Ahmadinejad vows never to give up Nuclear Program

[Northpaw77]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,330338,00.html

Thoughts?

[Go Fish]

And he also said that that are no gay Iranians. He won't give them up; We'll take them away.

[Tharagor]

Iran has every right to space and nuclear energy programs. It isn't as if our satellites could possibly miss the test detonation of a nuclear weapon, even underground, that would be a non-lethal smoking gun we could use to support our claim that Iran's programs have non-peaceful intentions.

As a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty such a test detonation would give the United States ample reason to petition the United Nations for sanctions possibly including invasion.

[cronic]

well, My thoughts are.. No one should be surprised by this.. but news is news.. no matter how many times Ahmadinejad repeats himself.

[PatrickHenry]

And he also said that that are no gay Iranians. He won't give them up; We'll take them away.


"We?"

You and your fishing rods?

You and your family?

You and the US military?

You and the Israeli "Defense" Forces?

You and the UN?

Or somebody that is not you, but that you support?

Because EVERY nation has the right to enrich uranium.

Just like every nation has the right to self-defense.

The UN sanctions contravene its own charter.

And US policy is hypocritical since it has nuclear arms in the Persian Gulf, threatening a nation that has not even rhetorically threatened the US.

So...do you support US hypocrisy, Go Fish?

[Go Fish]

Iran has every right to space and nuclear energy programs. It isn't as if our satellites could possibly miss the test detonation of a nuclear weapon, even underground, that would be a non-lethal smoking gun we could use to support our claim that Iran's programs have non-peaceful intentions.

As a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty such a test detonation would give the United States ample reason to petition the United Nations for sanctions possibly including invasion.

And what if that "test detonation" is conducted by a palestinian driving a delivery van at the Israeli border? Or on a ship in the Chesapeake Bay?[hr]

And he also said that that are no gay Iranians. He won't give them up; We'll take them away.


"We?"

You and your fishing rods?

You and your family?

You and the US military?

You and the Israeli "Defense" Forces?

You and the UN?

Or somebody that is not you, but that you support?

Because EVERY nation has the right to enrich uranium.

Just like every nation has the right to self-defense.

The UN sanctions contravene its own charter.

And US policy is hypocritical since it has nuclear arms in the Persian Gulf, threatening a nation that has not even rhetorically threatened the US.

So...do you support US hypocrisy, Go Fish?



I don't consider preventing madmen who have stated, as their aim, the destruction of my family, my country, and our country's allies "hypocritical". Iran is a patron of terrorism as well as a practitioner.
Be that as it may, Achmedinejad will never be allowed to have nuclear weapons.
Does that sadden you, PH?

[December]

Thoughts?

I think America should mind its own business. :)


Iran receives Russian nuclear fuel, hints of second reactor

Mon Dec 17, 5:26 PM ET

TEHRAN, Iran - Iran received its first nuclear fuel from Russia on Monday, paving the way for the startup of its reactor in 2008.

Both the U.S. and Russia said that with the shipment, the Iranians would no longer have any reason to produce enriched uranium that could be used to build a nuclear weapon.

But Iran said it would continue its enrichment activities at a separate facility, in the central city of Natanz, to provide fuel for another nuclear reactor. Not only that, it indicated that construction had begun on just such a reactor, in Darkhovin in southwestern Iran.

"We are currently constructing a 360-megawatt nuclear power plant in Darkhovin," Vice President Gholam Reza Aghazadeh said on state television. Previously Iran had always described the Darkhovin plant as being in the planning stages.

READ MORE -

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071217/ap_on_re_mi_ea/russia_iran

http://iarnoticias.com/images/personajes/5_putin_pres_iran.jpg

Iran says its first NPP will be commissioned before March 2009
22/ 12/ 2007

TEHRAN, December 22 (RIA Novosti) - Iran's first nuclear power plant being built by Russia will start generating electricity before March 2009, the Islamic Republic's government spokesman said on Saturday.

