9/11 was wrong
lets hope Mickee is safe
Yes. They are also one of only four states who have not signed the International Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, along with India, Pakistan and North Korea. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty
So, I think it goes something like the following - Israel wants to attack a state which has signed a treaty they themselves have refused to sign up to because they claim that country is an existential threat to them. The treaty explicitly allows for the development of nuclear technology for energy puposes. There has not been any credible evidence that Iran is developing nuclear technology for anything else. Amazing really that a country of 78 million people might need electricity.
The only wonder is that Iran is not trying to gather a âcoalition of the willingâ to defend its right to exist, given that it has three non-nuclear treaty signatory states on its doorstep, one openly talking about going to war against them. I doubt the current attempt at appeasement of Israel will work somehow.
So weâre a cert to get a war out of this?
I remember the first gulf war being very exciting as a young fella. Without the ground offensives though this war wonât be much use. Israel popping rockets at Iran from 1,000 miles away.
Poor oul Ishmael
The Israelis are great craic altogether. Didnât it come out recently that the Palestinians offered to meet all of their unreasonable demands in peace negotiations yet the Israelis refused.
It must be said though that the Iranians are different from us and must be treated as such.
Anyone who doesnât think Iran is developing a nuclear weapons capability is delusional, they clearly are. The problem is that their centrifuge development facility is buried deep inside a mountain and it would take, erm, a nuclear strike to destroy it.
Any military action against Iran would:
1 - Fail
2 - Piss off the Arab states even more
3 - Lead to countless terrorist attacks on western soil.
The only ones calling for military action are right wing politicians seeking to paint Obama as weak. There is a general consensus within the military that a war would be a disaster and to be avoided like the plague.
So what to do? The US and Israel should start to warm up to the Arab states, support the popular revolutions, help the Arab League support the fight against Bashar Al Assad and try to influence the more moderate elements of Iranian power.
There really isnât actually a whole lot they can do.
Any popular government in the middle east is going to be hostile to the US and Israel, for good reasons. The last thing the US or Israel want is democratic elections in the middle east. I canât imagine the US would commit to a ground war in Iran in any case. Too much popular opposition and too much risk. Itâs crazy that itâs even being considered to be honest. Norman Finkelsteinâs description of Israel as a âlunatic stateâ is being proven fairly accurate.
Is Ayatollah Khomeini still in charge in Iran or what?
No, Carlos Queiroz is in charge these days.
Frank OâFarrell remains the spiritual leader of Iranian football. Hopefully the US will see that as reason enough to bomb Cork.
:lol:
No wonder the place is gone to shite.
Big Mick is the man for that job, Israelis coming over here giving me guff, weâll see how they like it when their arse is in a non- kosher bacon slicer.
U.S. Agencies See No Move by Iran to Build a Bomb
By JAMES RISEN[/url] and [url=âhttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/mark_mazzetti/index.html?inline=nyt-perâ]MARK MAZZETTI
Published: February 24, 2012
WASHINGTON â Even as the United Nationsâ nuclear watchdog said in a new report Friday that Iran had accelerated its uranium enrichment program, American intelligence analysts continue to believe that there is no hard evidence that Iran has decided to build a nuclear bomb.
Recent assessments by American spy agencies are broadly consistent with a 2007 intelligence finding[/url] that concluded that Iran had abandoned its [url=âhttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/science/topics/atomic_weapons/index.html?inline=nyt-classifierâ]nuclear weapons[/url] program years earlier, according to current and former American officials. The officials said that assessment was largely reaffirmed in a 2010 [url=âhttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/i/us_intelligence_community/national_intelligence_estimates/index.html?inline=nyt-classifierâ]National Intelligence Estimate, and that it remains the consensus view of Americaâs 16 intelligence agencies.
That lad? Heâll for the acid baths soon enough so I imagine.
The Americans donât think that the Iranians have the capability or any observable intent to project force beyond their borders either. Ultimately the Israeliâs wonât feel secure until every brown person within 3000 miles is dead.
Sid, in February the Iranians would not allow the IAEA inspectors into the Parchin site. Its generally accepted this is because they were conducting tests on high explosive triggers for nuclear devices. Theyâve cleared that evidence now.
All I saw there was a few pictures of the bould Mahmoud shaking hands with people and a few aerial photographs of a mountain. We need a bit more than that I think.
During a second visit of a high-level IAEA team[/url] in February, Iran refused access to the site. According to Western intelligence reports, the Parchin complex may have been used to conduct high-explosives tests that the IAEA says are âstrong indicatorsâ of possible weapons development. Iran [url=âhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/irans-top-leader-vows-to-pursue-nuclear-progress-not-bombs/2012/02/22/gIQA0W2TTR_story.htmlâ]denies all charges of trying to fabricate a nuclear weapon and says there are no nuclear-related activities at Parchin.