Iran's Atomic Program

[Erich]

I think you can guess for your number 3 Kiwi. why havne't they used them in the past if they felt so hampered by the mid eastern threat around them ? it is most apparent under the present Iranian regime that yes there is a possibility that Iran could produce a nasty and use it. And yes it is a threat to israel and if they feel that to stop an agressor by taking out it's so called power plant(s) again I am all for it. they have more than one incidently

[evangilder]

1: A nuclear reactor is NOT a nuclear threat unless very specific things are done to it to enable it to enrich uranium.

And the Iranians are beginning the enrichment process aagin. It is not much harder to create weapons grade material if you are doing reactor grade.

2: An Israeli attack on Iran is AN ACT OF WAR and in this case unprovoked.

Maybe not provoked, but hezbollah and hamas are all getting financial and material support from Iran. These 2 groups would like nothing better than to see Israel wiped off the face of the earth. What is to stop Iran from even giving fissile material for a dirty bomb to one of these?

3: Israel has between 3 & 400 Nuclear weapons according to Jane's, why is it ok for the Israeli's to have a nuclear presence and not the Iranians?

Because the Iranians support international terrorism. The new president is one of the hostage takers from 1979. If you can read farsi, his own website brags about his participation in the hostage taking. Israel has had these weapons for years, have they used them? I don't think there are those same assurances from Iran.

4: Why is Iran having a nuclear power plant MORE of a threat than Israel having the Bomb?

Because they are already beginning the centrifuges to create weapons grade material. Also, North Korea only had power plants at one time as well. if you think the Iranian government can be trusted with nuclear material, you could be in for a very rude awakening.

Iran is a hotbed of terrorist activity with material and financial support that considers the US as the great satan. Plus with the long range missile capability that they are bringing on line, the world will be much more unsafe.

Why does a country that is sitting on top of a HUGE amount of oil need nuclear reactors?

[kiwimac]

Might it be to protect those oil reserves? To use them solely for revenue rather than at home use?

[kiwimac]

Whatever the reason, Iran is as entitled to build a power reactor as is Israel. To insist that they are only building it to use nuclear weapons is without proof. I might also add that unlike the Israelis, Iran has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty.

Kiwimac

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by kiwimac

Why is Iran having a nuclear power plant MORE of a threat than Israel having the Bomb?

Because Israel isn't supporting Jewish terrorist groups that blow themselves up in crowded Muslim marketplaces

Originally Posted by kiwimac

However it is not acceptable to engage in war for no other reason than someone MIGHT be a threat to you, hell, in that case the Chinese should attack the US, tell me, would you like that?

There aren't religious fanatics in the US saying the Chinese are the Great Satan and should be destroyed........

Originally Posted by kiwimac

Might it be to protect those oil reserves? To use them solely for revenue rather than at home use?

Protect oil reserves? If the west wanted Arab oil reserves they would of taken them years ago. Even as we speak, with over 100,000 US troops in Iraq, not one drop of that oil is being 'exploited' toward the west. If it is being purchased, I think the current $63 a barrel price is being paid....

Sell nukes for revenue?!? Just that alone would warrant the destruction of any Iranian nuclear producing capability! And the same should go for North Korea!

[Pisis]

Great discussion!

Iran has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty.

Nazi Germany also signed some non-attack treatys, eg. with USSR...
Sorry kiwi, but you're putting yourself in the same position as were people who wanted "peace" with Germany in 1938/39......... How did it end we all know...

[kiwimac]

I meant selling the OIL RESERVES not an prospective nukes. And Pisis I cordially disagree completely.

Kiwimac

[Pisis]

>> And Pisis I cordially disagree completely<<

Why if I may ask?

[schwarzpanzer]

It will sadden my heart because I know that will mean many, many casualties and grief and trauma to relatives to US service men that are to be KIA or WIA.

Not to mention Iranian civilians, I was all for war in Iraq because I thought it would be quick and precise attacks against military targets, how wrong was I?

There aren't religious fanatics in the US saying the Chinese are the Great Satan and should be destroyed.

Not too sure there?? (them Commie bastards!)

To use them solely for revenue rather than at home use?

Good point there.

Even as we speak, with over 100,000 US troops in Iraq, not one drop of that oil is being 'exploited' toward the west.

Again not so sure, the US Contractors wasted no time did they?

Bush being an oil baron doesn't fill me with confidence either.

Sell nukes for revenue?!? Just that alone would warrant the destruction of any Iranian nuclear producing capability! And the same should go for North Korea!

Agreed, especially 'suitcase nukes' think of the recent events in London.

Nazi Germany also signed some non-attack treatys, eg. with USSR...

Oh, and Stalin was guaranteed to keep his part of the bargain?

Sorry kiwi, but you're putting yourself in the same position as were people who wanted "peace" with Germany in 1938/39......... How did it end we all know...

How about the people that wanted peace in Germany in the '20's?

Churchill said something about that IIRC?

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by kiwimac

I meant selling the OIL RESERVES not an prospective nukes.
Kiwimac

My mistake Kiwi - sorry

Originally Posted by schwarzpanzer

Not too sure there?? (them Commie bastards!)

For the most part, that thinking is a thing of the past. Even the most hardened right wing wacko could give two hoots about a war with China, unless the US was attacked - highly unlikely! These days the enemy of choice is Muslim Terrorists.

Even as we speak, with over 100,000 US troops in Iraq, not one drop of that oil is being 'exploited' toward the west.

Originally Posted by schwarzpanzer

Again not so sure, the US Contractors wasted no time did they?

Bush being an oil baron doesn't fill me with confidence either.

