Iran to test peaceful nuclear bomb

[ed1066]

I have never seen anything like this report. It's breaking a major taboo. For now we have to treat it as a one off. However if this report is followed by others similar to it, then it would signify a major change in the way Iran refers to its nuclear program. It would mean that Iran has decided to use the idea of a nuclear bomb as a deterrence against further sanctions and the possibility of a military attack by the West. It could also be a tool for the regime to boost its waning popularity at home.
Such a change could prove to be very damaging in the short and long term, as it would be a significant boost for western efforts to isolate Iran and to consolidate the international consensus against the Islamic Republic and its nuclear program. Such isolation and deteriorating economic situation could be more damaging to the regime's top priority, which is its survival, than a military attack by the West.

www.guardian.co.uk/world/julian-borger-global-security-blog/2011/jun/08/iran-blogging

[❤ mollymouser ❤]

. . o O (nuclear programs are "entirely for peaceful, civil purposes?")

[Deleted]

No, Ed, they want to blow the crap out of Israel, AND put all other nations on notice that they are the mean kids on the block. Disgusting. NEVER should have gotten this far. I blame..... the superpower USA for being wimps.

[marshabar1]

Interesting origin for news story. Originates in Germany but is Persian. Google translate can't access it.

[Deleted]

www.presstv.com/detail/183808.html

Iran is to hold the second International Conference on Disarmament and Non-Proliferation to discuss Israel's policy of nuclear ambiguity.


The conference will take place in Tehran on June 12 and 13, 2011, a year after the first such event was held under the title “Nuclear Energy for All, Nuclear Weapons for None,” a Press TV correspondent in Tehran reported.

The gathering will be attended by international experts, ambassadors and representatives from international bodies such as the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Deputy Iranian Foreign Minister Mehdi Akhoundzadeh told Press TV that the conference would shed light on Israel's policy of nuclear ambiguity -- Israel's refusal to neither confirm nor deny the possession of nuclear weapons.

“The second conference that we are going to host in a few days' time in Tehran continues the sustainable efforts by the Islamic Republic of Iran in the past 20 years,” he said.

“We feel that there should be a very strong legal document, binding document, a verifiable document that all states, particularly those which have nuclear weapons, to go along with that document and we hope that in Tehran's conference, through the contribution of the experts, we could prepare the ground for it.”

Since Israel began building its Dimona plutonium- and uranium-processing facility in the Negev desert in 1958, it is believed to have secretly manufactured scores of nuclear warheads, turning into the sole owner of such weapons in the Middle East.

Former US President Jimmy Carter has attested to the existence of the arsenal, which he has said includes between 200 to 300 warheads.

Enjoying Washington's support, however, Tel Aviv has steadily refused to either declare the nuclear arsenal or join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Akhoundzadeh said the US and its allies continue to put pressure on countries like Iran that have no nuclear weapons, while ignoring Tel Aviv's looming nuclear threats to the Middle East.

The US and its allies accuse Iran of pursuing a military nuclear program, and used this pretext to pressure the UN Security Council to impose a fourth round of sanctions against Iran.

Iran, an NPT signatory and a member of the IAEA, insists on its legal right to utilize nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.


****Now the psycho has nukes,and is calling Israel out. I expect to see people here support Iran on this. *******

[ChiTownVenture]

Jun 8, 2011 17:04:34 GMT -5 @marshabar1 said:

Interesting origin for news story. Originates in Germany but is Persian. Google translate can't access it.

The entire article is strange (including commentary). It sounds more like someone picked up on an unintended posting on a website, but it's hard to tell what is going on.

[deziloooooo]

Jun 8, 2011 17:03:16 GMT -5 @krickitt said:

No, Ed, they want to blow the crap out of Israel, AND put all other nations on notice that they are the mean kids on the block. Disgusting. NEVER should have gotten this far. I blame..... the superpower USA for being wimps.

I wish it was that simple, but it isn't. As if we don't have enough on our plate, attack another nation...because we don't like their actions, kind of pushing it and the Israeli's , they still might but they too , have a lot on their plate a simple solution.

I believe they did get help from the Russians, possible China too, definitely on long range missile help, and why they would is beyond me...the more country's to so have, and a fundamentalist one to boot, the Russians have their own problems with fund mentalist in their midst, many areas unhappy with them, same with China, and any use of these things, to think they would possible not be affected.

There are topic all these major powers, they , we , allies of us have their own agenda on, then there are some that all should be on the same plane with, and this one, to me is one of those we all should be marching in lock step on. IMHO.

A short term advantage in relations is not he smartest thing to do and I would think these major powers would have leadeership smart enough to recognize that. If I can see it being a nobody, these others with their knowledge , credentials, they have no excuse for not understanding the terrible danger all of us , they included, not able to be left out of it, are in with the spread of these weapons.

[Deleted]

www.theblaze.com/stories/iran-sends-submarines-into-red-sea/

IRAN SENDS SUBMARINES INTO RED SEA
Posted on June 7, 2011 at 8:21am

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran has sent submarines to the Red Sea in the first such deployment by the country’s navy in distant waters, a semi-official news agency reported on Tuesday.

