them.

2) Not want them, to begin with.

Iran has a desire to possess those type weapons. That, sure as Hell, doesn't indicate a LACK OF WILLINGNESS to use them.

And the fact that were no Shias terrorists on 9/11? ever thought of that?

You're losing your focus, again...

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter

If Saudi Arabia has an WMD program are you going to trust them to with that?

Nope! Like nuclear weapons, further proliferation of WMDs, ONLY INCREASES the likelihood of their use.

After all they are stuck in he 11 century.

No, their not "stuck" there. That's where they want to be! And, I'm, perfectly, fine with that!

See ya,
Milt

I wish people would get off the "Iran is evil because they enrich Uranium and that means they are going to destroy the world", wagon.

For uranium to work in a nuclear reactor it must be enriched to contain 2-3% uranium-235. Weapons-grade uranium must contain 90% or more u-235.

BBC

There, see? All lies.

Hi tech disinfo used to demonize Iran, because they are next on the list to be conquered. NOT because they are going to make bombs. But it fools a lot of people when these claims are made because they don't understand enough about the technology.

Convenient, that.

reply to post by ParasuvO

Show me where they do NOT use those bombs over the heads of nations which could try and challenge them?

I never said that they didn't, so the only thing that I need to show you, is my original statement:

Over a period of many years, both Israel, and the United States, have demonstrated an extreme lack of willingness to use nuclear weapons. The same can't be said for Iran.

If you are capable of addressing that comment, without attempting to twist my words, please do so.

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by BenReclused


Both USA and Israel openly talk about scenarios in which they will use nukes.

They have not used for a long time, as there was no need.

Compare this to many other nations who have not built bombs despite technical and financial ability to do so.

I'm not pro war or anything but of course Iran wants the bomb. They want to use it too it's their destiny.

reply to post by GargIndia

Both USA and Israel openly talk about scenarios in which they will use nukes.

I haven't heard them "openly talk about scenarios in which they will use nukes" against countries that don't possess nuclear weapons. Have you?

They have not used for a long time, as there was no need.

If the use nuclear weapons is restricted by "need", that would, indeed, indicate a certain lack of willingness to use them.

Compare this to many other nations who have not built bombs despite technical and financial ability to do so.

I already addressed that:

There are ONLY TWO WAYS to demonstrate a lack of willingness to use nuclear weapons:
1) Possess them, and not use them.

2) Not want them, to begin with.

How do you feel about the possibility of Iran possessing nuclear weapons, in the near future?

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by BenReclused


Yes, I stand by my statement.

USA and Israel have every intention to use nukes against non-nuclear nations, and the threat is constant used to bully other nations.

You must study the military strategies of both countries.

The so called non-nuclear nations like Germany and Japan are also under USA's nuclear umbrella, so are not technically non-nuclear.

reply to post by GargIndia

USA and Israel have every intention to use nukes against non-nuclear nations, and the threat is constant used to bully other nations.

If that were true, that would have, indeed, constituted a "NEED" for the US, and Israel, to use nuclear weapons, on numerous occasions in the past. The only reason that those weapons weren't used, at those times, was because of their "LACK OF WILLINGNESS" to do so.

You must study the military strategies of both countries.

That is, only, an excuse to not provide a verifiable source, and to deny history.

The so called non-nuclear nations like Germany and Japan are also under USA's nuclear umbrella, so are not technically non-nuclear.

Explain what that has to do with anything that I've said.

You ignored my question:

How do you feel about the possibility of Iran possessing nuclear weapons, in the near future?

I have been very forthright with you, and I would appreciate the same in return. Kindly, answer that question.

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by BenReclused


Nothing will happen if Iran possesses nuclear weapons.

The above is the direct answer to that.

As regards evidence to what I said, you tell me what kind of evidence you want. Then I shall see if I can provide you that evidence or not.

reply to post by GargIndia

Nothing will happen if Iran possesses nuclear weapons.

The above is the direct answer to that.

Really? That seemed a bit evasive to me... Oh, well... I'll try again:
Which, of the following two, better defines your preference?
A) An Iran WITH nuclear weapons

B) An Iran WITH OUT nuclear weapons

As regards evidence to what I said, you tell me what kind of evidence you want. Then I shall see if I can provide you that evidence or not.

Anything with a verifiable quote, by any senior US or Israeli official, that indicates an intent to "nuke" non nuclear nations, should suffice.

Note to "Kromlech":
Earlier, I had to give you a star for the comic. Thanks!

See ya,
Milt