Follow us on...
Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Facebook Watch us on YouTube
Register
Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    Sinner's Swing! graeme's Avatar
    Join Date
    01.27.03
    Age
    10
    Location
    Dusseldorf, Germany.
    Posts
    3,946
    Favorite VH Album

    They're all shit
    Last Online

    11.19.17 @ 09:41 AM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 34 Times in 20 Posts

    Default YES YOU DO, NO WE DON'T, nO YOU DON'T ..ETC.IRAN NUKE REPORT

    From the BBC news website.............

    Last Updated: Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 12:25 GMT

    E-mail this to a friend Printable version

    Iran welcomes US nuclear report

    Iran says it will continue uranium enrichment despite sanctions
    Iran has welcomed a major US intelligence report which suggests its government is not currently trying to develop nuclear weapons.
    The latest National Intelligence Estimate says it is now believed Iran stopped its weapons programme in 2003.

    Tehran has always maintained its nuclear programme is being developed purely for peaceful purposes.

    But the US and other Western powers say Iran is trying to build a nuclear weapons capability.

    Iran is currently under UN Security Council and unilateral US sanctions.

    But the BBC News website's world affairs correspondent, Paul Reynolds, says the question of sanctions remains active because Iran is still defying Security Council calls for it to suspend uranium enrichment.

    The standoff is now likely to continue indefinitely but at a lower temperature, he says.

    Iran's 'victory'

    Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said he welcomed the change of opinion.




    Report frustrates US hawks
    US report cools crisis
    Should US change policy?

    "It's natural that we welcome it when those countries who in the past have questions and ambiguities about this case ... now amend their views realistically," he said.

    Iranian state TV hailed the report as a "victory". It said Iran was "honest" and had been "vindicated", while it said the report demonstrated flaws in US intelligence.

    The International Atomic Energy Agency also responded positively. It said the report backed up its statements that it had no evidence of an undeclared nuclear weapons programme anywhere.

    Earlier US Democrats called for a major policy rethink in the light of the NIE report.

    However, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said it was vital to continue US-led efforts to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

    Earlier his Defence Minister, Ehud Barak, took issue with the report, saying Iran had probably restarted its suspected weapons programme.

    Can you legitimately defend yourself against something that does not exist and might never exist?

    BBC North America editor Justin Webb


    Read Justin's thoughts in full
    In quotes: Report reaction

    "It seems Iran in 2003 halted for a certain period of time its military nuclear programme but as far as we know it has probably since renewed it," he told Israeli radio.

    Reports of this kind were "made in an environment of high uncertainty", he added.

    The BBC's Justin Webb in Washington says US hawks are horrified by the report.

    They are concerned that news of that key assessment will drown out other findings in the document - for instance, that Tehran is keeping open its option to develop a nuclear weapon and would have all the capacity to do so in the future if its leaders decided to go ahead.

    US National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said the report's findings confirmed the US was "right to be worried" about Iran's nuclear ambitions and that President George W Bush had "the right strategy".


    'Technical problems'

    The declassified summary of the report, which draws together information from the 16 US intelligence agencies, says with "high confidence" that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons programme in 2003 "in response to international pressure".

    READ THE FINDINGS


    National Intelligence Estimate on Iran[25kb]
    Most computers will open this document automatically, but you may need Adobe Reader
    Download the reader here

    The assessment says with "moderate confidence" that the programme has not restarted.

    This is a turnaround from previous assessments, when US intelligence agencies believed Iran was trying to develop a nuclear weapon.

    Iran made "significant progress" in 2007 installing gas centrifuges used to enrich uranium but still faced technical problems operating them, the report said.

    It concludes that the country is not likely to have enough highly enriched uranium to build a bomb until 2010-2015.
    A man could lose himself in a country like this.

