Report exposes 'nuclear-ready' Iran

[tbl]

The United States has vowed to seek further UN sanctions against Tehran, saying a new UN nuclear watchdog report shows Iran "continues to defy" world demands to suspend sensitive atomic work.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports that Iran has further expanded uranium enrichment despite UN demands to stop, raising the number of centrifuge machines to 3000 - enough to start industrial production of nuclear fuel.

While the IAEA found Iran has made "substantial progress" in revealing the nature and extent of its disputed nuclear program, its cooperation had been "reactive rather than pro-active".

Cont. http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/report-exposes-nuclearready-iran/2007/11/16/1194766908990.html

The same debate continues over Iran, what does this new report add to it, if anything at all?

[Ed Jones]

In retrospect, what would Iran possibly have to gain from launching nuclear warheads? In Iraq, for example, Saddam Hussein was no angel but he wasn't any real danger to the international community.

Surely the Bush administration has more pressing matters than this to deal with.

[Keramac]

I was listening to CNN this morning, and a member of the IAEA said that the findings have all been that Iran is at least five years away from being able to produce weapons grade uranium. He said that Iran has been remarkably open and that none of the random checks at nuclear facilities have revealed anything out of the ordinary. So, I'm not sure whose right, the article or the guy.

[Locke]

Does this not seem like a second Iraq to anyone?
We need to look back to the past.

[Someone]

Like they said about Iraq that they have nuclear weapons in order to open a war... Why ? in order to put there hands on the petrol, after they invaded Iraq they said they found nothing and they said ooooh maybe the nuclear weapons has been hidden in Iran (as you all know iran and iraq were in war and there not alliance or friends), etc...

Now, USA thinks which country is developed and has reached high science in the east and can be hard to take down... Iran did, so Iran must be taken down but they need an excuse.. No need to think of one >>> The usuall 2 excuse and only 2 for usa in order to open a war is to say:

1. The have nuclear weapons.

2. They are terrorists.

This my openion.

[Locke]

Like they said about Iraq that they have nuclear weapons in order to open a war... Why ? in order to put there hands on the petrol, after they invaded Iraq they said they found nothing and they said ooooh maybe the nuclear weapons has been hidden in Iran (as you all know iran and iraq were in war and there not alliance or friends), etc...

Now, USA thinks which country is developed and has reached high science in the east and can be hard to take down... Iran did, so Iran must be taken down but they need an excuse.. No need to think of one >>> The usuall 2 excuse and only 2 for usa in order to open a war is to say:

1. The have nuclear weapons.

2. They are terrorists.

This my openion.

If I may quote: "LOL WUT?"

[Ed Jones]

I believe he was stating that the current American administration believes that they are under threat because a country in the east is advancing scientifically.

Obviously to the majority of people on these forums, this seems morally wrong. Personally i would relate it to schoolyard bullying, but it is important to look at it from the other perspective - if you were the worlds number 1 super power and saw your global power diminishing, what would you do?

It just shows you, even politicians are human.

[Mitch]

if you were the worlds number 1 super power and saw your global power diminishing, what would you do?

Make a lot of nukes
Invade countries for no logical reason
Avoid environmental issues at all costsOh! I sound like GWB! :eek:
DAMNIT! NOOOO!

[Locke]

Oh no, it's not that I didn't understand the point he was getting across, I was just employing a different type of schoolyard bullying, applied when someone is completely incoherent.
And yeah, the motives are clear. But Iran poses no immediate threat to them and charging in with bombs is a decision that is the product of pure paranoia (or a threat to their dominance, as you said) and it lacks introspection.
And how are we to believe what is being said about Iran with the current administration's and the American media's past record?
As Someone (the user, not the vague reference to an human organism) stated, I also believe it is part of the American administration's ongoing plan to gentrify the middle east, as to gain access to the oil and retain said world dominance.

[Cattraknoff]

In retrospect, what would Iran possibly have to gain from launching nuclear warheads? In Iraq, for example, Saddam Hussein was no angel but he wasn't any real danger to the international community.

Surely the Bush administration has more pressing matters than this to deal with.


Note that Iran's leaders are religious fundamentalists, who have stated they would like to "wipe Israel from the map." Doing this would lead to a nuclear war regardless of whether they indeed launched any. These people believe that if they do plunge the world into war, and if the world ends, they will still go to paradise for it. So ask yourself: What do they believe they have to lose, really?

[Cattraknoff]

Make a lot of nukes
Invade countries for no logical reason
Avoid environmental issues at all costsOh! I sound like GWB! :eek:
DAMNIT! NOOOO!

Don't kid yourself, Bush is a puppet.

It's been a long time since Presidents of the US of A had any real power.

[Locke]

It's been a long time since Presidents of the US of A had any real power.

But to exercise that power behind the scenes, they still need consent from the President, so in that sense he does have power. But there is no chance of a president being elected who does not act in the interests of the elite.

[Cattraknoff]

But to exercise that power behind the scenes, they still need consent from the President, so in that sense he does have power. But there is no chance of a president being elected who does not act in the interests of the elite.

They automatically have his consent because they pick weak-minded fools like Bush to be president.

[Locke]

They automatically have his consent because they pick weak-minded fools like Bush to be president.

Which is accomplished by means of a corporate-influenced, deeply flawed electorial system.

[jpd1975]

I don't know that he is that dumb, but I do suspect drug or alcohol use. Have you watched the man speak? He speaks as if he is highly sedated or drunk as a skunk. #2 with the weak heart is the power broker behind the scenes... working the angles... and was IMO the main driver behind the 9/11 attacks and a recent false flag attempt that involved the B52 with nukes at MINOT... Yes the system is deeply flawed and swayed in the direction desired by "The powers that be."

[Ed Jones]

Note that Iran's leaders are religious fundamentalists, who have stated they would like to "wipe Israel from the map." Doing this would lead to a nuclear war regardless of whether they indeed launched any. These people believe that if they do plunge the world into war, and if the world ends, they will still go to paradise for it. So ask yourself: What do they believe they have to lose, really?

Let's look at the facts.

1. Iran is not currently equipped to do such damage to the west.
2. So far Iran has cooperated with the UN and America
3. If history has taught us anything it is "don't f*ck with Israel"

The threat of complete obliteration from the hands of the Israeli's should realistically be enough to keep the peace.

[Locke]

I don't know that he is that dumb, but I do suspect drug or alcohol use. Have you watched the man speak? He speaks as if he is highly sedated or drunk as a skunk. #2 with the weak heart is the power broker behind the scenes... working the angles... and was IMO the main driver behind the 9/11 attacks and a recent false flag attempt that involved the B52 with nukes at MINOT... Yes the system is deeply flawed and swayed in the direction desired by "The powers that be."

Fetal Alcohol Sydrome.

[Cattraknoff]

Let's look at the facts.

1. Iran is not currently equipped to do such damage to the west.
2. So far Iran has cooperated with the UN and America
3. If history has taught us anything it is "don't f*ck with Israel"

The threat of complete obliteration from the hands of the Israeli's should realistically be enough to keep the peace.

Then why not try to make amends rather than furthering tensions. They get in the way of peace processes in the middle east, likely support terrorists, etc.

While we've given them every reason to be a little hostile (or more than a little), they aren't handling it very wisely. I'm not sure whether their leaders actually believe in Islam, but if they do, then yes I would say there is a good chance that they might do something incredibly stupid. But many leaders in history have faked a strong faith in order to better influence their people. Their governments are corrupt, but so are ours. All need to be fixed, otherwise things will never change, and humanity will remain in its current path of idiocy.