Author Topic: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003  (Read 6164 times)

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22729
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« on: December 03, 2007, 11:36:49 AM »
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/03/iran.nuclear/index.html

any thoughts considering all the saber rattling we've been doing for the last year?

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #1 on: December 03, 2007, 11:45:12 AM »
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/03/iran.nuclear/index.html

any thoughts considering all the saber rattling we've been doing for the last year?

This is good. 

Something still needs to be done about Iran supplying insurgents, if that's still happening. 

youandme

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 10957
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #2 on: December 03, 2007, 12:00:36 PM »
This is good. 

Something still needs to be done about Iran supplying insurgents, if that's still happening. 

Yeah totally trust em

"But Iran is continuing to enrich uranium for its civilian nuclear reactors. That leaves open the possibility the fissile material could be diverted to covert nuclear sites to make enough highly enriched uranium to make a bomb."

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #3 on: December 03, 2007, 12:04:42 PM »
This is good. 

Something still needs to be done about Iran supplying insurgents, if that's still happening. 
I'm still waiting to see confirmed proof they ever did.  To date, I haven't seen any. 

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #4 on: December 03, 2007, 12:13:11 PM »
Yeah totally trust em

"But Iran is continuing to enrich uranium for its civilian nuclear reactors. That leaves open the possibility the fissile material could be diverted to covert nuclear sites to make enough highly enriched uranium to make a bomb."

I don't totally trust them, in part because of this:

"But the latest report says Iran -- which declared its ability to produced enriched uranium for a civilian energy program in 2006 -- could reverse that decision and eventually produce a nuclear weapon if it wanted to do so."

But the fact they aren't currently trying to develop weapons is good news. 

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #5 on: December 03, 2007, 12:14:01 PM »
I'm still waiting to see confirmed proof they ever did.  To date, I haven't seen any. 

I'll take headhunter's word for it.   :)

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #6 on: December 03, 2007, 12:20:41 PM »
I'll take headhunter's word for it.   :)
I didn't know he was in Iraq?  Where did he say he has indisputable proof of Iran supplying insurgents?  As much as I argue with him, I would take his word with a level of credibility as I believe he is a righteous dude  :D

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22729
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #7 on: December 03, 2007, 12:26:06 PM »
You know, i don't even know why Iran supplying insurgents is even a question:

-  They are opposed to the US invasion and occupation
-  They are culturally opposed to us.
-  They have much to gain if we fail in Iraq.


It's like you have a room mate and your beer goes missing and your room mate is a drinker.


Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #8 on: December 03, 2007, 12:35:29 PM »
You know, i don't even know why Iran supplying insurgents is even a question:

-  They are opposed to the US invasion and occupation
-  They are culturally opposed to us.
-  They have much to gain if we fail in Iraq.


It's like you have a room mate and your beer goes missing and your room mate is a drinker.


Well, if you're ever out of work, I'm sure they'll have a seat for you in the next neocon think tank :D

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #9 on: December 03, 2007, 12:39:32 PM »
I didn't know he was in Iraq?  Where did he say he has indisputable proof of Iran supplying insurgents?  As much as I argue with him, I would take his word with a level of credibility as I believe he is a righteous dude  :D

I don't think he's currently in Iraq, but he did say he believes Iran is supplying insurgents.  Good enough for me.   :)

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #10 on: December 03, 2007, 12:40:19 PM »
You know, i don't even know why Iran supplying insurgents is even a question:

-  They are opposed to the US invasion and occupation
-  They are culturally opposed to us.
-  They have much to gain if we fail in Iraq.


It's like you have a room mate and your beer goes missing and your room mate is a drinker.



Are you saying there is no question they are supplying insurgents?  If so, what should we do about it? 

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #11 on: December 03, 2007, 01:35:10 PM »
The govt made two statements on Iran.

1) They are building nukes
2) They are funding the insurgency

Well, they were absolutely sure of #1, and now we see it was (as Rove admits we were in Iraq) INCORRECT.

I spose many of you will just grant them your complete faith in their #2 statement above.  You'll ignore the WMD mistake in Iraq, and the WMD mistake in Iran now. 

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #12 on: December 03, 2007, 01:35:32 PM »
I don't think he's currently in Iraq, but he did say he believes Iran is supplying insurgents.  Good enough for me.   :)
This is so odd... In light of what they did in Iraq, I can't believe I have to justify asking what proof there is before we obliterate another country...

Yea, he said "If it walks like a duck..."--HH6  ::) The guys that have been held as Iranian agents... let go...  Gee if they really had something on them, wtf? I could apply the same logic given by Ozmo to Russia, should we also assume they are involved?  BB, opinions should carry some weight, but your "good enough for me" write off based on one guys opinion is silly.

There could have been a different direction:
It's only a six minute section, I know it breaches the 3:00 limit but what the hell, I'll just post it just in case.
(click number 2) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/showdown/view/

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #13 on: December 03, 2007, 02:08:20 PM »
This is so odd... In light of what they did in Iraq, I can't believe I have to justify asking what proof there is before we obliterate another country...

