Defend Iran from American Imperialism!

By the way, how highly was the uranium enriched? You failed to say.

 

Iran assassins were just caught in Thailand. I don't see Obama making an attack on Iran unless they wage war first. Isn't North Korea making nukes? Why aren't we going after them?

 

We did, with mass amounts of sanctions and such. Even China flipped the shit at them when they tested their really crude device. North Korea is also an extremely decrepit and isolated state which has basically zero influence outside its own borders and does very little in international affairs besides smuggling drugs and occasionally pissing off South Korea to try to get more aid.

The chemical weapons weren't the WMDs anyone was concerned about, it was Iraq's nuclear program, which in fact no longer existed in 2003.

Iran has said 20%, the IAEA from what they know agrees. You need 90% to make a classic nuclear bomb, but 20% is the enough to make a dirty bomb, uranium also becomes substantially easier to enrich further once you reach that level, hence why there was a big public announcement and celebration when it was first announced, because it's a significant level to reach.

 

No one was concerned about WMDs because there were none.

However, chemical weapons were a reality. Are you aware of who supplied them to Saddam?

_________________________________________________________

Concerning the 20% issue:


First of all, Kessler repeatedly insinuates that there's something fishy about Iran's motives for making 20% enriched uraium to power a reactor used to manufacture medical isotopes, because other countries do not do so and Iran could simply import the isotopes "more efficiently." Well, what Kessler doesn't mention is that the countries which purchase rather than make their own isotopes simply haven't dedicated the expertise or resources to do so, unlike Iran which is one of the few "new entrants" into the field of uranium enrichment, along with Argentina and Brazil and perhaps more in the near future.
More significantly, in insinuating that Iran's plans to make medical isotopes is part of a weapons program, Kessler doesn't mention that Iran has been making its own isotopes for a long time now. Indeed, the reactor that the Iranians want to make 20% enriched fuel for (TRR or Tehran Research Reactor) and which is used to make the medical isotopes was built in 1967, during the Shah's time, with the assistance and cooperation of the US (the US also provided the initial batch of 93% weapons-grade, highly-enriched uranium fuel to operate it.) Iran's plans to make medical isotopes is thus simply a continuation of a long pre-existing capacity and not something new cooked up by Ahmadinejad as part of a secret plot to make nukes.


http://www.iranaffairs.com/iran_affairs/2010/02/iran-purchase-medical-isotopes.html

 

You don't have to look very far to uncover the bullshit. But you do have to look!

____________________________________________

Whereas as of November 2011, Iran had produced nearly 5,000 kilograms of uranium-235 enriched to 3.5% and 79.7 kilograms of uranium-235 enriched to 20%, according to the IAEA…
Half-truths: True, Iran has produced low-enriched and 20% enriched uranium, but they are all sealed and safeguarded by the IAEA. So long as they are, Iran will not be able to use them for any purpose other than fuel for nuclear reactors. In addition, Iran began producing the 20% enriched uranium only after the IAEA and the West refused to supply nuclear fuel for Tehran Research Reactor that produces medical isotopes for 850,000 Iranian patients every year, in which the 20% enriched uranium will be spent.
http://original.antiwar.com/muhammad-sahimi/2012/02/23/deconstructing-liebermans-iran-resolution/

 

Yes I remember the Iran /Iraq war and what you're refering to . And you're going to prove your own point . There were chemical weapons . No matter how they got them .

 

The hardest thing for me to figure out is how the U.S. leaves half a million Iraqis dead in the early nineties by destroying their water system, and then denying them what they need to have clean drinking water; and then leaving another half million dead in the early 2000s, and creating millions of refugees in the process, and still have people fall for the bullshit idea that Iran is a threat to the civilized world. That will forever be a mystery to me.

 

Elaborate on your point that you don't care who gave them to Saddam.

EDIT: If they didn't find any chemical weapons, it means they must have gotten rid of them, and U.S. intelligence was unaware of that fact. Boy, I'll bet they were surprised . . .

 

The U.S. gave him the means to produce chemical weapons. That's why they were sure they'd find them. The joke was on them.

See you tomorrow . . .

 

Don't put words in my mouth . I didn't say I didn't care who gave them to him ,

You're suggesting the c.i.a. gave them to him , are you not ? Then why don't YOU elaborate it , instead of playing guessing games . It's your point not mine . And if you believe that , then either way there were chemical weapons , correct ?

 

Yet Pakistan, the country who hides OBL, has nuclear weapons without even so much as a finger wagging (except maybe by India).

Iran doesn't scare me nearly as much. The recent terrorist attacks looks like something Mossad would do, not Iran. All of a sudden Iran goes and does 3 militarily insignificant bombings in 3 countries just as Israel is ramping up their campaign to go bomb the Iran facility? Seems too convenient for Israel and too pointless for Iran.

Israel wants to blow up this plant. Most likely they will be using missiles, unlike the Iraq mission where they used fighters. Israel for the most part wants to exert her dominance in the region and wants global support after she does it. That's one reason Iran was setup.

 

So you do care that the ones who gave the weapons to him are the same ones who condemned him for having them?

