Bush again.

[Foxtrot]

Source?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

They declined a plan for TWO reactors, under the conditions russia would take the spent fuel for processing.

 

Why else would they want spent nuclear fuel, other then for weapons?

[Hillslam]

I imagine its actually mostly to do with the USA being built on jewish money, however, and there being an awful lot of jews in the states

I think you're right. I too think its money, and not guilt. Or karma.

 

For the record - I don't think the US feels any collective guilt about WWII, to be honest. At the time ya'lls was already fightin' the US had almost as large a germanic-descended populace as english. And even though we were technically a former colony and english speaking country, it was by no means a done decision that we support England. Although we *were* already helping England massively logistically (Lend/Leash, et al) long before we got in directly, there were many protests and voices raised in the US about doing so. Thats just history and how it was. Japan attacking us ended the debates with a thud. I never heard anyone here expressing any guilt over not getting involved earlier, and I feel thats correct, to be honest.

 

Luckily (and yeah I'll call it luck - since I don't buy into conspiracy theories about Rosevelt letting the Pearl Harbor attack happen on purpose) we entered on the side of right (given what was later discovered to have happened in Germany ala the holocaust).

 

I only mentioned maybe UK and Germany should hold Israel's leash abit not because of WWII but well yeah because of Germany and the WWII holocaust but also the UK for the '39 White Paper, and the '47 withdrawl from the British Mandate of Palestine. Not like I really mean it or even really give a large ######.

 

But yeah - I agree - the current state of support is probably because of money/power/influence.

[Hillslam]

Source?

It was in the summer of 2001 when a top secret message was delivered to Farid Solemani.

 

“We received news from a very valuable source within the Iranian regime,” said Solemani, who worked for more than a decade to expose Iran's nuclear program.

 

That message, if true, was explosive in more ways than one.

 

It was either "the biggest breakthrough that we have had in terms of opening up the secret of the Iranian nuclear program … or it's a hoax,” said Solemani, who is a senior member of the Paris-based National Council of Resistance in Iran (NCRI).

 

It wasn't a hoax.

 

His secret sources identified two sites — one in the town of Arak and one in Natanz — that were massive plants, disguised as anti-erosion facilities. Instead, the sources said, the two facilities were the heart of an advanced, clandestine nuclear weapons program.

 

When NCRI broke the story months later at a news conference in Washington, it was a shocking development.

 

“We knew back in 2000, 2001 that Iran had secret nuclear sites. And we were actually trying to find out where they were,” said David Albright, a former nuclear inspector for the International Atomic Energy Agency who now heads the Institute for Science and International Security think tank in Washington.

 

Albright went to work analyzing satellite photographs of the sites NCRI spoke about, beginning with the Arak site.

 

“We could look this right away and know this is a heavy water production plant just from the satellite imagery,” he said.

 

What he discovered at the Arak site worried him more than ever. Iran was not only building a plant — it had plans for a reactor as well.

 

“I mean when we first saw it, we said it was a heavy water production plant. Which implies it must be a heavy water reactor,” Albright said.

 

But this heavy water plant would be too big for research and too small to generate significant amounts of electricity. It would, however, produce plutonium, which is mainly used to make nuclear bombs.

 

Albright then turned his attention to the Natanz site.

 

“We actually had trouble with this,” he said. “What we had to do was really sort of do a series of interviews and triangulation to get out that this was actually a gas centrifuge plant.”

 

For Albright, this discovery presented a large problem because gas centrifuges are used to enrich natural uranium. Enrich it a little and you get "low-enriched uranium," which is used to fuel a nuclear reactor to generate electricity. But those centrifuges could also produce highly-enriched, or weapons-grade, uranium.

 

“Within a few days, they could make enough for a bomb,” Albright said.

 

Not just one bomb. The two massive underground facilities — each the size of a football field — are designed to hold 50,000 or more centrifuges. That could produce uranium for 25 to 50 nuclear bombs a year.

 

Another site that set off alarm bells was the Parchin military base (search), where Solemani's dissident group claims Iran is using as another location to enrich uranium.

 

Albright said he doesn't know about that, but suspects that Iran is testing the explosive triggers needed to detonate a nuclear warhead.

 

Until the allegations came to light, the world thought Iran had at best a rudimentary nuclear energy program.

 

At its center was Bushier, a half completed light-water reactor, started by the Germans and bombed by the Iraqis before the Russians resumed construction in 1995. Officials also knew about a handful of uranium mines in Sanghand and Ardekan, and a uranium ore processing facility in Isfahan.

