NationStates Jolt Archive

A recent IAEA report that was published last Thursday showed strong evidence that Iran was working to build an atomic bomb.

The report surprised experts with its revelation of tantalizing new evidence. The inspectors said they had found traces of highly enriched uranium, which can fuel atomic bombs. So far, the Iranians have not explained how it got there, adding to suspicions in the United States and Europe that the inspectors are being shown only part of Iran’s program and that some covert facilities have been hidden.

The UN, on the other hand, still remains locked over whether or not to impose sanctions on Iran.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/06/world/middleeast/06nuke.html

Why are we waiting for Iran to finally acquire a nuke and proceed to go all kamikaze on the West? We should set a date for Iran to dismantle its nuclear programme. If it does not, we should dismantle it forcibly. We really have no clue how close they are to getting a nuke -- we shouldn't risk being too late.

Mr. Ahmadinejad, we have come to the conclusion that your nuclear program is peaceful, in fact, we've come to the conclusion that it is just as peaceful as those B-2 Stealth Bombers that are flying over Tehran right now.

Thank you and have a nice day.

But...but Iran is a peaceful nation full of fluffy bunnies and guys in dresses wearing funny hats! They cant be bad!

Go all kamikaze on the west? Guess you better go hide under the bed in a puddle of your own pee or something.

Go all kamikaze on the west? Guess you better go hide under the bed in a puddle of your own pee or something.

I'm fairly certain that if Iran does acquire nuclear weapons and missiles capable of delivering the nuke to the US, Ahmadinejad would not choose to target a quite, suburban town such as mine; he's not retarded, just delusional and insanely religious. However, I can't say the same thing for people in New York or Tel Aviv.

Go all kamikaze on the west? Guess you better go hide under the bed in a puddle of your own pee or something.

Iran going kamikaze on the West would have the same effect as a bug flying in to a windshield....

Iran going kamikaze on the West would have the same effect as a bug flying in to a windshield....

If that bug were heavily religiously indoctrinated, I wouldn't put anything past it.

Begoner21;11645762']If that bug were heavily religiously indoctrinated, I wouldn't put anything past it.

That's why they'd go kamikaze...it would be the path to martyrdom for those nutjobs. But then again, the clerics have it too good siphoning off the country's wealth to allow the fanatics to make any dangerous moves.

Of course, a bug going kamikaze is still just a bug going kamikaze even if it's indoctrinated with religious fervor.

Iran going kamikaze on the West would have the same effect as a bug flying in to a windshield....

Exactly. It never ceases to amaze me how people like the OP can on the one hand brag about the vaunted power of the US, and then cry like little bitches over some supposed threat from a comparatively tiny country in the Middle East. Iran's not a bogeyman. It's got a shit economy and no armed forces to speak of. It's the biggest dog left in the Middle east, but that's like saying you're the toughest guy in the paraplegic ward of the hospital.

Well if Iran does get nukes and transfers them to terrorists I'm glad our government had the foresight to give the midwestern states plenty of homeland defense money. Sure NY city doesn't even have interoperable radios for it's first responders, but that'll have to wait. They might nuke the corn!

Well, that's it. I say it's time the USA does the following.

1. Annex Mexico

2. Hire as many Mexicans as possible

3. Send them over to the Middle East

4. Build a great wall and a dome around the Middle East

5. Seal it

6. Let them deal with their own problems

7. Don't open up the ME Dome until 3000 AD.

Well if Iran does get nukes and transfers them to terrorists I'm glad our government had the foresight to give the midwestern states plenty of homeland defense money. Sure NY city doesn't even have interoperable radios for it's first responders, but that'll have to wait. They might nuke the corn!

Actually, striking our crops and source food would be a good way to attack us...

Actually, striking our crops and source food would be a good way to attack us...

No it wouldn't. It would have minimal impact. No big body count, nobody would starve either. The worst effect would be the economic consequences, which would be lower than the economic consequences of nuking NYC.

Finding traces of highly enriched uranium is nothing new.

The Iranians have - in the past - stated it to be residues left over from Pakistan's nuclear program.

Finding traces of highly enriched uranium is nothing new.

The Iranians have - in the past - stated it to be residues left over from Pakistan's nuclear program.Yeah, but it sure gets the wingnuts' panties knotted up in a bunch.

The ignorance of some of us people in the West never ceases to amaze me.

Hezbullah is the brain child of Iran, before 9/11 it was the largest terrorist organisation in the world and the one the CIA was watching the most. If the USA so much as bombs one of Iran's nucleur sites they'll cause havoc world wide...