Yea, he said "If it walks like a duck..."--HH6  ::) The guys that have been held as Iranian agents... let go...  Gee if they really had something on them, wtf? I could apply the same logic given by Ozmo to Russia, should we also assume they are involved?  BB, opinions should carry some weight, but your "good enough for me" write off based on one guys opinion is silly.

There could have been a different direction:
It's only a six minute section, I know it breaches the 3:00 limit but what the hell, I'll just post it just in case.
(click number 2) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/showdown/view/

My comments were partly tongue-in-cheek.  Headhunter isn't the only one who has said it.  I think I posted an article about this a while back, with comments from other military personnel.  I've also talked to other folks who have been on the ground and they say the same thing.

I interrupted my Christmas music and listened to the entire clip.   :)  Yes, it looks like things did take quite a turn and the "axis of evil" comments were not helpful.     

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22729
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #14 on: December 03, 2007, 04:33:19 PM »
Well, if you're ever out of work, I'm sure they'll have a seat for you in the next neocon think tank :D

got more than i can handle now  8)

However, it's just obvious, and prudent for Iran to help the insurgents in someway(s).  To think they are not becuase of an absence of concrete proof would be incompetent.

i get what you are saying, but you if you were a betting man would you bet they are not?

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22729
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #15 on: December 03, 2007, 04:35:07 PM »
Are you saying there is no question they are supplying insurgents?  If so, what should we do about it? 

Nothing.  We will do nothing until it suits us to do so. Until then it's unofficial.

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22729
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #16 on: December 03, 2007, 04:37:40 PM »
The govt made two statements on Iran.

1) They are building nukes
2) They are funding the insurgency

Well, they were absolutely sure of #1, and now we see it was (as Rove admits we were in Iraq) INCORRECT.

I spose many of you will just grant them your complete faith in their #2 statement above.  You'll ignore the WMD mistake in Iraq, and the WMD mistake in Iran now. 


Something happened 240.  something happened and this news from the US government might be the first steps in backing up from the "we should attack Iran" justification campaign.


OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22729
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #17 on: December 03, 2007, 04:44:43 PM »
This is so odd... In light of what they did in Iraq, I can't believe I have to justify asking what proof there is before we obliterate another country...

Yea, he said "If it walks like a duck..."--HH6  ::) The guys that have been held as Iranian agents... let go...  Gee if they really had something on them, wtf? I could apply the same logic given by Ozmo to Russia, should we also assume they are involved?  BB, opinions should carry some weight, but your "good enough for me" write off based on one guys opinion is silly.

There could have been a different direction:
It's only a six minute section, I know it breaches the 3:00 limit but what the hell, I'll just post it just in case.
(click number 2) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/showdown/view/

It would be harder for Russia to be involved and not get exposed and the political fall out from getting exposed might outwieght what they would gain from it.

Iran is right next to Iraq with a border that stretches for miles.  They can supply them with arms that would hard to trace back to Iran.  They can help train and advise insurgents.   All of this would be easy for them to do, unofficially and easy for them to keep it hidden.

Again, why wouldn't they be trying to help America fail?  they have everything to gain from it. 

Do you really think they are just sitting there not doing a dam thing and seeing what happens? 

Do you really think no one from Iraq is asking for their help promising them a piece of the pie?

Now, is that enough for us to justify a war?  Probably not.   So until it suits us, we will not bring it out.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #18 on: December 03, 2007, 04:47:26 PM »
Honestly, I don't think we're going to attack Iran.  

I think some in the neocon camp would love to.  They've tried to sell it but resources are thin and without a draft, we don't have the men to do it.  With a draft, public support ends and the economy tanks.  I think we did try to instigate it in March with those UK soldiers who let themselves be captured.  Perhaps if they had been killed, we would have had war with them.

But a false flag, today, would be so obvious that I don't think many would buy it.  60+% of americans at the very least allow the possibility that 911 was an inside job.  If there's another attack, the firs tthing they'll say is "Inside job!" whether it is or not.

(cue the dickheads to say "no one I know believes this.." when repeated polls show that yes, people do consider inside job a possibility).

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #19 on: December 03, 2007, 05:24:09 PM »
got more than i can handle now  8)

However, it's just obvious, and prudent for Iran to help the insurgents in someway(s).  To think they are not becuase of an absence of concrete proof would be incompetent.

