jpillian Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Iran is now a 'nuclear state' says Ahmadinejad as thousands take to the streets Iran is now a 'nuclear state', President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced this morning. He spoke as tens of thousands of people took to the streets in Tehran to mark the 31st anniversary of the Islamic revolution. There are fears of violence as opposition and pro-government supporters are expected to meet at rallies in a show of popular strength unmatched since the revolution itself. Today Ahmadinejad told scores of cheering Iranians that the Islamic Republic is capable of producing weapons-grade uranium. He said it had produced its first batch of 20 per cent enriched uranium - and had the capability to enrich to far higher levels at its Natanz plant. Enriching uranium produces fuel for a nuclear power plants but can also be used to create material for atomic weapons. The international community has warned Iran against further enrichment activities, threatening new UN sanctions. The Iranian leader insisted the material was not intended to produce an atomic bomb, however. 'We have the capability to enrich uranium more than 20 percent or 80 percent (the level needed to create an atomic bomb),' he said in a speech broadcast live on state television. 'But we don't enrich (to this level) because we don't need it... 'When we say we do not manufacture the bomb, we mean it, and we do not believe in manufacturing a bomb,' he told the crowd. 'If we wanted to manufacture a bomb we would announce it.' Security forces have threatened to crush any opposition protests as Iran marks the anniversary of the revolution today. Witnesses say security forces fired paint balls to disperse anti-government protesters in one of the first clashes during today’s ceremonies. The unrest began after protesters began to chant opposition slogans in Sadeqieh Square, which is about a half-mile (one kilometer) from a huge pro-government gathering where President Ahmadinejad delivered a speech. Witnesses say there were no apparent injuries among the several hundred protesters. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1250127/Iran-Revolution-day-protests-Islamic-Republic-nuclear-state.html#ixzz0fEfvVbLv Sweet. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVUforREDSKINS Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 1. I call BS 2. I highly doubt that the US and Israel would let this happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselPwr44 Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Thanks guys..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Back when Kim Jong Il was announcing that he had a nuclear bomb, I used to observe: International relations over the centuries have evolved traditions, dances, code words, which are used to convey very specific meanings. And one of those traditions which is well recognized and respected among the international community is the procedure by which a nation announces that it possesses nuclear weapons. You set one off. This announcement is internationally recognized. Widely disseminated. And completely unambiguous. After setting one off, it is guaranteed that no one will stand in the White House situation room and say "Mr. President, I think they're bluffing". ---------- That said, however, I observe that Iran isn't saying "we have a bomb". They're claiming that they have the ability to make one. ---------- I have to confess to having the fantasy of a military operation of some kind to enter one of these facilities, document what's in them, destroy it, and get out. Think of it as a "weapons inspection by force". I will, however, admit that there's a BIG difference between having that fantasy, and being willing to roll those really big dice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 "We would love some international sanctions" President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 "We would love some international sanctions" President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced this morning. ...followed by "we await Israel's jets" ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 ---------- That said, however, I observe that Iran isn't saying "we have a bomb". They're claiming that they have the ability to make one. ---------- They wish their cake and to eat it too,as many have predicted. Their extensive enrichment infrastructure should have put any doubts to rest long ago,as well as the volume of uranium they have sought. Staying below the level of declaring nuclear weapons is simply a game to avoid the responsibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 They wish their cake and to eat it too,as many have predicted.Their extensive enrichment infrastructure should have put any doubts to rest long ago,as well as the volume of uranium they have sought. Staying below the level of declaring nuclear weapons is simply a game to avoid the responsibilities. Although it also occurs to me to wonder what somebody would hope to gain from claiming "I don't have nuclear weapons, but I will in a few months". To me, that's like telling some guy in a bar fight that you're going out to your car to get your gun: You've told your opponent "You'd better attack me right now, or else!" I can't think of anything the could possibly say or do that would be more likely to bring retribution down upon their country. Which makes me wonder: Is retribution what they want? (Seems to me like, quietly building a bomb and then announcing it, would be a much less dangerous path for them to go down.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Although it also occurs to me to wonder what somebody would hope to gain from claiming "I don't have nuclear weapons, but I will in a few months". He clearly stated they have no desire for nuclear weapons. You don't believe him?...never knew you were a closet Neo-con;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 More saber rattling and posturing, I can't help but think this is garbage none-the-less he's just asking for trouble. But, what better way to galvanize his people than to draw the ire of the international community upon them so he can then play the victim card? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Short of going to war, I'm not sure that there was anything we could have done to stop this. Some will say that Iraq weakened our ability to negotiate by revealing our vulnerabilities... that we blew the crap out of Iraq in Gulf I and Afghanistan after 9/11 and that intimidated everyone. We blew the crap out of Iraq again, but when we lingered we displayed a level of disorganization and vulnerability that gave our enemies courage. In the end, as a sovereign state, Iran was going to do what it was going to do and I don't know that we could or can stop them. Still, this is a very scary development. They are very possibly the most irresponsible nuclear power ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVUforREDSKINS Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Pakistan is more frightening than Iran. Israel won't hesitate to do what they feel needs to be done, although, I bet they are gonna want the green light from the US. Who knows if we give it to them. If that does happen, it might be a big spark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjunkies Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 I wish we could send a Navy SEAL team in to get rid of this prick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MassSkinsFan Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 I wish we could send a Navy SEAL team in to get rid of this prick. I'm not familiar with the other "contenders" in Iran but my sense is that there is not enough political/military support for anyone even remotely as reasonable as Ahmadinejad (YES - I said as reasonable as him) to assume and maintain power. The lineup of viable successors who could stay in power probably makes Saddam, Kim Jong Il and company look downright sane and sober. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Pakistan is more frightening than Iran.Israel won't hesitate to do what they feel needs to be done, although, I bet they are gonna want the green light from the US. Who knows if we give it to them. If that does happen, it might be a big spark. Israel doesn't wait for US green lights. They couldn't care less what Americans think of what they do and who they do it too. In fact if they think that our leaders are even TALKING about subjects that don't benefit them they immediately lash out at the US. If they wanted to bomb Iran and needed US controlled airspace they'd tell us while their pilots are in the air. Note I said "tell" not "ask". You know why? Because no leader in the US is going to order Israeli jets shot down and they know it as well as we do. I think the reason they are waiting is in hopes that we will fight that war for them. A US/Iran military conflict benefits Israel far more than having to do it themselves. If we wait too long however they'll go ahead and bomb stuff hoping to dent the nuclear program and asking for our help... can't have them spending their treasury on things like invasions and rebuilding now can we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 I think it is also as JMS has stated. Israel can conduct surgical strikes and do some good damage to Iran's infrastructure, but they really are a small country with a tiny population. They can't conquer anyone or get into a protracted battle. If the target isn't clear and the mission isn't precise, Israel's options are pretty limited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 I think it is also as JMS has stated. Israel can conduct surgical strikes and do some good damage to Iran's infrastructure, but they really are a small country with a tiny population. They can't conquer anyone or get into a protracted battle. If the target isn't clear and the mission isn't precise, Israel's options are pretty limited. Israel has nuclear weapons... the above is what makes them far more likely to use them than just about anyone other than North Korea. If Iran goes nuclear and threatens Israel I wouldn't be surprised if Obama gets a phone call: "You invade or we nuke them, choice is yours" Iran has to realize that they are on a suicidal path... they just don't seem to care. Unlike North Korea they don't have a nation they can hold hostage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicious Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Israel has nukes too, so don't cheer too hard Iran. If someone gets a handle on some of your material and it is used on Israel (if any material whatsoever is used on israel) Iran will be to blame, they will immediately be wiped off the map. MAD, everyone dies. Big glass sheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Israel has nuclear weapons... the above is what makes them far more likely to use them than just about anyone other than North Korea. If Iran goes nuclear and threatens Israel I wouldn't be surprised if Obama gets a phone call: "You invade or we nuke them, choice is yours" Iran has to realize that they are on a suicidal path... they just don't seem to care. Unlike North Korea they don't have a nation they can hold hostage. Except they haven't and they have been bullied and attacked in every conceivable way other than via nuke for more than 40 years. Given prior restraint, it's really unlikely that Israel will initiate a nuclear attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Sometimes you have to swat the annoying fly. The last POTUS didnt have the stones to do it, so Im certain this one wont. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Sometimes you have to swat the annoying fly.The last POTUS didnt have the stones to do it, so Im certain this one wont. The last one thought he did. He just missed. Those buggers are fast and it's truly unfair that they have so many letters in their name in common. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Except they haven't and they have been bullied and attacked in every conceivable way other than via nuke for more than 40 years. Given prior restraint, it's really unlikely that Israel will initiate a nuclear attack. They haven't had a fight they couldn't quickly win or at least control. Iran's impending journey to nuclear power and the size of their armed forces is their worst nightmare. I don't think their use of nuclear weapons is far fetched. Unlike with the US they might think it necessary and to be perfectly frank... I'm not sure I would disagree with them. If Iran decides to pick a fight with the middle east as unstable as it is the outcome is going to be bloody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 I wonder what their game plan is. This is a fairly weak announcement about their capability so perhaps 'they' are looking for some sort of deal. Given the well-know technical problems at Natanz, 20% enriched Uranium is not much to shout about. They have just about enough lowly enriched fuel to make a single warhead without enough for a test shot, if they can get Natanz working. They also need a working design and functioning triggers, plus of course a reliable delivery capability, a medium range ballistic missile. They may be closest to the last of these. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Except they haven't and they have been bullied and attacked in every conceivable way other than via nuke for more than 40 years. Given prior restraint, it's really unlikely that Israel will initiate a nuclear attack. Actually I would rank them among the most likely to use a tactical nuke by nature of existential threats. They cannot afford to be wrong once and lack other capabilities to make up for risks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Will weinvade Iran if they have nuclear capabilities? Man this whole situation is a mess. Thank god I am not president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.