Under a Russian-Iranian agreement on Bushehr, nuclear fuel deliveries to the plant start about six months ahead of its commissioning. Russian officials said supplies would continue into February 2008.
The Russian contractor for the $1 billion project, state-controlled Atomstroyexport, said on Thursday the plant will not be commissioned before the end of 2008.
READ MORE -
http://en.rian.ru/world/20071222/93766655.html

http://www.kremlin.ru/dyn_images/img148387.jpg

October 16, 2007
TEHRAN.
With the President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. On the right, the President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliev.

Source - http://www.kremlin.ru/eng/text/images/148388.shtml

"Iranians have a fine image from Russians in mind" - Ayatollah Sayed Ali Khamenei

http://www.leader.ir/langs/EN/index.php?p=news&id=3693

[Go Fish]

AND........6 terrorists are about to be sentenced to death.

[Tharagor]

And what if that "test detonation" is conducted by a palestinian driving a delivery van at the Israeli border? Or on a ship in the Chesapeake Bay?


Well, considering the technology of nuclear weapons and the fact that no nation has ever deployed one without testing, I'd say the chance is exceedingly small.


I don't consider preventing madmen who have stated, as their aim, the destruction of my family, my country, and our country's allies "hypocritical". Iran is a patron of terrorism as well as a practitioner.
Be that as it may, Achmedinejad will never be allowed to have nuclear weapons.


Personally, I can't consider Ahmadinejad a madman. He has never directly threatened the United States pre-emptively. Yes, he has, and continues to threaten Israel. Given the history of the region, they have a legitimate complaint regarding the existence of Israel.

My position for many years has been to let them fight it out and stay out of it ourselves. I cannot find any reason to agree with our interventionist policies.

[PatrickHenry]

I don't consider preventing madmen who have stated, as their aim, the destruction of my family, my country, and our country's allies "hypocritical". Iran is a patron of terrorism as well as a practitioner.
Be that as it may, Achmedinejad will never be allowed to have nuclear weapons.
Does that sadden you, PH?
Well! I see the assertions, I don't see the evidence.

Is Ahmadinejad "mad"? That's a somewhat subjective term for insane. But I see no evidence of that. So you are just calling him a convenient name, huh?

You claim the President of Iran has stated certain aims. Care to substantiate your rhetoric?

The US patronizes terrorists, too from the PJAK to the AUC to AlQaeda of the 80s and too many others to count. I mentioned hypocrisy, and it is demonstrably US policy to both publicly condemn and secretly support terrorists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PJAK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Self-Defense_Forces_of_Colombia

I don't think that Iran should have nukes, no.

But since others have them and are historically more aggressive, shouldn't Iran have them as a deterrent? The only thing that apparently deters a nuclear-armed power is when their opponent has them also...

Can you show a pattern of Iranian aggression? I can certainly show a pattern of American unprovoked aggressive military moves.

What are you afraid of?

That some other nation may tell Uncle Sam to take a hike?

[Go Fish]

Iran's last war was with.....? Their current one is with us, but since I assume that you are unwilling to consider the evidence (Or as I call it, "proof".) that Iranians are actively fighting our (Not yours, of course.) troops in Iraq, training and funding Hamas, dealing in Russian arms, and calling for the destruction of Israel, (That whole "Holocaust" fantasy just doesn't get it for him it seems. Those goddamned Jews seem to have a hook-up.) and trying to get enough cascade centrifuges on line to build a real nuke, you really don't see them as a threat.
That a camel-humping caveman could pull off 9/11 really cuts the legs out from under you and your argument. You do know that Hawaii is at the top of the list for these vermin, don't you? The Muslims picked 9/11 because it is the United States' emergency phone number. Pearl Harbor came in second.

[Labrocca]

Let them have their toys. Certainly we don't have to support the idea but who gives a shit. If anyone is going to take action it will be Israel. They won't allow Iran to have nukes.

[jafar00]

And he also said that that are no gay Iranians. He won't give them up; We'll take them away.


I'll forgive your lack of English comprehension skills because of the bad translation of Ahmedinejad's speech, but he didn't say their were no gays in Iran. He meant that Iran doesn't have as many gays as the US. ie. there is a different situation in Iran when compared to the US.[hr]

Iran has every right to space and nuclear energy programs. It isn't as if our satellites could possibly miss the test detonation of a nuclear weapon, even underground, that would be a non-lethal smoking gun we could use to support our claim that Iran's programs have non-peaceful intentions.