 

None of it suggested the ayatollahs were close to getting a nuclear bomb.

 

But add in the once-secret sites in Natanz and Arak, plus access to ballistic missiles, and suddenly experts decided Iran had all it needed to turn its uranium ore into a nuclear arsenal that could target Israel, Turkey and eventually even Paris and Berlin.

 

Iran will have the capability in just a few years, according to the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

 

Others think it could be a matter of months.

 

All the nuclear facilities officials do know about are perfectly legal under the international treaty that's supposed to stop the spread of nuclear weapons.

 

“One of the weaknesses of the nonproliferation treaty … was that it allows countries to get a screwdriver's turn away from having a nuclear weapon,” Albright said.

 

Iran was only obligated to disclose the facilities and allow inspectors from the IAEA to inspect them. The fact the ayatollahs hid them, according to President Bush (search), shows what they're up to.

 

“And remember, this all started … because somebody told on them. It was an Iranian group that brought forth the information,” Bush said at a Feb. 17 news conference. “And so you can understand our suspicions.”

 

For Solemani, the various pieces to the puzzle reveal that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons and the world needs to act “decisively.”

 

“If the Iranian regime, bent on exporting Islamic fundamentalism to all over the Muslim world, is armed with nuclear weapons — that is a catastrophe for the whole world, not just the United States, not just Europe — for the whole global community,” Solemani said.

 

But what some find disturbing is that for 18 years, Iran built its clandestine program — which went unnoticed by the international body tasked with protecting against nuclear dangers.

 

At the IAEA’s headquarters in Vienna, Director General Mohammad ElBaradei told News that he was surprised Iran had kept details secret from them for nearly two decades.

 

“I know we had a problem on our hands,” he said.

 

After Iran got caught, it responded with a series of lies and fishy explanations. But it now admits it's building a reactor, which could allow it produce plutonium without foreign help.

 

Iran denied it was building a heavy water reactor — one that would produce plutonium — until satellite photos proved it was lying.

 

IAEA inspectors proved the discovered gas centrifuges were Pakistani designs — passed on by the notorious black market nuclear arms dealer A.Q. Khan. Confronted with that, Iran first said it never dealt with Khan, then admitted it did.

 

Then there's a military facility in Lavizan, which was never declared a nuclear site by Iran.

 

But when the IAEA learned Iran moved advanced radiation detectors there, it asked to take a look. Iran's response: it bulldozed the place.

 

ElBaradei said the jury is still out on whether Iran is actually trying to build nuclear weapons though he concedes Iran has “credibility gap.”

 

“They need to work hard, more than anybody else to restore credibility, to restore confidence,” he said.

 

To restore confidence, Iran did say it would halt its uranium enrichment program while the IAEA finishes its investigation and while Britain, Germany and France try to strike a deal to give Iran nuclear power, but not nuclear weapons.

 

Meanwhile, however, Iran is denying IAEA inspectors complete access to the Parchin military facility, where Iran is suspected of testing nuclear triggers — and perhaps running another secret enrichment operation.

 

But most of the staff News spoke with at IAEA headquarters — from ElBaradei on down — seemed relatively confident they could keep a watch on Iran and keep it from acquiring a bomb.

 

ElBaradei is doing more than investigating and reporting. He's advocating that the West give a helping hand to Iran.

 

“You need to address security," he said. "You need to address [that] you know a country’s sense of isolation, and you need to give them incentives."

 

For Iranian officials, the effort made to develop a nuclear program has been worth the pain.

 

“It is something that we have acquired through blood, sweat and tears,” said Sirous Nasseri, one of Iran’s top nuclear negotiators, who spoke with News in Vienna.

 

Asked if Iran intended to create nuclear bombs, Nasseri said: "The hell we will not. It is clear that we won’t.”

 

“You know that the agency [iAEA] has been scrutinizing everywhere, everything, in Iran for the last two years," he said. "They have not found a single shred of evidence that there is any diversion [from] military purposes.”

 

Nasseri said Iran needed to be hush-hush about what they were doing because if they had reported everything they were up to, they would have been stopped in their efforts to develop nuclear power.

 

“What choice do we have?” he asked.

 

And this

Iran has acknowledged that it obtained instructions on how to enrich uranium, which can used to make nuclear arms, from the black market network of Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan...

and a bunch more. It was sort of headline news awhile ago.... their excuse? "Oh we didn't *ask* for it, it just sort of got delivered to us."