The deployment reflects Iran’s efforts to show off its naval power. Iran has long sought to upgrade its air defense systems and navy to portray itself as a regional military superpower, as well as prepare for any possible future attacks against the country, saying they would most likely be air and sea-based.

The Fars news agency, which is close to Iranian military officials, said the submarines would collect data in international waters and identify warships of other countries.

The report quoted an unnamed government official as saying the submarines accompanied Iranian warships on an anti-piracy route in the Gulf of Aden before they moved into the Red Sea earlier this month. Fars gave no details on the number or capabilities of the submarines.

Iran has long had three Russian-made submarines and last year, four new small Iranian-built submarines were delivered to its navy.

The four were said to be Ghadir class submarines, which can fire missiles and torpedoes and at the same time are capable of cruising in shallow waters, such as those of the Persian Gulf off the Iranian coast.

Earlier this year, two Iranian warships shuttled in a naval visit to Syria. The move prompted an outcry by Israel, which considers Iran an existential threat because of its nuclear program, its calls for Israel’s destruction and its support for the Palestinian Hamas and Lebanese Hezbollah militants.

Israel, the United States and others want to stop Iran from what they fear is a push by Tehran to develop nuclear weapons. So far the pressure on Iran has been mostly through international sanctions but both Israel and the U.S. have not ruled out a military strike if sanctions fail.

Iran says its nuclear program aims only to produce electricity.


****I guess they sent those armed subs out to test their nuclear electricity under water...****

No rattling sabers here.. nothing to see.. move on.. Weiner's weiner may have moved or something..

[deziloooooo]

I believe I posted that ..the Subs are planned to go though the canal, go to new seabase in Syria, Russians are sending sea to land missles to Syria, will possible meet with the subs in Syria and be merged with them.

Israel allow with no interference...we'll have to see...geting dicey there..like just before the First WW..maneuvering, a this, a that, ...next thing we know...

[Deleted]

I AM sorry you are a bit sad, Dez. Yes, it is scary.

[deziloooooo]

Jun 8, 2011 17:44:06 GMT -5 @krickitt said:

I AM sorry you are a bit sad, Dez. Yes, it is scary.

something to be sad about...as it is all out of our hands...and the ones who's hands it's in, you have to wonder if they have all their marbles..they push, before your time, Nasser did the same thing egged on by the Soviets..a bluff, a sable rattler, not wanting to get into it and the next thing , Israeli Planes taking out his Air Force..and away we go.

Now it seems the same thing but the danger is as great and possible even more so with the Nuc's in question, subs, missiles, Hamas, Fatah together, 10,000 missles in Gaza, Hezballah in Lebonon, many missles, Egypt making changes in their relationships, populace getting worked up, Syria in turmoil looking for a way to deflect the populace anger against the regime, "Hey how about the Israeli's, we mix it up a bit with those Jews over there, they shoot a few kids, all p off at them, and the Israeli's looking around and seeing all this coming down on them from all sides....

Reason to be Sad because from what is really not intended as a real confrontation, just a few embers of , for the hell of it, make em uncomfortable, diss em a bit, they need it, miscalculate, not understanding there , Israeli's short fuse, acute paranoia, all have it, specially nations....could end up in a raging fire before you know it........

[NoMoreLunacy]

I find Iran's effort to increase its military power gut wrenching. Let's not forget that Iran kicked out our friend, the Shah of Iran, and has been a very vocal critic of another one of our allies, Israel, for a long time. I hate to say this, but it is time for us to drop the big one in Teheran. Iran cannot be trusted with nuclear bombs as it is quite likely they will use it against a civilian population.

[billisonboard]

Jun 8, 2011 23:36:05 GMT -5 NoMoreLunacy said:

... I hate to say this, but it is time for us to drop the big one in Teheran. Iran cannot be trusted with nuclear bombs as it is quite likely they will use it against a civilian population.

I hope that you simply forgot to include the " " after this statement.

[NoMoreLunacy]

Jun 8, 2011 23:46:10 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Jun 8, 2011 23:36:05 GMT -5 NoMoreLunacy said:

... I hate to say this, but it is time for us to drop the big one in Teheran. Iran cannot be trusted with nuclear bombs as it is quite likely they will use it against a civilian population.

I hope that you simply forgot to include the " " after this statement.

What do you mean? You think Iran can be trusted with nukes? I don't think so. They will use it against civilians. Better to take out the threat now by nuking Teheran.

[ChiTownVenture]

Jun 8, 2011 23:50:30 GMT -5 NoMoreLunacy said:

Jun 8, 2011 23:46:10 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

I hope that you simply forgot to include the " " after this statement.

What do you mean? You think Iran can be trusted with nukes? I don't think so. They will use it against civilians. Better to take out the threat now by nuking Teheran.