i get what you are saying, but you if you were a betting man would you bet they are not?
If we're talking about government sanctioned efforts to help the insurgency, yes, I would like proof.  If there's a significant aiding going on, it shouldn't be that hard to prove, in fact if you look at every major instance of this happening in a war, it has been impossible to hide significant aid by an outside player.  So I'm left wondering when all their so called proof has fallen apart.  If we're talking about elements in Iran, well I'd say that's almost a sure bet.  But then again there are elements all over the middle east that fit this label.  Is it sanctioned and funded by Iran, that's the important question and one I think you just can't assume is happening even if you strongly suspect it.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #20 on: December 03, 2007, 05:48:19 PM »
It would be harder for Russia to be involved and not get exposed and the political fall out from getting exposed might outwieght what they would gain from it.
I disagree somewhat.  If they were found out, I'm sure it wouldn't be on a level that went to the top.  An operation like that wouldn't be ran out of Putin's office.  Hell, even we don't have a problem conducting extremely damning operations around the world with little political fallout for the leaders...  The most that would happen is they'd have their own version "Oliver North" take the fall...  And I would argue that they're taking an increasing hostile stance toward us as of late without much consequence, especially where Iran and Iraq are concerned.
Quote
Iran is right next to Iraq with a border that stretches for miles.  They can supply them with arms that would hard to trace back to Iran.  They can help train and advise insurgents.   All of this would be easy for them to do, unofficially and easy for them to keep it hidden.
Well actually the weapons they have found are stamped, "Made in Iran" serial numbers and all written on the weapons :D  I'm sure if they were sent in by Iran, they would have removed this little item?  If it's being done on a major level, training insurgents, supplying weapons, they would not be able to hide it that easy.  And come to think of it, was there not an incremental evolution in the bombs and tactics used?  If they were provided with help, you wouldn't see as much of an evolution in these items, there would have been more of a huge leap.  An evolution suggests trial and error.

Quote
Again, why wouldn't they be trying to help America fail?  they have everything to gain from it. 
I didn't disput this.

Quote
Do you really think they are just sitting there not doing a dam thing and seeing what happens? 

Do you really think no one from Iraq is asking for their help promising them a piece of the pie?

Now, is that enough for us to justify a war?  Probably not.   So until it suits us, we will not bring it out.
I don't know... The only thing I do know is that all evidence I've seen fell apart.  It is not impossible at all that the Iranian government has not provided help to the insurgency and I would disagree with your idea of it not coming out until it suits us.  There have been many times they've tried to make the case, it obviously suited us to prove it.  Why would you release shaky evidence, try to make the case in public and not use the smoking gun... because there is no smoking gun.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #21 on: December 03, 2007, 11:57:54 PM »
Nothing.  We will do nothing until it suits us to do so. Until then it's unofficial.

If we know someone is supplying the "enemy" we have to do something IMO.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #22 on: December 04, 2007, 12:13:00 AM »
If we know someone is supplying the "enemy" we have to do something IMO.
I'm curious, playing devil's advocate, what would you have done on Russia's side when we were supplying the Afghans in the 80's?

and futher, what are you suggesting we do now?  Two plans are on the table of which only one is suggested as workable which is a total shock and awe, on a level not ever seen before, of Iran according to neocon think tank BS...  This plan is in focus rather than a limited strike because of the possibility that Iran has the capability otherwise to retaliate in Iraq, according to their logic...  The thinking is that with a large scale attack, the retaliatory ability of Iran will be eliminated...  Of course I believe this would only further fuel extremism leading us down an even more dangerous future. You're commander and chief, what do you do?  I know what I would do, what would you do?

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #23 on: December 04, 2007, 12:23:48 AM »
I'm curious, playing devil's advocate, what would you have done on Russia's side when we were supplying the Afghans in the 80's?

and futher, what are you suggesting we do now?  Two plans are on the table of which only one is suggested as workable which is a total shock and awe, on a level not ever seen before, of Iran according to neocon think tank BS...  This plan is in focus rather than a limited strike because of the possibility that Iran has the capability otherwise to retaliate in Iraq, according to their logic...  The thinking is that with a large scale attack, the retaliatory ability of Iran will be eliminated...  Of course I believe this would only further fuel extremism leading us down an even more dangerous future. You're commander and chief, what do you do?  I know what I would do, what would you do?

I would have done precisely what Russia did for years:  arms race, spy, etc.  Would not have attacked the U.S., because the U.S. would have kicked Russia's butt. 

I don't know what we should do, but doing nothing is not an option, because it endangers the troops.  I wish we could just find suppliers and blow them up.  Maybe Special Forces, etc. are already doing something. 

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
« Reply #24 on: December 04, 2007, 12:34:37 AM »
I would have done precisely what Russia did for years:  arms race, spy, etc.  Would not have attacked the U.S., because the U.S. would have kicked Russia's butt. 

I don't know what we should do, but doing nothing is not an option, because it endangers the troops.  I wish we could just find suppliers and blow them up.  Maybe Special Forces, etc. are already doing something. 
::) If ever there were a deserving eye roll... You do know that during that time, according to our estimates or propaganda?, they outnumbered us like 7 to 1 on nuclear arms.  At the height, there would not have been a winner under any scenario you could image so please don't suggest we would have kicked their ass ::)  Your answer of arms race, spy etc is insufficient since that was already common place before Afghanistan.  With what you just said, Russia should have done nothing which is pretty much what they did.  Now what would you have done, nothing or something?