Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Technosoul · Sep 20, 2004, 07:08 pm

Are we having a replay of Iraq but this time in Iran?

Time issues photo of a site they claim Iran can use to test nuclear bombs after Iran said it has dropped it's nuclear programs.

Iran will allow UN inspectors to look around but they are not permitted to inspect the site in question.

Can the UN enforce anything upon Iran without the help of the USA and can we afford to move in that direction?

Or is this another case of poor intelligence reporting and photos that might note denote turisms of anykind, perhaps being circulated by ... (okay, who owns the Time media monopoloy?) via the higher-up of corporate wealth for some reasons not mentioned?

What is your opinion about the esculating news about Iran and the nuclear ban for so-called radical nations?

Here is a weblink.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8...,430649,00.html

Technosoul.

Technosoul.

Rainbow · Sep 20, 2004, 07:32 pm

I think that Israel will "take care" of Iranian nuclear facility, if U.N. will not enforce a proper inspection and agreements.

Technosoul · Sep 20, 2004, 09:01 pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Rainbow,
I think that Israel will "take care" of Iranian nuclear facility, if U.N. will not enforce a proper inspection and agreements.

Like a chip off the old block.

OberonDOtherseid · Sep 20, 2004, 09:45 pm

I think Iran would be wise not to force anyones hand, if it is nothing, let it be seen as nothing.

Sonart · Sep 21, 2004, 12:03 pm

Quote:

I think that Israel will "take care" of Iranian nuclear facility, if U.N. will not enforce a proper inspection and agreements.

Really?

Quote:

I think Iran would be wise not to force anyones hand, if it is nothing, let it be seen as nothing.

Why? What is "anyone" gonna do about it? Certainly not us. Or military is stretched just a tad thin already, and Iran will NOT be the pushover Iraq was.

bishop · Sep 21, 2004, 12:31 pm

i completely agree sonart.

although, there's always the possibility of simply launching a strategic attack - rather than a full invasion. i wonder how the iranians would react to such an attack. those who know, know that hezbollah has cells in many countries - not just israel/syria/lebanon.

jose · Sep 21, 2004, 12:55 pm

The dateline on that TIME story is march 8 of 2003

why does no one inspect Israels nuclear weapons rumored to be 200 plus warheads
why does israel need so many? if thay are only for a deterent. why the double standards, israels illegal WMDs are causing an arms race in the middle east which will bring nothing good to the people of israel and thier niehbours.

**Pooeypants** · Sep 21, 2004, 01:00 pm

Quote:

Originally posted by jose,
The dateline on that TIME story is march 8 of 2003

why does no one inspect Israels nuclear weapons rumored to be 200 plus warheads
why does israel need so many? if thay are only for a deterent. why the double standards, israels illegal WMDs are causing an arms race in the middle east which will bring nothing good to the people of israel and thier niehbours.

Israel was, until recently the only foothold that the US had on the middle East. You have to wonder also, did those several billion USD given annually to the Israeli state by USA help to fund the research and development of these nukes?

jose · Sep 21, 2004, 02:10 pm

Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran
quote. as you can see from the report, the Agency is making steady progress in understanding the nature and extent of Iran’s nuclear programme, and no additional undeclared activities on the part of Iran have come to light during this period. Iran has continued to act as if its additional protocol were in force. The Agency has gained access to requested locations. Iran has also provided new information in response to Agency requests, although in certain instances the process needs to be accelerated. While in some cases information has been provided promptly, in other cases information has regrettably been provided so late that it has not been possible to include an assessment of it in this report.
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/...sp2004n006.html
this is a more recent statement from the int. atomic energy agency

Rainbow · Sep 21, 2004, 06:34 pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Sonart,
Really?

What do you mean by that ?

giuliano · Sep 22, 2004, 06:47 am

Quote:

Originally posted by Technosoul,
Are we having a replay of Iraq but this time in Iran?

Time issues photo of a site they claim Iran can use to test nuclear bombs after Iran said it has dropped it's nuclear programs.

here is another strategic photo of iran.

bishop · Sep 22, 2004, 07:55 am

heh, well we already control #1 and #2 and #4.. how are we with #3?

giuliano · Sep 22, 2004, 08:28 am

i made this up for a post on con-x..

what? me hegemonist?

bishop · Sep 22, 2004, 10:24 am

and i'm sure they stuck their heads up their asses and gave angry replies once you did that.

funny that iran wouldn't be able to continue with their project if it wasn't for russian support. a wise diplomat, which bush clearly is not (wise or a diplomat), could've brokered a deal for the russians to stop aiding iran's nuke aspirations while we'd give russia various contracts in iraq and some taxpayer funded foreign aid money. of course, we'll never know since bush doesn't operate that way.

call me jaded, but i almost don't even care about iran's nuke project. the only one they can toast is israel and if they did, i wouldn't really care.

Sonart · Sep 22, 2004, 01:21 pm

Quote:

I wonder how the iranians would react to such an attack. Those who know, know that hezbollah has cells in many countries - not just israel/syria/lebanon.