    My blog at http://tollins.blogspot.de/

  2. #2
    Atomic Punk
    Join Date
    12.25.01
    Age
    53
    Location
    Carmel, Ca
    Posts
    7,954
    Favorite VH Album

    Fair Warning
    Favorite VH Song

    You\'re Kidding,right?
    Last Online

    05.31.14 @ 08:17 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    'Scuze me whilst I rain on your parade....the NIE from 2001:

    http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2003_cr/h072103.html

    We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass
    destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and
    restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as
    well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if
    left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during
    this decade. (See INR alternative view at the end of these
    Key Judgments.)
    We judge that we are seeing only a portion of Iraq's WMD
    efforts, owing to Baghdad's vigorous denial and deception
    efforts. Revelations after the Gulf war starkly demonstrate
    the extensive efforts undertaken by Iraq to deny information.
    We lack specific information on many key aspects of Iraq's
    WJMD programs.
    Since inspections ended in 1998, Iraq has maintained its
    chemical weapons effort, energized its missile program, and
    invested more heavily in biological weapons; in the view of
    most agencies, Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear weapons
    program.
    Iraq's growing ability to sell oil illicitly increases
    Baghdad's capabilities to finance WMD programs; annual
    earnings in cash and goods have more than quadrupled, from
    $580 million in 1998 to about $3 billion this year.
    Iraq has largely rebuilt missile and biological weapons
    facilities damaged during

    The same people who brought you the above passage also gave us the 2007 estimate.


    I should point out that one of the reasons I've been saying that all this invasion of Iran talk is BS is because the folks in the intelligence community figured Imnadina-whats-his face was probably talking out of his hairy asshole anyway. The fact that the Iranian president was more than happy to play along with public perception that they were building nukes didn't help either.
    "Nothing is ever what it seems but everything is exactly what it is." - B. Banzai


    My Blog:

    http://axxman300tool.blogspot.com/

    http://www.myspace.com/axxman300

  3. #3
    Atomic Punk
    Join Date
    12.25.01
    Age
    53
    Location
    Carmel, Ca
    Posts
    7,954
    Favorite VH Album

    Fair Warning
    Favorite VH Song

    You\'re Kidding,right?
    Last Online

    05.31.14 @ 08:17 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Also, what happened in the Middle East in 2003 that might have given Iran cause to cool their jets for a little while?
    "Nothing is ever what it seems but everything is exactly what it is." - B. Banzai


    My Blog:

    http://axxman300tool.blogspot.com/

    http://www.myspace.com/axxman300

  4. #4
    Hot For Teacher 8amtill606's Avatar
    Join Date
    01.06.07
    Posts
    231
    Last Online

    03.20.08 @ 01:50 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
    Also, what happened in the Middle East in 2003 that might have given Iran cause to cool their jets for a little while?

    I agree with that. Supports the idea that many of share that the US is not just there for Iraq but to stabalize a region????????


  5. #5
    Atomic Punk
    Join Date
    12.25.01
    Age
    53
    Location
    Carmel, Ca
    Posts
    7,954
    Favorite VH Album

    Fair Warning
    Favorite VH Song

    You\'re Kidding,right?
    Last Online

    05.31.14 @ 08:17 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    It's just too damned bad that the White House and the President are just so fucking clueless. A smart President would have been waving this report around doing cartwheels because in a backhanded way it justifies the entire war in Iraq. That means that not only did we get Lybia to kill it's WMD program but we got Iran put their master plan on hold.

    I would be rubbing it in the Democrat's faces, but no, W just stood there yesterday essentually say "Yeah huh, Iran does too have nukes."...Dipshit.
    "Nothing is ever what it seems but everything is exactly what it is." - B. Banzai


    My Blog:

    http://axxman300tool.blogspot.com/

    http://www.myspace.com/axxman300

  6. #6
    Atomic Punk MikeL's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.17.00
    Posts
    11,536
    Last Online

    03.03.15 @ 08:31 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 2 Times in 1 Post


    Donor

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
    Also, what happened in the Middle East in 2003 that might have given Iran cause to cool their jets for a little while?
    I think you're working on some pretty hefty assumptions there.