Actually a loaded statement - the little oil being exported into the US from Iraq got nothing to do with those big-bad Texas oil men. See the map and go to this site. At the sake of repeating myself, there are enough reserves in the US to alleviate our reliance on foreign oil. In my state alone there is more shale oil here alone than all the oil in Saudi Arabia. It's a heck of a lot easier both politically and economically to release the reserves than to fight a war over oil, so if it was about the oil all of the middle east would of been a western colony years ago. Economics, world trade, imports and exports are what's at stake and the world economy, that why the US imports 60% of its oil and right now gas in the US has risen to $3.00 a gallon....

http://www.gravmag.com/oil.html

[Pisis]

Originally Posted by schwarzpanzer

Not too sure there?? (them Commie bastards!)

"Them commie bastards" is China...

Originally Posted by schwarzpanzer

Oh, and Stalin was guaranteed to keep his part of the bargain?

Who's talking about stalin? Iran at this time is the same danger to World as Nazi Germany was in the 30's... Nobody avoided its remilitarization and what came than? WWII...

Originally Posted by schwarzpanzer

How about the people that wanted peace in Germany in the '20's? Churchill said something about that IIRC?

Sorry sir, no matter you write the peace protestors are freaks and allways caused only troubles with their asses in safety... It's an unpleasant fact that people living in relative safety, peace and sufficiency have the tendention to go lefty... And that is immediately used by those bastards... I dislike Bush also but if there was Kerry, he'd only say "sorry, sorry, ok, ok...". These fanatics must be stopped before it's too late!



Cheers,
Pisis

[SM79Sparviero]

Why is Iran having a nuclear power plant MORE of a threat than Israel having the Bomb?


Because Israel isn't supporting Jewish terrorist groups that blow themselves up in crowded Muslim marketplaces

Pakistan and Iran are both Muslim countries.
Pakistan has undertaken a nuclear program for years, they have nuclear powerplants and experimented weapons ( not only "dirty" weapons) and F16s which can carry the latter.
Pakistan is ruled by a militar dictatorship, while Iran has a legitimate premier chosen by people by democratic elections.
According to some sources Osama bin Laden's men are training terrorists along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.Sciite Hezbollah and "God's Sons"( supported by Sciite Iran) can be considered no more than chicken-robbers if compared to Osama and his Sunnite puppeteers from Saudi Arabia.For their job exogene is enough, a "dirty" nuclear-explosive weapon is neither practical nor easy to employ.

-How many Iranian terrorists have been halted in the last years?

-How many Pakistanian ones?

No comment from USA? Is it all right?

One more question:

If you were an American banker or trader or economy mynister ,are you sure that the worst nightmare from Iran that hampers your performancers on the golf field is just the nuclear program?

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by SM79Sparviero

-How many Pakistanian ones?

No comment from USA? Is it all right?

COMMENT FROM THE US - RIGHT HERE!

While you are correct in saying that Pakistan, a military dictatorship has received much assistance from the US and it possesses nukes, those Dictators running the country have been friendly to the US and kept much of their radical element in check. For years the scorn of that Muslim country was India and the United States had put a huge effort to keep India and Pakistan in check so they don't start lobing nukes at each other. No, it hasn't been cool to support military dictators, the US learned that lesson years ago, at the same time if you have a military junta keeping a radical part of the population sustained, which is the worse of two evils? Maybe we should go in and remove that dictator? I should think not! In a situation like that you are placed in a "no-win" situation and to me it's better to support "the little bastard" than to see him outsed and bring in 'freely elected' leaders Like Iran who openly incite "Jihad" aganist the US.

Originally Posted by SM79Sparviero

One more question:

If you were an American banker or trader or economy mynister ,are you sure that the worst nightmare from Iran that hampers your performancers on the golf field is just the nuclear program?

I don't know what you mean, but I would worry more about my "slice."

[SM79Sparviero]

I don't know what you mean, but I would worry more about my "slice."

So would I.If you really want to defend your garden you are right and you would have my full support and help.I don't agree when someone goes to war thinking to defend his own garden but he really defends the golf-field of a banker of an economy trader .

Dollar has nowadays the monopoly in petrol market, it is the only currency conventionally accepted by the producer countries.
If you want to buy petrol you need dollars to pay it , you have to buy dollars from USA banks or ask them a loan that will be paid off in future with its interests, still in dollars.
Dollar has got an enormous practical value anywhere independently from its ratio with Euro, simply because anyone needs it if he wants to buy petrol.

More important,USA Federal bank is the only one in the world which can print money independently from their gold reserve without fearing the risk of an inflaction because THERE IS ALWAYS SOMEONE IN THE WORLD WHO NEEDS THIS MONEY and will buy it.

Iran Gouvernment expressed in 2004 the intention to accept Euros in payement for their petrol, it means that anyone could buy petrol in Iran without the necessity of dollars, this could be the first event of a "domino effect" rapidly spread to other petrol producers.Iran would start a challenge with IPE ( International Petrol Exchange-London) and NYMEX ( New York Merchantile exchange-New York) , a challenge that would be very probably lost by USA because there is no match between a price of 37 Euros/cask in Iran and 57 dollars/cask in New York or London( the price in dollars is higher nowadays), businness in London and New York markets could halve.

Dollar would loose its absolute world monopoly with a consequent deep crisis for USA banks profits and capital gains.

Saddam Hussein has been an unpunished vile pig for years ,but we all know what happened when he offered petrol in change of euros in 2000.....

Murphy's first law:
"anything they are speaking about, they are speaking of money"

[FLYBOYJ]

Yep - it's about the money!