[Zero_DgZ]

Hrm.

 

I missed that one somehow, but it's interesting stuff.

[Sledge]

In all this, I really feel one point has been overlooked: would you like some toast?

 

[DrewLawson]

Yes Please

[Hillslam]

Smeg! Lamest show evar.

[Zero_DgZ]

In all this, I really feel one point has been overlooked: would you like some toast?

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sure. But only butter side down!

[Robot 2000]

It appears it's our weekly "let's all toss our toys out the pram" discussion...

 

Alright guys, go to the opposite corners of the room, take DEEP BREATHS of oxygen, and take five.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OH NOES! PEOPLE ARE DISCUSSING POLITICS! STOP EVERYONE BEFORE THE FORUMS COLLAPSES IN A GIANT FLAME WAR OMFG!!!ONE!!!!

 

Seriously, why does this happen every time people try and discuss current affairs on here. We've managed to sustain a fairly coherent political discussion for 5 pages and then someone turns up to post this irrelevance.

 

That's the thing though, isn't it?

 

We get told that by people who don't want the nasty ay-rabs to move out of the middle ages.

 

Incidentally, the whole thing about Iran denying the Holocaust is a great example of that. It was, apparently, a "factually inaccurate" story which was put about by an Egyptian translator after a speech by Mahmoud. That story was just too juicy to ignore and it was all over the news and internet.

When it turned out that it may not have actually been true you didn't see any of the news agencies being quite so quick to post the retraction.

 

What he actually said is that Muslims must put up with people saying their religion is not truly gods way but if anybody suggested that the Jewish Holocaust was a myth then it'd be an outrage.

Admittedly, it's a dodgy metaphor since he's asking that we compare a belief to actual, physical, events but, whatever.

 

Then some Egyptian reporter came scuttling out of the room and told people "OMG!!! hee sed taht the Holocaust was teh liez!!!"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think the exact meaning of the Holocaust comments were that it was used as a justification for giving the Jews whatever they wanted after WWII; basically he was saying that rather than such events leading to equal treatment for all, the result has tended to be favoritism towards the Jews, which is not such an unreasonable point given the current state of affairs.

 

His comments about destroying Israel as a state are, of course, indefensible.

 

As for Iran: if they were letting the IAEA in to monitor what they were doing, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Stopping their research when we have some degree of control over it would just be taking the ######. If they're trying to keep themselves to themselves, however, then we have a right to be worried.

Attacking Iran, however, would be the wrong thing to do.

As I said before, Iran isn't your next tinpot little dictatorship on the "axis of evil" list. They have a large standing army, with modern(ish) ex-soviet equipment, unlike the Iraqis who lost most of their up to date assets in the Iran-Iraq war and Operation Desert Storm. Even without nukes, attacking Iran would be no pushover.

[Sledge]

Indefensible? There's a small, but warlike nation on your doorstep with nuclear weapons. Dunno about you, but I'd want to wipe them out.

 

[doc_newstead]

unlike the Iraqis who lost most of their up to date assets in the Iran-Iraq war and Operation Desert Storm.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Ha ha, they had French planes; no wonder they lost the air war

 

 

/jk, Mirages are beautiful things, I know

[Robot 2000]

OK.

 

I don't mind it so much when Brits bash the French. We've been fighting them for the best part of 1,000 years so we have a right to throw some insults at them. We owe the V-sign to the wars against the French. It's a longstanding rivalry.

 

The Americans though: your country wouldn't even exist if it weren't for the French. Show some gratitude, jeez

[Sledge]

Aren't us Brits legally obliged to bash the French?

 

[doc_newstead]

I'd be upset if we didn't. Just like the Micks, Jocks, Taffs, Krauts and Gippos, the Frogs deserve a bit of banter once a while.

 

EDIT: Goddamnit, did Nick Griffin hack into my account again?!

[Hillslam]

The Americans though: your country wouldn't even exist if it weren't for the French. Show some gratitude, jeez

Uh, isn't doc_newstead British?