As a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty such a test detonation would give the United States ample reason to petition the United Nations for sanctions possibly including invasion.

And what if that "test detonation" is conducted by a palestinian driving a delivery van at the Israeli border? Or on a ship in the Chesapeake Bay?


Are you really that naive? The fear mongers have got to you for sure.



The UN sanctions contravene its own charter.

And US policy is hypocritical since it has nuclear arms in the Persian Gulf, threatening a nation that has not even rhetorically threatened the US.

So...do you support US hypocrisy, Go Fish?



I don't consider preventing madmen who have stated, as their aim, the destruction of my family, my country, and our country's allies "hypocritical". Iran is a patron of terrorism as well as a practitioner.
Be that as it may, Achmedinejad will never be allowed to have nuclear weapons.
Does that sadden you, PH?


What Patrick said is correct. Iran has not threatened the US with destruction. The closest thing to that would be threatening to retaliate if attacked which is par for the course. You don't go and attack another country without expecting some kind of response.

As for Iran being involved in terrorism, do you have any hard proof? Or just more rhetoric?[hr]
Iran's last war was with.....? Their current one is with us, but since I assume that you are unwilling to consider the evidence (Or as I call it, "proof".)


Iran is not currently at war with the US unless you count sabre rattling on both sides and US sponsored groups like Jundullah(Al Qaeda) and MEK conducting terrorism on Iranian soil as an actual war.


that Iranians are actively fighting our (Not yours, of course.) troops in Iraq, training and funding Hamas,


Any evidence? No, I thought not.


dealing in Russian arms,


Many countries do. What makes Iran any different to the others?


and calling for the destruction of Israel,


Since when has Iran called for the destruction of Israel? Ahmedinejad has called for regime change in Israel, nothing more.


(That whole "Holocaust" fantasy just doesn't get it for him it seems. Those goddamned Jews seem to have a hook-up.) and trying to get enough cascade centrifuges on line to build a real nuke, you really don't see them as a threat.


Since the evidence is overwhelming that they do not have a Nuclear Weapons program, only Bush and his brainwashed hordes believe that nonsense.

[Northpaw77]

Iran cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons/programs. Any reactor can be turned into a breeder reactor without much trouble... Anyone crazy enough to use nukes... should not be allowed to have them.

[PatrickHenry]

Iran cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons/programs. Any reactor can be turned into a breeder reactor without much trouble... Anyone crazy enough to use nukes... should not be allowed to have them.
Including the Pentagon?

[just a grunt]

PH, uniformed personnel cannot make the decision to use nukes. That decision rests with elected officials. By Northpaw's criteria, only a Democratic party administration should be prevented from having nukes.

[apdst]

Including the Pentagon?

When's the last time we nuked anyone? The only instance was to bring an end to worst war in history. That one doesn't count.

[Northpaw77]

Pat. H, Don't be ridiculous. My friends here have said all that needs to be said

Thanks guys!

[PostmodernProphet]

And US policy is hypocritical since it has nuclear arms in the Persian Gulf, threatening a nation that has not even rhetorically threatened the US.

let's see....I have a choice between being hypocritical for wanting to prevent a country from having nuclear weapons when I have them....or being an absolute idiot for letting them have nuclear weapons....hmmmm.....hypocrite, idiot......hypocrite, idiot......

okay, I choose hypocrite......what's your choice again?.......

[apdst]

I have a choice between being hypocritical for wanting to prevent a country from having nuclear weapons when I have them....or being an absolute idiot for letting them have nuclear weapons....hmmmm.....hypocrite, idiot......hypocrite, idiot......

okay, I choose hypocrite......what's your choice again?.......

THAT'S funny!!

[Elrathin]

It's Ironic, not one conservative would ever give into the demands of another country, yet they expect other countries to give into their demands.

[apdst]

not one conservative would ever give into the demands of another country, yet they expect other countries to give into their demands.

Because The United States has the stroke to back it up.

[Elrathin]

Because The United States has the stroke to back it up.


And conservatives wonder why the world views us as aggressive and hypocritical. We have plenty of examples right here on this board.