And don't be so arrogant that you think a nucleur armed Iran will want to attack the USA, they'll get your allies first. They've publicly denied the right of Isreal to exist, which is closer?

And remember that the Middle East which you lot look down on with so much contempt has the power to cripple your economy and bring the entire Western world to it's knees by decreasing the amount of oil it sells you.

Iran isn't going to commit collective suicide by launching a nuke anyway, it just likes seeing old Bush shit is pants....and is probably trying to divert the CIA's attention while they plan an attack on the "land of the free, home of the brave" which isn't hard to do...anyone see the hearings after 9/11? What a circus.

No it wouldn't. It would have minimal impact. No big body count, nobody would starve either. The worst effect would be the economic consequences, which would be lower than the economic consequences of nuking NYC.

Umm yea, see, if they nuked the land that we grow our food on, and where our cows and animals that we use meat for on. We can't use that land anymore, not for a very long long long (1,000,000 more longs) time. While NYC is a valuable place, but so is the place where we grow our food.

And remember that the Middle East which you lot look down on with so much contempt has the power to cripple your economy and bring the entire Western world to it's knees by decreasing the amount of oil it sells you.

I actually hope they do that, then there would be a big push for alternative fuels. After we established a strong base for the Alternative Fuels here in the USA, we would have no more use for the ME.

The ignorance of some of us people in the West never ceases to amaze me.

Hezbullah is the brain child of Iran, before 9/11 it was the largest terrorist organisation in the world and the one the CIA was watching the most. If the USA so much as boms one of Iran's nucleur sites they'll cause havoc world wide...

And don't be so arrogant that you think a nucleur armed Iran will want to attack the USA, they'll get your allies first. They've publicly denied the right of Isreal to exist, which is closer?

And remember that the Middle East which you lot look down on with so much contempt has the power to cripple your economy and bring the entire Western world to it's knees by decreasing the amount of oil it sells you.

Iran isn't going to commit collective suicide by launching a nuke anyway, it just likes seeing old Bush shitting is pants....and is probably trying to divert the CIA's attention while they plan an attack on the "land of free, home of the brave" which isn't hard to do...anyone see the hearings after 9/11? What a circus.

Iran's going to use nuclear weapons the same way Kim Jong Il does. It will use them to protect itself from any potential military consequences for it's bad behavior, such as sponsoring terrorism, and to get political and economic goodies in exchange for not doing something stupid.

Still doesn't mean I want them to get a bomb. I'd be in favor of conventional bombing of it's known nuclear sites, some additional military sites, and perhaps bombing the mullahs' residences and Ahmedinejad's residence at about 3 AM local time when they should be sound asleep in their beds.

Begoner21;11645571']We should set a date for Iran to dismantle its nuclear programme. If it does not, we should dismantle it forcibly. We really have no clue how close they are to getting a nuke -- we shouldn't risk being too late.
We have set several dates. Doesn't work. Forcibly? but hey, it's expensive and we're tired of fighting. Iran isn't as weak as Iraq or Afghanistan.

I bet they will get the nuke. So what. Pakistan has nukes, Israel has nukes, Russia has nukes (and several missing nukes, which should be more alarming than Iran's nukes). No one has used them since 1945.

Umm yea, see, if they nuked the land that we grow our food on, and where our cows and animals that we use meat for on. We can't use that land anymore, not for a very long long long (1,000,000 more longs) time. While NYC is a valuable place, but so is the place where we grow our food.

It won't contaminate as much land as you think. Also Hiroshima and Nagasaki aren't all that radioactive anymore. In fact the level of radiation over there nowadays is about the same as you'd find anywhere else IIRC.

It won't contaminate as much land as you think. Also Hiroshima and Nagasaki aren't all that radioactive anymore. In fact the level of radiation over there nowadays is about the same as you'd find anywhere else IIRC.

Big booms tend to spread the radiation around. Given the fact that Big Boy and Fat Man are fire crackers compare to the nukes we have today, I shudder to think how much power these nukes can have.

Big booms tend to spread the radiation around. Given the fact that Big Boy and Fat Man are fire crackers compare to the nukes we have today, I shudder to think how much power these nukes can have.

Import?

Of course it would have serious effects but I also believe that nuking NY would cause more damage.

Big booms tend to spread the radiation around. Given the fact that Big Boy and Fat Man are fire crackers compare to the nukes we have today, I shudder to think how much power these nukes can have.