This poses an interesting question, nuclear fission technology is old technology at some point in the near future it is going to be impossible for for any nation to dictate if another nation if they can have nuclear fission technology available to them (it will be like denying electricity or a combustion engine).

It seems like the UN and other nations need to re-evaluate IF and How they are going to control this (sanctions and the threat of destruction is just delaying the inevitable). What other options are there?

[mmhmm]

If we nuke Tehran, are we not using nukes against a civilian population, raving? Seems to me we would be.

[Deleted]

We should have not restrained Israel from blowing up the factories a few years ago when it was just starting. IF it is safe for Israel to do so now, I think they should. I have heard it is too far along to be done safely now. SAFE meaning without actually causing a nuke situation. This is very bad news. I wish it had not been allowed to go this far. I really don't like how Obama has handled Iran from the time he took office.

[ed1066]

The liberal/Democrat/UN complex would like to wait until Iran vaporizes Tel Aviv (and maybe Jerusalem, too), then they will discuss possible economic sanctions against Iran, and possibly issue a strongly-worded statement from the UN Security Council...

[billisonboard]

Jun 9, 2011 8:29:14 GMT -5 @ed1066 said:

The liberal/Democrat/UN complex would like to wait until Iran vaporizes Tel Aviv (and maybe Jerusalem, too), then they will discuss possible economic sanctions against Iran, and possibly issue a strongly-worded statement from the UN Security Council...

If anyone is interested in current US sanctions against Iran, here is a source of information: www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Documents/iran.pdf

[Deleted]

Sanctions don't work with insane people. Obama made a fool out of the USA with this mess. Israel could have used some backing from the USA to deal with Iran, but Obama is so full of himself he actually thought he could "negotiate" with Iran. Real soon now this may turn out to be the biggest mistake Obama has made so far. He turned his back on Israel, now he is trying to act like he didn't, and all hell is breaking loose over there now.

[billisonboard]

President Obama is simply the latest in a long line of individuals who has failed to bring stability and/or peace to the Middle East.

[NoMoreLunacy]

Jun 9, 2011 7:44:50 GMT -5 ChiTownVenture said:

Jun 8, 2011 23:50:30 GMT -5 NoMoreLunacy said:

What do you mean? You think Iran can be trusted with nukes? I don't think so. They will use it against civilians. Better to take out the threat now by nuking Teheran.

This poses an interesting question, nuclear fission technology is old technology at some point in the near future it is going to be impossible for for any nation to dictate if another nation if they can have nuclear fission technology available to them (it will be like denying electricity or a combustion engine).

It seems like the UN and other nations need to re-evaluate IF and How they are going to control this (sanctions and the threat of destruction is just delaying the inevitable). What other options are there?

Preemptive nuclear strikes by the major powers is the only way to go.

[NoMoreLunacy]

Jun 9, 2011 9:17:51 GMT -5 @krickitt said:

Sanctions don't work with insane people. Obama made a fool out of the USA with this mess. Israel could have used some backing from the USA to deal with Iran, but Obama is so full of himself he actually thought he could "negotiate" with Iran. Real soon now this may turn out to be the biggest mistake Obama has made so far. He turned his back on Israel, now he is trying to act like he didn't, and all hell is breaking loose over there now.

Israel needs to stand on its own two little feet. We have given Israel gobs of dollars over the years. We cannot afford that any more.

[NoMoreLunacy]

Jun 9, 2011 8:29:14 GMT -5 @ed1066 said:

The liberal/Democrat/UN complex would like to wait until Iran vaporizes Tel Aviv (and maybe Jerusalem, too), then they will discuss possible economic sanctions against Iran, and possibly issue a strongly-worded statement from the UN Security Council...

That should hardly be anyone's concern. I am worried about an American city getting vaporized. So I say nuke Teheran already. We can no longer afford to protect Israel. We simply do not have the money.

[NoMoreLunacy]

Jun 9, 2011 7:49:10 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

If we nuke Tehran, are we not using nukes against a civilian population, raving? Seems to me we would be.

Sometimes that is necessary. What would you rather have? Another costly exercise like Iraq? Another trillion dollars down the drain? We simply can't afford it. We need to severely cut military spending and depend more on nukes. We need tax cuts.

[handyman2]

Well I have never heard of a peaceful Nuclear bomb or any bomb for that matter. The only bombs I have ever seen blasted the heck out of it's target zone. I need some one to expand my intellectual world and explain what a peaceful nuclear bomb is. Sounds like a lot of bull from the little munchkin leader of Iran. I would tell Iran to detonate the first peaceful bomb in Tehran and let us see how it works.

[billisonboard]

Jun 9, 2011 10:37:01 GMT -5 handyman2 said:

Well I have never heard of a peaceful Nuclear bomb or any bomb for that matter. The only bombs I have ever seen blasted the heck out of it's target zone. I need some one to expand my intellectual world and explain what a peaceful nuclear bomb is. Sounds like a lot of bull from the little munchkin leader of Iran. I would tell Iran to detonate the first peaceful bomb in Tehran and let us see how it works.

Maybe they meant "peacekeeper"?