 

But to bite your bait one could just as easily say *their* country would no longer exist without *us*. Quid Pro Quo. Nanner nanner boo boo. *raspberry*

 

Now on with the show:

 

"France has neither winter nor summer nor morals. Apart from these drawbacks it is a fine country. France has usually been governed by prostitutes." —Mark Twain

 

"I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." —General George S. Patton

 

"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without your accordion." —Norman Schwartzkopf

 

"We can stand here like the French, or we can do something about it." —Marge Simpson

 

"As far as I'm concerned, war always means failure." —Jacques Chirac, President of France

 

"As far as France is concerned, you're right." —Rush Limbaugh

 

"The only time France wants us to go to war is when the German Army is sitting in Paris sipping coffee." —Regis Philbin

 

"The French are a smallish, monkey-looking bunch and not dressed any better, on average, than the citizens of Baltimore. True, you can sit outside in Paris and drink little cups of coffee, but why this is more stylish than sitting inside and drinking large glasses of whiskey I don't know." —P.J O'Rourke (1989)

 

"You know, the French remind me a little bit of an aging actress of the 1940s who was still trying to dine out on her looks but doesn't have the face for it." —John McCain, U.S. Senator from Arizona

 

"They've taken their own precautions against Al Qaeda. To prepare for an attack, each Frenchman is urged to keep duct tape, a white flag, and a three-day supply of mistresses in the house." —Argus Hamilton

 

"The only way the French are going in is if we tell them we found truffles in Iraq." —Dennis Miller

 

"You know why the French don't want to bomb Saddam Hussein? Because he hates America, he loves mistresses and wears a beret. He IS French, people." —Conan O'Brien

 

"I don't know why people are surprised that France won't help us get Saddam out of Iraq. After all, France wouldn't help us get the Germans out of France!" —Jay Leno

 

"The last time the French asked for 'more proof,' it came marching into Paris under a German flag." —David Letterman

 

How many Frenchmen does it take to change a light bulb?

One. He holds the bulb and all of Europe revolves around him.

 

An old saying: Raise your right hand if you like the French.... Raise both hands if you are French.

 

Next time there's a war in Europe, the loser has to keep France.

 

[Crandall]

Sure. But only butter side down!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Catman]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

lol and we all know where thats from

 

I'm nicking that pic.... love it!!

[doc_newstead]

Now on with the show:

 

excessive amount of French bashing

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If you can find a similar 'wall of shame' about our fair isle, I'll dance myself giddy Go on, we're history's biggest villain; someone must have slagged us off!

[Sledge]

They tried, but we then humiliated them with our superior linguistic skills. And our refusal to speak those made up "languages" other countries pretend they use.

 

[doc_newstead]

[Robot 2000]

Uh, isn't doc_newstead British?

 

But to bite your bait one could just as easily say *their* country would no longer exist without *us*. Quid Pro Quo. Nanner nanner boo boo. *raspberry*

 

<Hee-layrious quotes from a bunch of yanks>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think you'll find that France would no longer exist without Britain and Russia. But that's a different story. You can carry on with the Hollywood version of WWII if you want.

 

Oh, and for the record, a bunch of Americans slagging someone off for not wanting to support their ill advised foreign wars? Makes me laugh at you more than at the French to be honest. The French are clever enough not to have lost thousands of young soldiers attempting to pacify a country that's ripe to collapse into anarchy the second you leave.

 

Anyway, since when has America been so great at winning wars? The only significant ones you've been involved in, you've turned up late when everyone else has done all the bloody work.

[doc_newstead]

LOL.

 

I love this.

 

I see your:

 

 

And raise you one:

 

[Robot 2000]

 

I love this. It's fun. We've been doing it for hundreds of years and we'll be doing it for hundreds more.

 

Americans: ###### off. You've barely been a country as long as the gap between now and our last war with the french.

[Hissing_Sid]

I personally dont think it's them holding us, but us holding them BACK.

 

They have more firepower in a country smaller then New Jesersy, probably more then some European nations. Let alone the standing army of 136,000 and a army of 400,000+ ready in 72 hours....

 

Isreal, has already expressed their willingness to go after Iran, if Iran continues to go on  their path to making weapons.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Very true.

 

In much the same way that there was always a skinny little runt in school who used to act like a bully cos he has a brother who looked like The Incredible Hulk.

 

Israel acts the way it does cos it knows it can always come scuttling back to the USA for money/guns/bombs/assistance and probably a blow job off Dubyah if they asked loudly enough too.

[Hissing_Sid]

*sigh*

 

Press the wrong bloody button and then spend a f*cking hour waiting to get access to the f*cking site again so I can correct the f*cking mistake. What a f*cking p*sspot f*cking server!?