Iran would have to smuggle suitcase sized nukes into the country to hit the nation's farmland. Their missiles suck, their airforce blows. The only way they could hit us is to carry the bombs over personally.

Well, that's it. I say it's time the USA does the following.

1. Annex Mexico

2. Hire as many Mexicans as possible

3. Send them over to the Middle East

4. Build a great wall and a dome around the Middle East

5. Seal it

6. Let them deal with their own problems

7. Don't open up the ME Dome until 3000 AD.

Or we could just reform the Ottoman Empire and let the Turks deal with it ;)

Iran's going to use nuclear weapons the same way Kim Jong Il does. It will use them to protect itself from any potential military consequences for it's bad behavior, such as sponsoring terrorism, and to get political and economic goodies in exchange for not doing something stupid.

Still doesn't mean I want them to get a bomb. I'd be in favor of conventional bombing of it's known nuclear sites, some additional military sites, and perhaps bombing the mullahs' residences and Ahmedinejad's residence at about 3 AM local time when they should be sound asleep in their beds.

I wouldn't like to see them with a bomb either. My parent's are expats, we live in the United Arab Emirates, just across the water from Iran...

Iran would have to smuggle suitcase sized nukes into the country to hit the nation's farmland. Their missiles suck, their airforce blows. The only way they could hit us is to carry the bombs over personally.

That would probably fail seeing how...welll..*remembers the incompetence of the TSA* eh nevermind, I got nothing.

Let's just say this, them attacking NYC or the farmlands with Nukes is bad, but for seperate reasons.

Iran would have to smuggle suitcase sized nukes into the country to hit the nation's farmland. Their missiles suck, their airforce blows. The only way they could hit us is to carry the bombs over personally.

Ron Jeremy's secret revealed

Iran's going to use nuclear weapons the same way Kim Jong Il does. It will use them to protect itself from any potential military consequences for it's bad behavior, such as sponsoring terrorism, and to get political and economic goodies in exchange for not doing something stupid.

Still doesn't mean I want them to get a bomb. I'd be in favor of conventional bombing of it's known nuclear sites, some additional military sites, and perhaps bombing the mullahs' residences and Ahmedinejad's residence at about 3 AM local time when they should be sound asleep in their beds.

I agree with your assessment of Iran's plan for nuclear weapons. Iraq showed us that not having weapons of mass destruction can lead to your country being invaded.

I think Israel will destroy any Iranian nuclear weapons it can. Would you blame them? Even if you did, the IDF would do it anyway.

Harmonia Mortus Redux;11645930']Or we could just reform the Ottoman Empire and let the Turks deal with it ;)

Hmm, how would they deal with it?

Hmm, how would they deal with it?

It depends, I imagine they would start off with an ineffective pacification campaign against the Arabs, resulting in thosands of Turkish deaths. Then they would most likely scapegoat the Armenians or Kurds or some other relativly easy to locate and attack group, while leaving the Arabs alone.

We could give them the Balkans to. Hell, lets just return the map to the way it was around 1900, better for everybody...except France really, they would have to try to occupy Vietnam again, and the British might have some trouble with India, and I imagine Korea wouldnt take kindly to being a Japanese vassal state again, but thats their problem.
Fourtunatly the former American colonies should be easy to take again. Cuba here we come!
[/nosarcasmATALL]

Well, that's it. I say it's time the USA does the following.

1. Annex Mexico

2. Hire as many Mexicans as possible

3. Send them over to the Middle East

4. Build a great wall and a dome around the Middle East

5. Seal it

6. Let them deal with their own problems

7. Don't open up the ME Dome until 3000 AD.

this is the master plan we have been waiting for. gets rid of 2 problems at once.

wilgrove, i think i love you, i want to have your babies, but physicly i believe that is impossible. how do you feel about adoption?:D

Begoner21;11645571']Why are we waiting for Iran to finally acquire a nuke and proceed to go all kamikaze on the West? We should set a date for Iran to dismantle its nuclear programme. If it does not, we should dismantle it forcibly. We really have no clue how close they are to getting a nuke -- we shouldn't risk being too late.
Don't get your knickers in a twist.

And also - what the hell are you going to do about it?

"Lolz let's glass them" etc. will lead to "oh fuck now they've torched the oil fields and it's £93 per litre of petrol, damn it all if only we'd thought about it for a bit".

Because that's exactly what will happen - they have a hell of a lot of oil and hence a hell of a lot of power - think the 70's post-oil depression but a bit worse due to there being less fuel from other sources to exploit.

this is the master plan we have been waiting for. gets rid of 2 problems at once.

wilgrove, i think i love you, i want to have your babies, but physicly i believe that is impossible. how do you feel about adoption?:D

I'm all up for adoptoins!

