No Concrete Proof Iran Nuclear Program Is Military

[Kärnfysikern]

wow that is amazing

One diplomat said Larijani floated the possibility of stopping enrichment activities "voluntarily, for one or two months if presented ... in such a way that it does it without pressure."

Their talks had been given little chance after months of a building crisis over enrichment. But while neither side disclosed the substance of the talks, Solana said that "the meeting was worth it" and Larijani told reporters that "many of the misunderstandings were removed.

Their comments — and the diplomats' report of Iranian readiness to consider a temporary enrichment stop — jibed with indications that positions may have shifted slightly, both for Iran and within the six-nation alliance.

[mcpeepants]

We do not negotiate with terrorists, period.

The US has dealt with governments that committed terrorism, for example Iraq, on their people and others so terrorism has not been an excluder of diplomatic relations. it's just empty rhetoric.

[Logan13]

To sum up my above long post

Show me Iran has:

Uranium enrichened above 80%
Plutonium in ample ammounts.
The capacity to enrichen uranium to 90% or produce plutonium.

If they had one of those things I would agree that they want weapons and nothing else....

once we can actually show you this, it will be too late.

[Logan13]

The US has dealt with governments that committed terrorism, for example Iraq, on their people and others so terrorism has not been an excluder of diplomatic relations. it's just empty rhetoric.

By "and others" who are you referring? As for Sadaam, he gased his own people after the war. Anyway, I recall that you were not in favor of overthrowing Sadaam in the first place. So, which is it?

[mcpeepants]

By "and others" who are you referring? As for Sadaam, he gased his own people after the war. Anyway, I recall that you were not in favor of overthrowing Sadaam in the first place. So, which is it?

In Iraq, I'm referring to Saddam gassing Iraqi kurds and Iranian soldiers. This happened when he was the US govts ally. That's true I imposed the invansion of Iraq. The Iraqi people would eventually overthrown Saddam on their own and it would of happened sooner if UN economic sanctions were not in place that led to the decimation of the Iraqi middle class and made the people more dependent on the government.

[Kärnfysikern]

once we can actually show you this, it will be too late.

no it wont. If they have a park of centrifuges 10 times as large as the current one they have they can enrichen uranium to 90%. But they cant just pull that kind of thing out of there ass and suprise us.

[Logan13]

no it wont. If they have a park of centrifuges 10 times as large as the current one they have they can enrichen uranium to 90%. But they cant just pull that kind of thing out of there ass and suprise us.

North Korea did. North Korea lied about it and their capability for years, now they are nuclear. It amazes me how soon you forget such pertinent facts. Thank fully, Social Democrats are not in charge of our National Security.

[Kärnfysikern]

North Korea did. North Korea lied about it and their capability for years, now they are nuclear. It amazes me how soon you forget such pertinent facts. Thank fully, Social Democrats are not in charge of our National Security.

North Korea had reactors running since 1986. They did not allow inspections for some time after nuclear facilites where discovered on satellites and when they did allow limited inspections IAEA from the start suspected they where running a secret weapons program.
December 1993 "IAEA Director-General Blix announces that the agency can no longer provide "any meaningful assurances" that North Korea is not producing nuclear weapons."

Whats also interesting is that the US didnt uphold its part of a deal with N.Korea for N.Korea to cease plutonium production in change for 2 lightwaters reactors from the united states. The construction of those 2 reactors would have made it alot easier to keep a check on all possible weapons materials.

Iran has no running reactor as far as I know. Iran has allowed inspections
February 2003 Mohamed ElBaradei traveled to Iran with a team of inspectors to investigate Iran's nuclear program. By November, Dr. ElBaradei stated that there was "no evidence" that Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons. On December 18, 2003 Iran signed the Additional Protocol at the IAEA headquarters in Vienna, and acted in accord with its provisions pending completion of ratification of the protocol

The difference betwen N.Korea and Iran is that Iran has done what the world has wanted repedetly in the past. They have frozen enrichment, they have allowed inspections and so on.

What you are saying is that we should deman no proof whatsoever to do whatever we wish just because we suspect someone is doing something fishy. Im very glad that you are not running the states but I suspect your president needs as little proof as you to run into wars.

Innocent until proven gulity, isnt that one of the main ideas in your country?

[Kärnfysikern]

I went back and edited my post a bit

[Kärnfysikern]

Ohh I was wrong. Iran has one running research reactor. Guess who built it thats right the united states

Fortunaly the waste has been monitored by the IAEA from the start

[Logan13]

Ohh I was wrong. Iran has one running research reactor. Guess who built it thats right the united states

Fortunaly the waste has been monitored by the IAEA from the start

Correct, part of our upheld "deal" with them from the past. I am sure that it was all done with the approval of Sweden.......

[Logan13]

North Korea had reactors running since 1986. They did not allow inspections for some time after nuclear facilites where discovered on satellites and when they did allow limited inspections IAEA from the start suspected they where running a secret weapons program.
December 1993 "IAEA Director-General Blix announces that the agency can no longer provide "any meaningful assurances" that North Korea is not producing nuclear weapons."

Whats also interesting is that the US didnt uphold its part of a deal with N.Korea for N.Korea to cease plutonium production in change for 2 lightwaters reactors from the united states. The construction of those 2 reactors would have made it alot easier to keep a check on all possible weapons materials.