[apdst]

And conservatives wonder why the world views us as aggressive and hypocritical.

That's because we get credit for everything bad and no credit for everything good.

We save hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lives from slaughter and/or famine and you never hear about it. Let something less flattering, but neccessary, happen and we never hear the end of it.

[Elrathin]

And conservatives wonder why the world views us as aggressive and hypocritical.

That's because we get credit for everything bad and no credit for everything good.


Yeah it couldn't do with the fact we order other countries around while we listen to noone. Nope that can't be it at all. :rolleyes:

[apdst]

You hear about UNOSOM II, but you NEVER hear about Operation Restore Hope and for damn sure you enver hear about Operation United Shield. We ceartianly never hear the real story of any of those operations. The facts, the reality, oh no, all we hear is the part where the bad ole USA fucked the dog, again.[hr]Go ahead ans start Googling, Lefties. I already know that none of you are familiar with any of it.

[Pookie]

This noise about Lefties, Libs, Dems, everyone to the left a little being ignorant or unfamiliar with things is getting old. I am sick of the insults I am seeing.
I will not Google something I already know about for someone who already assumes I am ignorant.
Suppose you prove your superiority, Apdst and tell us all about it. Since you said, and I quote:
"I already know that none of you are familiar with any of it." -- here's your golden chance to educate us. You tell us all about these things and then we'll all know.
Pookie

[apdst]

This noise about Lefties, Libs, Dems, everyone to the left a little being ignorant or unfamiliar with things is getting old. I am sick of the insults I am seeing.

Reality is a real bitch, isn't it? If you don't like it, then maybe all you Leftists should huddle up and create a different atmosphere. Something on the opposite side of the spectrum from calling those with whom you disagree with, "liars", or, "ignorant". Whatcha think? Maybe?

Don't like the way you're being talked to? Then change the way that Leftists talk to others. You response is the typical Left Wing cry baby retort, everytime you get caught with your pants down.

I don't have to prove to you, or anyone else, what I do, or do not know. You're not my judge, nor do you sign my paycheck. I mentioned those operations to prove a point. If you're as familiar with the three operations as you say, then you are welcome to challenge the point I was trying to make.

Address the point I'm trying to make, not the actual facts that I used to make it.

[Elrathin]

If you don't like it, then maybe all you Leftists should huddle up and create a different atmosphere. Something on the opposite side of the spectrum from calling those with whom you disagree with, "liars", or, "ignorant". Whatcha think? Maybe?


Take your own advice, when anyone says something that the right doesn't agree with a lot of the righties here jump on the lefties and call them un-american, etc. Just look at the Berkley thread for proof on that one. Please don't act like Righties are all victims here, many of the right on this board are quick to judge lefties just as bad.[hr]
Address the point I'm trying to make, not the actual facts that I used to make it.


I love it, you tell others to not order you around, yet you order others around. This proves my other point on why America is looked bad upon, because of shit just like this.

[apdst]

Any comments on the point I was making? At all? Or, are you too busy defending The Church of Liberalism?

[Elrathin]

Any comments on the point I was making? At all? Or, are you too busy defending The Church of Liberalism?


I've made my point, what the U.S. has done gives no right for it to order other countries around while not listening to others. Nuff said.

[apdst]

So, you're not going to address the point I was making. Notta problem.

[Pookie]

Why won't you just impart some of your wisdom that you brought up, Apdst, explain it and help us see your point? That's what I'm asking. I don't like seeing the insults and I try to be nice.
So tell us what you know. I think that would help a lot.
Purrs,
Pookie

[apdst]

Pookie,

Are you going to dance around the point, as well?

[jafar00]

And conservatives wonder why the world views us as aggressive and hypocritical.

That's because we get credit for everything bad and no credit for everything good.

We save hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lives from slaughter and/or famine and you never hear about it. Let something less flattering, but neccessary, happen and we never hear the end of it.


Sure the American people are generous with charity and I have acknowledged that several times on this forum in the past. But where are the thousands and millions you have saved from slaughter? Your conflict with Iraq has caused the deaths of over a million alone.

[apdst]

Your conflict with Iraq has caused the deaths of over a million alone.