God I wish you would google something for yourself.

Try this: google U.S. gives Saddam chemical weapons.

That Iraq destroyed them is to their credit. Do you agree, and if not, why?

 

I don't believe we gave them to him,you do . It was horseshit back then and it's horseshit now . And they never destroyed anything . So where the hell is the smoking gun ? Oh I know I know it's hidden in Syria now , right ? BULLSHIT !

Still like I said you proved your own point . You believe he had them and used them , so they WERE there correct ? At least at some point .

 

India and Pakistan both faced widespread condemnation and sanctions for their nuclear programs and tests, and to this day it still scares the crap out of everyone. If a nuclear attack is ever going to happen anywhere it's going to happen between India and Pakistan as they're still perpetually on the brink of war over Kashmir. And Pakistan is the worst example because they're unstable as hell, forget attacking other countries, everyone is scared shitless of the fact Pakistan can't control itself enough to keep track of all its nuclear material.

Actually, western Europe, mainly France, West Germany, Britain and Italy played just as and in many instances a more culpable role in giving Saddam the ability to produce, so perhaps you should try more googlin than just the US.

And they only destroyed them because they lost a freakin war and it was part of the peace settlement to keep UN forces from streaming right into Baghad the first time around, which they should've done.

Look at this sentence, and the cognitive dissonance it takes to think this. Iran, which has publicly announced all of its nuclear achievements, and has given the IAEA access to parts of its facilities to verify said claims.............is being set up because Israel is bad. Israel may have a terrible foreign policy, but it doesn't change the pragmatic reality Iran is very openly developing a bomb. Like they're not even hiding it, there is no set up here unless Iran is a glutton for self punishment.

And If Iran is making only medical isotopes as their claim states, once again, why won't they open up their facilities fully to inspectors, like it's that simple, and it's something they're legally bound to do under the NPT.

Also, those IAEA seals, funny thing about the IAEA, they don't really have the power to actually enforce anything. Let's go back 6 years ago
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4597738.stm
Iran breaks seals at nuclear site
Iran has removed international seals from a nuclear facility to begin research defying foreign pressure. The move ends a two-year suspension of research, and could result in Tehran being referred to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions.
The UN nuclear chief said Iran planned small-scale nuclear enrichment.
Western countries fear Iran's nuclear programme could be used to make atomic bombs. But Tehran denies this, saying it wants to produce energy only.

 

oh yeah? ever heard of 'Iraqgate'? here ya go...

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1412.htm

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1150

 

Did you even read my post? You didn't. Go back and read it and try again.

I am aware Iran is developing a bomb. They want to be in the same regional political class as Israel and Pakistan. I can't fault them for that knowing how proud the Persian people are. However, that wasn't the point of that of my original post.

 

WAR PLAN IRAN: Dispelling the Lies, Telling the Truth about Western Aggression in the Persian Gulf

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=28675

 

the mass media:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/25/w...cies-see-no-move-by-iran-to-build-a-bomb.html

 

Papa wolf,

Ironically, your disbelief of what I have just shown you borders on religious obsession.

SN,

I never said that the U.S. was the only hypocrite in the shit-pile, did I? Maybe from now on I'll refer to the shit-pile of hypocrites as the "West." Then you can defend the hypocrisy of the whole bunch.

Tell me, why aren't you up in arms about the fact that the West gave Saddam the thing you're condemning him for having. Google "hypocisy."

After you do, tell me how it is that you not only live with it, but actually defend it. I have to wonder why anyone would.

 

Papa wolf,

Does this mean anything to you?

Donald W. Riegle, MBA, (D-MI), and Alfonse M. D'Amato, JD, former (R-NY), former Chairman and Ranking Member, respectively, of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, in their May 25, 1994 report titled "U.S. Chemical and Biological Warfare-Related Dual Use Exports to Iraq and their Possible Impact on the Health Consequences of the Gulf War," also known as "The Riegle Report," stated:

"In October 1992, the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, which has Senate oversight responsibility for the Export Administration Act (EAA), held an Inquiry into the U.S. export policy to Iraq prior to the Persian Gulf War. During that hearing it was learned that U.N. Inspectors identified many U.S.-manufactured items exported pursuant to licenses issued by the U.S. Department of Commerce that were used to further Iraq's chemical and nuclear weapons development and missile delivery system development programs...
...we contacted a principal supplier of biological materials to determine what, if any, materials were exported to Iraq which might have contributed to an offensive or defensive biological warfare program.
Records available from the supplier for the period from 1985 until the present show that during this time, pathogenic (meaning "disease producing"), toxigenic (meaning "poisonous"), and other biological research materials were exported to Iraq pursuant to application and licensing by the U.S. Department of Commerce.... Included in the approved sales are the following biological materials...: Bacillus Anthracis: anthrax...Clostridium Botulinum: a bacterial source of botulinum toxin...Histoplasma Capsulatum: a fungus affecting the lungs...Brucella Melitensis: a bacteria which can cause...damage to major organs...Clostridium Perfringens: a highly toxic bateria which causes gas gangrene."

http://usiraq.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=894




​