There's no real physical danger from Iran obtaining nuclear weapons. While I would perhaps doubt Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's grasp of the principle of MAD, the Iranian constitution luckily does not give foreign policy powers to the President (an office equivilent to Chief Demogogue), instead the powers belong to the pragmatic Supreme Ruler, an individual who does not have to rely on the support of the anti-Semitic Iranian populace.

The only danger is from knowing how much Soft Power Iran will thus be able to exercise if they obtain nukes. With nukes Iran will be able to keep smaller, weaker nations under its wing and keep them from submitting to the West's program on enforcing democracy. Although Israel, America and their allies would surely be able to keep themselves safe from Iran, even if it did become militant.

Enriched uranium in Iran? Trying to propel spacecraft/Nuclear Pulse Rockets maybe? Doesn't seem likely. Peaceful energy production? No, not that either. Try as hard as I might, I don't think I can explain this away. I want to give Iran the benefit of the doubt but I'm drawing a blank on why they'd need this.

Finding traces of highly enriched uranium is nothing new.

The Iranians have - in the past - stated it to be residues left over from Pakistan's nuclear program.

The article specifically states "new evidence", so it could be fresher than what Khan left.

I would greatly prefer no traces of enriched uranium whatsoever in Iran. Old or new.

Either way,I'm sure we'll find out, sooner or later.

What would Iran do if we sent a warhead over there full of playboy magazines?

And remember that the Middle East which you lot look down on with so much contempt has the power to cripple your economy and bring the entire Western world to it's knees by decreasing the amount of oil it sells you. .

They would hurt us temporarily but they would be utterly destroyed. Our economy is not dependent on energy anywhere near the level that their is; most OPEC countries rely on oil for 80% or more of their GDP and almost all of their government revenue, so any oil embargo would not only collapse their economy but also dry up their government revenue entirely.

Even worse for them, we would make huge efforts to develop alternatives, conserve, boost efficiency and overall cut our dependence on them for oil. Once the embargo ended, they would end up with no customers and their economy would continue its collapse. Here's an interesting fact: following the 1970's energy crisis, Saudi Arabia's citizens saw their real per capita GDP fall by 50% and they had to deal with 25% unemployment and negative GDP growth for the next decade and a half. OPEC lost big time for the embargo which is why they won't try it again; they may hurt us in the short run but they are utterly devastated in the long run.

"Lolz let's glass them" etc. will lead to "oh fuck now they've torched the oil fields and it's £93 per litre of petrol, damn it all if only we'd thought about it for a bit".

I care more about the lives of millions of people than I do about the price of gas. See, I value the right to life over the right to cheap petrol. Apparently, you don't.

I bet they will get the nuke. So what. Pakistan has nukes, Israel has nukes, Russia has nukes (and several missing nukes, which should be more alarming than Iran's nukes). No one has used them since 1945.

I don't like the prospect of those nations having nukes either (well, maybe Israel is OK). However, neither of those nations has pledged to fight against the West, to wipe Israel off the map, etc. None of those countries is led by an insane religious zealot who thinks he sees God everywhere. All you have to do is listen to the guy speak to figure out that if he has nukes, he won't hesitate to expediate the coming of the Mahdi or whatnot:

"On the last day when I was speaking, one of our group told me that when I started to say 'Bismillah Muhammad,' he saw a green light come from around me, and I was placed inside this aura. I felt it myself. I felt that the atmosphere suddenly changed, and for those 27 or 28 minutes, all the leaders of the world did not blink. When I say they didn't move an eyelid, I'm not exaggerating. They were looking as if a hand was holding them there, and had just opened their eyes – Alhamdulillah!"

His speeches which vaunt martyrdom do not inspire confidence, either:

"We are all obliged to keep alive the culture of martyrdom-seeking in the society. Culture of martyrdom-seeking is our most effective weapon and best guarantee for our national security. Ruthless enemies who have a chronic enmity against our country and our nation have not succeeded in achieving their objectives so far thanks to the existence of this culture of martyrdom-seeking among our nation. He who is ready for martyrdom is always victorious. Martyrdom is the peak of mankind's perfection and the martyrs enjoy the highest status of humanity in this world and the Hereafter. People spend tough years of strenuous work in a bid to achieve the peaks of grandeur and pride, while our dear martyrs achieved those high peaks in shortest possible time."

That's definitely not a guy I'd trust with nukes.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=23916