That figure is false. Besides that, most of the Iraqi civilians that have been killed, were killed by their fellow Muslims. The insurgents cames to Iraq to fight Americans, and in doing so killed a shit load of Iraqis with car bombs. Wow! They really showed us!!

But where are the thousands and millions you have saved from slaughter?

I'm sure quite a few of them have been killed by Muslims. How many people Muslims kill in the last century? 2 million? More? It's no small number.

Here's a research project for you: Tell us how many humanitarian disasters Muslims have created vs. humanitarian disasters Muslims have fixed. It shouldn't take long to figure that one out.

[Pookie]

Pookie,

Are you going to dance around the point, as well?


No. I asked you a legitimate question.
I expect an answer, as I have asked many conservatives about things, and they were happy to explain things and educate me. I am sure you are no different and you will help answer my question as well.
Thanks!
Purrs,
Pookie

[jafar00]

Your conflict with Iraq has caused the deaths of over a million alone.

That figure is false. Besides that, most of the Iraqi civilians that have been killed, were killed by their fellow Muslims. The insurgents cames to Iraq to fight Americans, and in doing so killed a sh1t load of Iraqis with car bombs. Wow! They really showed us!!


The figure includes over 500,000 Iraqi children who died for lack of medical care because of your sanctions, the estimated 700,000+ who have died because of your pre-emptive invasion of Iraq either by American bombs and bullets, or by the Al Qaeda terrorists you lured there. Al Qaeda are not muslims. They may claim to be, and may even look like a Muslim from time to time, but they act contrary to Islamic law and the Islamic religion which means they are not Muslims.

But where are the thousands and millions you have saved from slaughter?

I'm sure quite a few of them have been killed by Muslims. How many people Muslims kill in the last century? 2 million? More? It's no small number.


Probably about that in over 1400 years of combat. How many millions of people have Americans killed in the 232 years since independence?


Here's a research project for you: Tell us how many humanitarian disasters Muslims have created vs. humanitarian disasters Muslims have fixed. It shouldn't take long to figure that one out.


you tell me.

[Tharagor]

And conservatives wonder why the world views us as aggressive and hypocritical.

That's because we get credit for everything bad and no credit for everything good.

We save hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lives from slaughter and/or famine and you never hear about it. Let something less flattering, but neccessary, happen and we never hear the end of it.


That's the way to world works. That's how people treat each other.

Something to note, the "but necessary" qualification is not universal. That's the crux of the problem and the debate.

[apdst]

No. I asked you a legitimate question.
I expect an answer,

IOW, you don't have the first clue what I'm trying to tell you, so you're going to bypass the issue and go off on some other tangent.

[Pookie]

Why won't you answer my question? I have not gone off on any other tangent. I have stuck to the topic and asked you to help educate us. You have not addressed my questions. Please answer me, okay? That way we can understand each other.
Purrs,
Pookie

[apdst]

Pookie,

WE hear from some that The United States should mind it's own business. Those same people never say that when The United States is out their saving hundreds of thousands of lives from whatever imminent threat of death there happens to be on hand, at the time. We never hear about the successes, we only hear about the f-ups. I used Somalia as a prime example. Everyone has heard of UNOSOM II phase of the Somalia relief effort, The UN controlled operation where 18 American soldiers died fighting Somali militias. The operation prior to UNOSOM II, American operated Operation Restore Hope, was a huge success, stemming allotta violent action by the warlords and making sure the food got to where it would do the most good and making a stabalized Somalia a realistic goal. Exactly 31 days after control was handed off to The UN, Paki peace keepers were slaughtered. After UNOSOM II had broken down to the point that it was a waste of time to stay in Somalia (you know you're fucked if The UN gives up on you), the US was asked to organize and execute Operation United Shield; the evacuation of all UN forces from Somalia, another huge success.

Three major operations and we only hear about the one that screwed the pooch.

See my point, now?

[jafar00]

Pookie,

WE hear from some that The United States should mind it's own business.


As it should in the case of the Iranian Nuclear Power program while it operates within the law and doesn't violate the treaties they have signed.

[Pookie]

Ok, I see all the points now. Thanks, Apdst. That makes it a little more clear.
Purrs,
Pookie