Political Crossfire Forums

[John Galt]

Iran Hits Milestone in Nuclear Technology
Apr 11 1:42 PM US/Eastern

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI
Associated Press Writer

TEHRAN, Iran -- Iran has successfully enriched uranium for the first time, a landmark in its quest to develop nuclear fuel, hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Tuesday. He insisted, however, that his country does not aim to develop nuclear weapons.

In a nationally televised speech, Ahmadinejad called on the West "not to cause an everlasting hatred in the hearts of Iranians" by trying to force Iran to abandon uranium enrichment.

"At this historic moment, with the blessings of God almighty and the efforts made by our scientists, I declare here that the laboratory- scale nuclear fuel cycle has been completed and young scientists produced enriched uranium needed to the degree for nuclear power plants Sunday," Ahmadinejad said.

"I formally declare that Iran has joined the club of nuclear countries," he told an audience that included top military commanders and clerics in the northwestern holy city of Mashhad. The crowd broke into cheers of "Allahu akbar!" or "God is great!" Some stood and thrust their fists in the air.

The U.N. Security Council has demanded that Iran stop all uranium enrichment activity by April 28. Iran has rejected the demand, saying it has a right to develop the process. The head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, is due in Iran this week for talks to try to resolve the standoff.

The White House denounced the latest comments from Iranian officials, with spokesman Scott McClellan saying they "continue to show that Iran is moving in the wrong direction."

Ahmadinejad said Iran "relies on the sublime beliefs that lie within the Iranian and Islamic culture. Our nation does not get its strength from nuclear arsenals."

He said Iran wanted to operate its nuclear program under supervision by the International Atomic Energy Agency and within its rights and regulations under the regulations of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/04/11/D8GTUL906.html

[Simon De Montfort]

I would like to aske the liberals what they think we should do about a nuclear Iran?

[Demonic Spoon]

Doubt i'd be considered a "liberal"...

But it's hypocritical for the only country in the world to ever use nuclear arms to tell someone else not to develop them.

[Quicksurf]

Demonic Spoon wrote: Doubt i'd be considered a "liberal"...

But it's hypocritical for the only country in the world to ever use nuclear arms to tell someone else not to develop them.

Only difference is that we don't want to "wipe an entire nation off the face of the earth", but Iran does.

[steve abdul jabbar]

Quicksurf wrote: Demonic Spoon wrote: Doubt i'd be considered a "liberal"...

But it's hypocritical for the only country in the world to ever use nuclear arms to tell someone else not to develop them.

Only difference is that we don't want to "wipe an entire nation off the face of the earth", but Iran does.

Except that they'll never do it. You know it to be true.

No nation on Earth, not even whacko Kim jong Il will launch a nuclear strike on another nation, knowing that it would result in the complete destruction of their own country.

Iran arms itself because they are surrounded by a hostile nuclear superpower. Look at the map.

[Quicksurf]

steve abdul jabbar wrote: Quicksurf wrote: Demonic Spoon wrote: Doubt i'd be considered a "liberal"...

But it's hypocritical for the only country in the world to ever use nuclear arms to tell someone else not to develop them.

Only difference is that we don't want to "wipe an entire nation off the face of the earth", but Iran does.

Except that they'll never do it. You know it to be true.

No nation on Earth, not even whacko Kim jong Il will launch a nuclear strike on another nation, knowing that it would result in the complete destruction of their own country.

Iran arms itself because they are surrounded by a hostile nuclear superpower. Look at the map.

Yeah and people never thought that Hitler would kill 6 million Jews in Europe. :roll:

Have any of you read history books? Dictators, kings, presidents, "fuhers", "comrades", have brutal actions toward people without using any logic at all. Look at Saddam Hussein- He invaded Kuwait knowing that he would get his ass kicked by the US anyway.

Adolf Hitler, another moron. No one had the slightest idea that he was killing of millions of people. But later he invaded Poland and later Russia which led to the fall of Nazism.

God, the list goes on and on...

What makes you think that a nut job terrorist won't use a nuclear weapon on Israel, who is surrounded by a lot of nations who would not mine seeing it destroyed?

[Zoot]

This story is about Iran enriching its own nuclear fuel.

Yet people are talking about it making weapons.

Please stay on topic.

[Simon De Montfort]

steve abdul jabbar wrote: Quicksurf wrote: Demonic Spoon wrote: Doubt i'd be considered a "liberal"...