    Put yourself in Iran's shoes. Your long-time enemy has just been invaded and plunged into chaos. Why? Because, ostensibly, they were unwilling to stop their WMD programs. You happen to have a WMD program, and the US is doing a fair bit of saber-rattling about it.

    However... they're tied down. They've had considerable difficulty in pacifying Iraq. You've made that task harder, further tying down and wearing down their forces. Your intelligence estimate is that they would be unable to invade/occupy your country while at the same time occupying Iraq.

    What do you do?

    You've got two choices, and your estimates on how far you are from having a bomb provide your answer. You either keep working and hope to complete your project before the US can act, or you make it clear that you've stopped working.

    Libya went with the later, Iran with the former. Whatever the reasons behind this apparent change in Iran's position, I doubt our demonstration in 2003 had much to do with it. They'd done the math on that already, and determined that they could have a bomb (and thereby a deterrence capability) before we would be able to stop them.

    At any rate, we really do need to accept that non-proliferation as a viable hope is dead. It's just a matter of time. Once we accept that we'll start to formulate some real-world strategies for dealing with unfriendly nations who happen to have a bomb or two. We'll be in rough shape if we don't get those doctrines developed before we run out of time.

  7. #7
    Sinner's Swing! graeme's Avatar
    Join Date
    01.27.03
    Age
    10
    Location
    Dusseldorf, Germany.
    Posts
    3,946
    Favorite VH Album

    They're all shit
    Last Online

    11.19.17 @ 09:41 AM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 34 Times in 20 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
    It's just too damned bad that the White House and the President are just so fucking clueless. A smart President would have been waving this report around doing cartwheels because in a backhanded way it justifies the entire war in Iraq. That means that not only did we get Lybia to kill it's WMD program but we got Iran put their master plan on hold.

    I would be rubbing it in the Democrat's faces, but no, W just stood there yesterday essentually say "Yeah huh, Iran does too have nukes."...Dipshit.
    Justification for the war in Iraq?

    Hundreds of thousands dead. I have yet to see any justification for this invasion but that's besides the point in this thread.

    Personally I don't want any country to have nukes, irresponsible people always seem to get power anyway, but when we have administrations like the UK and the US backing a dictatorship like Pakistan, which obviously has them, I say who the fuck are we to judge.

    A nuclear Iran is not a good thing but neither is a nuclear UK, US, N.Korea, Pakistan, India..........blah blah

    Whatever, after the hideous treatment that certain countries have afforded Iran, I wouldn't blame them for wanting to attain nuclear status. I do not like "after-my-dinner-jacket" but, as the records will attest, he has started less wars than a few people I could care to mention.

    I wonder how the history books will record events that we are currently living through. From my western point of view, I wonder if I will be recorded as being on the wrong side.........

    ps. Libya halted it's weapons program for very sound financial reasons and an assurance that no-one was after it's arse. It was, as they say, a buy-off.
    A man could lose himself in a country like this.

    My blog at http://tollins.blogspot.de/

  8. #8
    Atomic Punk MikeL's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.17.00
    Posts
    11,536
    Last Online

    03.03.15 @ 08:31 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 2 Times in 1 Post


    Donor

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by graeme View Post
    Libya halted it's weapons program for very sound financial reasons and an assurance that no-one was after it's arse. It was, as they say, a buy-off.
    Getting caught with their hand in the cookie jar is why they renounced any plans to acquire the bomb. Had the shipment of centrifuges from Pakistan not been intercepted it would be rather difficult to say that "very sound financial reasons" and assurances--both of which had been on the table for a while--were the real incentive. When the equipment you need is seized and your supplier (who also happens to be the brains behind your effort) takes the fall to prevent a major international incident, yeah, it makes it difficult to continue.