Iran has no running reactor as far as I know. Iran has allowed inspections
February 2003 Mohamed ElBaradei traveled to Iran with a team of inspectors to investigate Iran's nuclear program. By November, Dr. ElBaradei stated that there was "no evidence" that Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons. On December 18, 2003 Iran signed the Additional Protocol at the IAEA headquarters in Vienna, and acted in accord with its provisions pending completion of ratification of the protocol

The difference betwen N.Korea and Iran is that Iran has done what the world has wanted repedetly in the past. They have frozen enrichment, they have allowed inspections and so on.

What you are saying is that we should deman no proof whatsoever to do whatever we wish just because we suspect someone is doing something fishy. Im very glad that you are not running the states but I suspect your president needs as little proof as you to run into wars.

Innocent until proven gulity, isnt that one of the main ideas in your country?

Iran has a penchant for supporting terrorism, that they are guilty of already. I do not need to wait for them to actually hand off nuclear capabilities to Hezbollah and then for Hez to use it on Israel to figure out that allowing Iran to go nuclear may not have been a good idea in the first place. Put down the Marxist books, they kill brain cells. At one point, you were actually not in favor of Iran having nukes.
I guess that the biggest problem that I have with your comments is that regardless of the situation, you and your country will sit on your hands. Sweden is as inept as the UN is in situations that may require action. Learning about history from a book is great, just make sure that you are getting the complete story. Talking out of both sides of your mouth is not an admirable trait, at least not where I come from......
Like it or not, there is a reason why 21 year olds are very rarely put in positions of power.

[Kärnfysikern]

Iran has a penchant for supporting terrorism, that they are guilty of already. I do not need to wait for them to actually hand off nuclear capabilities to Hezbollah and then for Hez to use it on Israel to figure out that allowing Iran to go nuclear may not have been a good idea in the first place. Put down the Marxist books, they kill brain cells. At one point, you were actually not in favor of Iran having nukes. I guess that the biggest problem that I have with your comments is that regardless of the situation, you and your country will sit on your hands. Sweden is as inept as the UN is in situations that may require action. Learning about history from a book is great, just make sure that you are getting the complete story. Talking out of both sides of your mouth is not an admirable trait, at least not where I come from......
Like it or not, there is a reason why 21 year olds are very rarely put in positions of power.

Sorry bro you are the one that should learn to read. I am very much opposed to Iran getting nukes and have never stated anything else. But I am equaly much opposed to going in and bombing them without evidence.

Once again you bring up my age and the same old bullshit. But bullshit isnt evidence and evidence is what is needed not blind neocon support. You cant bring any evidence, not one single shred of evidence. Yet you manage to justify military action.
You say I and sweden will be inept, well are you going to sign up to be on the front line? Or are you comfortable to send the youth of america to die in another needless war?

The difference betwen you and me is that you are willing to throw away lifes just because you have a hunch iran is up to something. I want proof. Proof is everything.

[Logan13]

Sorry bro you are the one that should learn to read. I am very much opposed to Iran getting nukes and have never stated anything else. But I am equaly much opposed to going in and bombing them without evidence.

Once again you bring up my age and the same old bullshit. But bullshit isnt evidence and evidence is what is needed not blind neocon support. You cant bring any evidence, not one single shred of evidence. Yet you manage to justify military action.
You say I and sweden will be inept, well are you going to sign up to be on the front line? Or are you comfortable to send the youth of america to die in another needless war?

The difference betwen you and me is that you are willing to throw away lifes just because you have a hunch iran is up to something. I want proof. Proof is everything.

You can't handle the proof, you dismiss all that is given to you. Just because you do not wish to accept the proof does not make it any less revelant. Again, sit back and quarterback all actions taken, I am sure that many outside of this forum are actually listening....... I did not say Sweden will be inept, I stated that they are. BTW, the difference between you and I is that I am willing to stand up for something and I prefer to act, not theorize. As I have stated to you before; You can sit in your chair and think about painting the room, but nothing will happen until you actually get up and DO IT! Thinking about it will not accomplish anything.

[Kärnfysikern]

You can't handle the proof, you dismiss all that is given to you. Just because you do not wish to accept the proof does not make it any less revelant. Again, sit back and quarterback all actions taken, I am sure that many outside of this forum are actually listening....... I did not say Sweden will be inept, I stated that they are. BTW, the difference between you and I is that I am willing to stand up for something and I prefer to act, not theorize. As I have stated to you before; You can sit in your chair and think about painting the room, but nothing will happen until you actually get up and DO IT! Thinking about it will not accomplish anything.

Why dont you show me proof? Maby Im stupid but its seems like every country in the world except the united states wants proof I havent dismissed anything that was solid. You have not given me anything relevant.

If the nuclear cops(IAEA)isnt convinced why should I be? They are the only ones that have walked around in the Iranian nuclear facilites and the ones with the expertise to determine if something fishy is going on, have you been there, are you a nuclear engineer. What expertise do you have to determine they will have nukes sooner rather than later, on what do you back your idea to go in and **** them up now since there is no time to wait?
Dont you realise you base your descision on assumptions and fallacious thinking. You have nothing concrete, just your personal hunch, offcourse you like to claim your personal hunch is based on facts, facts that you surely must have gotten from the ayatholla himself since no one else on planet earth seems to know about them.

I dont endorse war on gut feelings.

Me sitting in my chair and beeing against war and you sitting in your chair and beeing for the war=2 people doing nothing. You are not acting so its ridicilous of you to bash me for not supporting action. If you where ready to sign up in a war against Iran then I would have more respect for your pro war stance.

The difference betwen you and me is that I follow what I support, you send others to do what you preach.

In the real world solid facts count. Atleast until the abomination Bush took office.