But it's hypocritical for the only country in the world to ever use nuclear arms to tell someone else not to develop them.

Only difference is that we don't want to "wipe an entire nation off the face of the earth", but Iran does.

Except that they'll never do it. You know it to be true.

No nation on Earth, not even whacko Kim jong Il will launch a nuclear strike on another nation, knowing that it would result in the complete destruction of their own country.

Iran arms itself because they are surrounded by a hostile nuclear superpower. Look at the map.

Dear lord another "It's America's fault" liberal. :roll:

So what if you're wrong and Iran does launch a nuclear attack on Israel? What are you going to say?

"Well I know Iran called for the destruction of Israel and that they support terrorism against Israel but I wouldn't think they would do that, .... sorry?"

You liberals really need a reality check.

[Simon De Montfort]

Zoot wrote: This story is about Iran enriching its own nuclear fuel.

Yet people are talking about it making weapons.

Please stay on topic.

Hitler just wanted the Rhineland, stay on topic

Hitler just wanted Austria, stay on topic

Hitler just wanted Sudatenland, stay on topic

Hitler just wanted Czecheslovakia, stay on topic

You mean he invaded Poland?!?!? I'm shocked.


:arhhg:

When will you fools relize the we can't trust people like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

[Zoot]

Simon,

That is exactly what HITLER would say. So you're just like Hitler. So you're wrong.

Gosh, arguing's easy.

[hill0118]

If we had not invaded Iraq, wouldn't our threat of force be that much more potent for Iran? I mean, now they know the U.S. military is indeed limited and they know we are not all powerful. Seeing us getting bogged down in Iraq, I would surmise, has made it the perfect time to tell the US to F off if you are Iran or N. Korea.

We brought this on ourselves. We squandered the threat of force that gives the U.S. so much power in the world, and now we don't have the ability to throw our weight around to get what we want. Consequently, Iran and N. Korea see that big bad U.S.A. is busy dealing with other punks and now feel like the time is right to make rude gestures to the other kids behind our backs and stick disgusting substances in our desks.

Iraq was such a waste. We could have been threatening Kim and Ahmadinejad right now and scaring them **** into doing what we tell them. Instead, they aren't afraid to throw mud at us.

[Zoot]

Even without having caught quagmired up in Iraq, Iran is a tough call. They have Chinese missiles that fly so fast and low that current US missle-defence systems can't stop them. So the US navy in the Gulf would be f****d, for a start.

Plus, while the US had to invade to get people to support Saddam, people already support the leadership in Iran.

[Simon De Montfort]

Zoot wrote: Simon,

That is exactly what HITLER would say. So you're just like Hitler. So you're wrong.

Gosh, arguing's easy.

um ... if you think that is a well made arguement ... well then .... never mind you wouldn't understand anyways.

If you're so naive to believe that Iran (a nation with an over abundance of oil) is pursuing nuclear enrichment to meet their energy needs then I have the bridge to sell you.

Let's not forget that they support terrorism against Israel and that they have called for the destruction of Israel.

Do think Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was joking?

[Simon De Montfort]

hill0118 wrote: If we had not invaded Iraq, wouldn't our threat of force be that much more potent for Iran? I mean, now they know the U.S. military is indeed limited and they know we are not all powerful. Seeing us getting bogged down in Iraq, I would surmise, has made it the perfect time to tell the US to F off if you are Iran or N. Korea.

We brought this on ourselves. We squandered the threat of force that gives the U.S. so much power in the world, and now we don't have the ability to throw our weight around to get what we want. Consequently, Iran and N. Korea see that big bad U.S.A. is busy dealing with other punks and now feel like the time is right to make rude gestures to the other kids behind our backs and stick disgusting substances in our desks.

Iraq was such a waste. We could have been threatening Kim and Ahmadinejad right now and scaring them **** into doing what we tell them. Instead, they aren't afraid to throw mud at us.

Actually having 130,000 troops on Iran's west border and 30,000 on Iran's east border along with the airfields and support facilities for both those armies we are in a great position to invade Iran.

[LDS Patriot]

Simon De Montfort wrote: Zoot wrote: This story is about Iran enriching its own nuclear fuel.

Yet people are talking about it making weapons.

Please stay on topic.

Hitler just wanted the Rhineland, stay on topic

Hitler just wanted Austria, stay on topic

Hitler just wanted Sudatenland, stay on topic

Hitler just wanted Czecheslovakia, stay on topic

You mean he invaded Poland?!?!? I'm shocked.