    Saying that nuclear weapons are bad is like saying that a puppy is evil. Sure, some puppies are evil, but that's a reflection upon their circumstances. Nuclear weapons successfully kept the peace during an extremely dangerous period in human history. People are so damn quick to forget the hell that is industrialized warfare, and so unable to give credit to the nuclear weapons that ended large-scale industrialized warfare between nation states. Nuclear weapons had a chilling effect on warfare. Large-scale war suddenly became unwinnable, with costs that would handily exceed any conceivable gains. Thank god for the bomb--it saved many millions of lives.

    Nuclear proliferation may very well change that proud history of keeping the peace. Will we ever be willing to fight to prevent others from getting the bomb? I sure don't think so--that's not why we went into Iraq, anyway. We're just fighting for time at the moment.

  9. #9
    Sinner's Swing! graeme's Avatar
    Join Date
    01.27.03
    Age
    10
    Location
    Dusseldorf, Germany.
    Posts
    3,946
    Favorite VH Album

    They're all shit
    Last Online

    11.19.17 @ 09:41 AM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 34 Times in 20 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeL View Post
    Getting caught with their hand in the cookie jar is why they renounced any plans to acquire the bomb. Had the shipment of centrifuges from Pakistan not been intercepted it would be rather difficult to say that "very sound financial reasons" and assurances--both of which had been on the table for a while--were the real incentive. When the equipment you need is seized and your supplier (who also happens to be the brains behind your effort) takes the fall to prevent a major international incident, yeah, it makes it difficult to continue.

    Saying that nuclear weapons are bad is like saying that a puppy is evil. Sure, some puppies are evil, but that's a reflection upon their circumstances. Nuclear weapons successfully kept the peace during an extremely dangerous period in human history. People are so damn quick to forget the hell that is industrialized warfare, and so unable to give credit to the nuclear weapons that ended large-scale industrialized warfare between nation states. Nuclear weapons had a chilling effect on warfare. Large-scale war suddenly became unwinnable, with costs that would handily exceed any conceivable gains. Thank god for the bomb--it saved many millions of lives.

    Nuclear proliferation may very well change that proud history of keeping the peace. Will we ever be willing to fight to prevent others from getting the bomb? I sure don't think so--that's not why we went into Iraq, anyway. We're just fighting for time at the moment.
    I agree with every point you made here. My point is that a nuclear Iran, just like every other nuclear state, whilst not a "nice" thing for humanity, is no worse than a nuclear --insert country--.

    The threat of absolute destruction with no gain is a fantastic deterrent to aggression. Every administration knows that at the point of "pushing the button" they also are fucked is a wonderful humility prover.

    The reason I posted the article was obvious. Enough wankers have this kind of power over us. It just makes me nauseous to see so much of the "we can but you can't" attitude, especially when it is misplaced.

    Nobody is the world's keeper. Just imagine a world where all the money and time being spent on working out ways to kill each other was spent otherwise.

    Mind, I don't see it happening.
    A man could lose himself in a country like this.

    My blog at http://tollins.blogspot.de/

  10. #10
    Atomic Punk MikeL's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.17.00
    Posts
    11,536
    Last Online

    03.03.15 @ 08:31 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 2 Times in 1 Post


    Donor

    Default

    You're just plain wrong when you say that a nuclear Iran is no worse than a nuclear US or UK. It absolutely defies reality to say such a thing.

  11. #11
    Hot For Teacher 8amtill606's Avatar
    Join Date
    01.06.07
    Posts
    231
    Last Online

    03.20.08 @ 01:50 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeL View Post
    You're just plain wrong when you say that a nuclear Iran is no worse than a nuclear US or UK. It absolutely defies reality to say such a thing.
    I could not agree with this statement more.

    The more I read on this report, the more it reaks of garbage and I'm not totally convinced they have backed off. It appears one of the authors of the report just 4 months ago claimed that Iran was a major threat and that it was pursuing nukes. Why the change up now?