For one, I suspect their covert assistance to the Shiite insurgency in Iraq would become a tad less covert and a tad more muscular.

bishop · Sep 22, 2004, 01:27 pm

yeah.. even right after the war, there were reports of iranian agents slipping into iraq. i'm sure they've sent more than personell.

with this fued over their nuke program, they're playing with fire. the bush administration has shown itself to be very pro-war. if the iranians aren't careful, they'll be the targets of bush's 3rd war. i can understand why they'd want to bog us down in iraq though. the best way to fight a war is by proxy.

Sep 20, 2004, 09:45 pm	#4 (permalink) (top)
OberonDOtherseid Logic Via Reality Posts: 653	I think Iran would be wise not to force anyones hand, if it is nothing, let it be seen as nothing. George Bush kicks ass and takes names in 2005!!

Sep 21, 2004, 12:31 pm	#6 (permalink) (top)
bishop moderat-e/o-r Location: boston Posts: 11,184	i completely agree sonart. although, there's always the possibility of simply launching a strategic attack - rather than a full invasion. i wonder how the iranians would react to such an attack. those who know, know that hezbollah has cells in many countries - not just israel/syria/lebanon. hope for america... http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

Sep 22, 2004, 07:55 am	#12 (permalink) (top)
bishop moderat-e/o-r Location: boston Posts: 11,184	heh, well we already control #1 and #2 and #4.. how are we with #3? hope for america... http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

Sep 22, 2004, 08:28 am	#13 (permalink) (top)
giuliano Tres COOL Location: melbourne australia Posts: 819	i made this up for a post on con-x.. what? me hegemonist? sheik's progressive islam online* *with editorials by bishop

Sep 22, 2004, 10:24 am	#14 (permalink) (top)
bishop moderat-e/o-r Location: boston Posts: 11,184	and i'm sure they stuck their heads up their asses and gave angry replies once you did that. funny that iran wouldn't be able to continue with their project if it wasn't for russian support. a wise diplomat, which bush clearly is not (wise or a diplomat), could've brokered a deal for the russians to stop aiding iran's nuke aspirations while we'd give russia various contracts in iraq and some taxpayer funded foreign aid money. of course, we'll never know since bush doesn't operate that way. call me jaded, but i almost don't even care about iran's nuke project. the only one they can toast is israel and if they did, i wouldn't really care. hope for america... http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

Sep 20, 2004, 07:08 pm	#1 (permalink) (top)
Technosoul Volcanic Erupter Posts: 8,663	Are we having a replay of Iraq but this time in Iran? Time issues photo of a site they claim Iran can use to test nuclear bombs after Iran said it has dropped it's nuclear programs. Iran will allow UN inspectors to look around but they are not permitted to inspect the site in question. Can the UN enforce anything upon Iran without the help of the USA and can we afford to move in that direction? Or is this another case of poor intelligence reporting and photos that might note denote turisms of anykind, perhaps being circulated by ... (okay, who owns the Time media monopoloy?) via the higher-up of corporate wealth for some reasons not mentioned? What is your opinion about the esculating news about Iran and the nuclear ban for so-called radical nations? Here is a weblink. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8...,430649,00.html Technosoul. Technosoul.

Sep 20, 2004, 07:32 pm	#2 (permalink) (top)
Rainbow Volcanic Erupter Posts: 3,063	I think that Israel will "take care" of Iranian nuclear facility, if U.N. will not enforce a proper inspection and agreements.

Sep 21, 2004, 12:55 pm	#7 (permalink) (top)
jose Volcanic Erupter Location: España Posts: 2,514	The dateline on that TIME story is march 8 of 2003 why does no one inspect Israels nuclear weapons rumored to be 200 plus warheads why does israel need so many? if thay are only for a deterent. why the double standards, israels illegal WMDs are causing an arms race in the middle east which will bring nothing good to the people of israel and thier niehbours.

Sep 21, 2004, 02:10 pm	#9 (permalink) (top)
jose Volcanic Erupter Location: España Posts: 2,514	Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran quote. as you can see from the report, the Agency is making steady progress in understanding the nature and extent of Iran’s nuclear programme, and no additional undeclared activities on the part of Iran have come to light during this period. Iran has continued to act as if its additional protocol were in force. The Agency has gained access to requested locations. Iran has also provided new information in response to Agency requests, although in certain instances the process needs to be accelerated. While in some cases information has been provided promptly, in other cases information has regrettably been provided so late that it has not been possible to include an assessment of it in this report. http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/...sp2004n006.html this is a more recent statement from the int. atomic energy agency

Sep 22, 2004, 01:27 pm	#16 (permalink) (top)
bishop moderat-e/o-r Location: boston Posts: 11,184	yeah.. even right after the war, there were reports of iranian agents slipping into iraq. i'm sure they've sent more than personell. with this fued over their nuke program, they're playing with fire. the bush administration has shown itself to be very pro-war. if the iranians aren't careful, they'll be the targets of bush's 3rd war. i can understand why they'd want to bog us down in iraq though. the best way to fight a war is by proxy. hope for america... http://www.ronpaul2008.com/