:arhhg:

When will you fools relize the we can't trust people like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Amen and amen!

And Ahmadinejad just wants Israel...and the West. If you think he is a pain now with all his active support of terrorism, consider how much leverage multiple nukes will give him.

Talk is cheap. Action is the only language Ahmadinejad understands.

[LDS Patriot]

hill0118 wrote: If we had not invaded Iraq, wouldn't our threat of force be that much more potent for Iran? I mean, now they know the U.S. military is indeed limited and they know we are not all powerful. Seeing us getting bogged down in Iraq, I would surmise, has made it the perfect time to tell the US to F off if you are Iran or N. Korea.

We brought this on ourselves. We squandered the threat of force that gives the U.S. so much power in the world, and now we don't have the ability to throw our weight around to get what we want. Consequently, Iran and N. Korea see that big bad U.S.A. is busy dealing with other punks and now feel like the time is right to make rude gestures to the other kids behind our backs and stick disgusting substances in our desks.

Iraq was such a waste. We could have been threatening Kim and Ahmadinejad right now and scaring them **** into doing what we tell them. Instead, they aren't afraid to throw mud at us.

Are we overextended? Perhaps. Was Iraq a waste? Not in the least, it is a major success for our security. You think Iran thinks the US can do nothing because we are too extended in Iraq? Nope, Iran knows better.

Many good points to ponder in the following long article even if you don’t agree with the authors analysis:

Striking Iran is an option, not inevitable

[M787M]

Put it into perspective. Why is that as soon as Iran decides to develop enriched uranium for power plants that everyone is crying nuclear warfare and Hitler? I find World War II and nuclear power quite a ways away from one another. Nuclear power is NOT nuclear weaponry. Nuclear power does not equal war automatically. The only way that nuclear power could kill people is if there were a Chernobyl-type incident, a very rare occurance and would only kill Iranian people.

So, why would Iran want some power plants?
Lets see...well, their power supply went down 40% when Iraq bombed their power plants in 1986. They have had severe gas shortages since. Apparently, the demand to develop nuclear power began pretty much in the late 1980s. Before that point, they were running on hydroelectric plants and steam powered plants.

These aren't people who are trying to bomb the world and kill all occupants because they are mad sadists who hate the world and its allies. These are people who want to restore electricity that they lost so that their citizenry is happy. A little bit of facts make a lot of the difference.

[Alexander on America]

It's great that many countries are getting access to nuclear power. It's probably the best source of electricity available in this day and age.

The United States and other nations with nuclear power should give or sell information on nuclear power to other countries so that all nations in the world can get a lot of inexpensive energy. It's only fair that if the US gets nuclear power, everyone should.

But of course, nuclear energy could lead to nuclear weapons. No country should have nuclear weapons, because they cause far too much destruction and are pretty much the only weapon capable of starting WWIII. All countries with nukes should destroy them and advise all other countries to do so. It would also be a good idea to invest heavily on anti-ballistic missiles to shoot down enemy nukes, if a country does not rid themselves of nuclear weaponry. Another good (but impossible or at least difficult and expensive) idea is to establish a system of satellites orbiting the earth that are capable of identifying, tracking, and shooting down nuclear (or any) missiles. Then everyone can stop being paranoid about eachother and get back to our lives. Use words to fight your wars, not WMD's.

[Simon De Montfort]

Alexander on America wrote:
But of course, nuclear energy could lead to nuclear weapons. No country should have nuclear weapons, because they cause far too much destruction and are pretty much the only weapon capable of starting WWIII. All countries with nukes should destroy them and advise all other countries to do so. It would also be a good idea to invest heavily on anti-ballistic missiles to shoot down enemy nukes, if a country does not rid themselves of nuclear weaponry. Another good (but impossible or at least difficult and expensive) idea is to establish a system of satellites orbiting the earth that are capable of identifying, tracking, and shooting down nuclear (or any) missiles. Then everyone can stop being paranoid about eachother and get back to our lives. Use words to fight your wars, not WMD's.

That works in the land of make believe.

[DavidXV]

Here are some quotes from President Mahmoud Ahadolfhitlerejad

"The establishment of the Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world."

"The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land."

"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map."

and he is currenntly on a campagn to prep people in the ME for his nuking of Israel by teaching them that the holocaust was exagerated or even false.