    We have a major problem in our intelligence communities when 'officials' start fudging 'official' reports to manipulate foriegn policy, influence elections, or embarrass an administration. Poor Bush cannot win with anyone. He's a failure for believing (like almost the rest of the world did) the Iraq WMD intel and invading based on it. Now he's a failure because he's not taking this report at face value and letting them know he isn't convinced. The double standard that this president is constantly judged by is rediculous.

    For God's sake - has everything become CNN?

  12. #12
    Hot For Teacher 8amtill606's Avatar
    Join Date
    01.06.07
    Posts
    231
    Last Online

    03.20.08 @ 01:50 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by graeme View Post

    Nobody is the world's keeper. Just imagine a world where all the money and time being spent on working out ways to kill each other was spent otherwise.
    This is pretty and would make geat lyrics for a Joan Baez tune, but...

    there are evil men in the world who wish to do evil things like fly planes into buildings, bomb commuter trains, and nuke nations. And then there are brave men who wish to rid the world of this evil. If those brave men are labeled the 'world's keepers', so be it. I'm on their side.

  13. #13
    Atomic Punk
    Join Date
    12.25.01
    Age
    53
    Location
    Carmel, Ca
    Posts
    7,954
    Favorite VH Album

    Fair Warning
    Favorite VH Song

    You\'re Kidding,right?
    Last Online

    05.31.14 @ 08:17 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeL View Post
    I think you're working on some pretty hefty assumptions there.


    You've got two choices, and your estimates on how far you are from having a bomb provide your answer. You either keep working and hope to complete your project before the US can act, or you make it clear that you've stopped working.

    Libya went with the later, Iran with the former. Whatever the reasons behind this apparent change in Iran's position, I doubt our demonstration in 2003 had much to do with it. They'd done the math on that already, and determined that they could have a bomb (and thereby a deterrence capability) before we would be able to stop them.

    .

    If you read the NY Times today they site Military Intel sources that said pretty much what I figured all along, that we have great intel on Iran to the point that we could listen to their top military command complain about the Iranian leadership shutting down a key facility in their weapons program. It's essentually the same behavior in "The Hood" when a police cruiser drives by nice and slow, everyone drops what they're doing and looks innocent. If anything, the mistak that the Bush administration has made in releasing this to the public is that they've revealed the extent that we've been spying on Iran.

    So the next question is: Was the Bush White House inept yet again or are they steppng up the mind-games on Iran?
    "Nothing is ever what it seems but everything is exactly what it is." - B. Banzai


    My Blog:

    http://axxman300tool.blogspot.com/

    http://www.myspace.com/axxman300

  14. #14
    Atomic Punk
    Join Date
    12.25.01
    Age
    53
    Location
    Carmel, Ca
    Posts
    7,954
    Favorite VH Album

    Fair Warning
    Favorite VH Song

    You\'re Kidding,right?
    Last Online

    05.31.14 @ 08:17 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    I should also point out that for all of the hot air Bush directed at Iran the fact is that the US has never directly threatened Iran and has urged diplomacy at every step.

    Unlike that mystery target in Syria that NOBODY wants to talk about.
    "Nothing is ever what it seems but everything is exactly what it is." - B. Banzai


    My Blog:

    http://axxman300tool.blogspot.com/

    http://www.myspace.com/axxman300

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. N Korea Nuke Test
    By Axxman300 in forum VH Fans Meeting Place (Non-Music)
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 02.15.07, 05:18 PM
  2. We should nuke Iran
    By Phatie in forum VH Fans Meeting Place (Non-Music)
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 09.11.06, 06:15 AM
  3. The Serious Goddamn Nuke Thread!
    By janthraxx in forum VH Fans Meeting Place (Non-Music)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09.18.05, 01:30 AM
  4. A reason to Nuke...
    By el_jalepeno in forum VH Fans Meeting Place (Non-Music)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09.14.02, 01:26 AM
  5. Bush opting out of 72' nuke pact
    By seenbad in forum VH Fans Meeting Place (Non-Music)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12.11.01, 11:04 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •