Iran ready to share nuclear know-how with other Islamic countries!!!

[MegaWorks]

I really don't feel like talking politics toinght Raildogg, doesn't mean that I don't like arguing with you.

Man I just installed my X800 Pro after work and I'm so tired, bed time for me guys.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: MegaWorks
I really don't feel like talking politics toinght Raildogg, doesn't mean that I don't like arguing with you.

Man I just installed my X800 Pro after work and I'm so tired, bed time for me guys.

Shoulda got an nVidia.




J/K!!!

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: raildogg
Thank you Bush, thank you Europe and thank you others for letting this happen. But oh well, keep focusing your attention on Iraq while the biggest danger to the world goes unnoticed.

Why shouldn't they have nuclear weapons too?

Well, they freely agreed (by international treaty) not to for starters.

 

[mOeeOm]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: raildogg
Thank you Bush, thank you Europe and thank you others for letting this happen. But oh well, keep focusing your attention on Iraq while the biggest danger to the world goes unnoticed.

Why shouldn't they have nuclear weapons too?

Well, they freely agreed (by international treaty) not to for starters.

:roll:

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: raildogg
Thank you Bush, thank you Europe and thank you others for letting this happen. But oh well, keep focusing your attention on Iraq while the biggest danger to the world goes unnoticed.

Why shouldn't they have nuclear weapons too?

Well, they freely agreed (by international treaty) not to for starters.

:roll:

Was it a Zionist plot that suckered them in?

Several nations decided not to sign, including Pakistan.

 

[Aimster]

Iran can have nukes

When the mullahs all die. So I ask, why the hell are they still alive?

Who watched the last episode of "Over There"? Well you see those village idiots in Iraq. Those are the same kind of village idiots who run Iran. Someone needs to send the village idiots back to their village so they can preach to their donkeys.

 

[raildogg]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Iran can have nukes

When the mullahs all die. So I ask, why the hell are they still alive?

Who watched the last episode of "Over There"? Well you see those village idiots in Iraq. Those are the same kind of village idiots who run Iran. Someone needs to send the village idiots back to their village so they can preach to their donkeys.

Hi!

 

[jpeyton]

Iran is a soveriegn nation that has every right to pursue whatever the fvck national agenda they have. Nuclear power? Fine. Nuclear weapons? Not preferred, but we still can't do a bum fvcking thing about it. Sanctions? So what, they lived with sanctions for decades.

Everyone here is too dense to realize no government in the world would openly engage the US in military combat. Nuclear weapons or not, no country in the world is that stupid.

So nations like Iran and North Korea are not the real threat to the US. They will not commit suicide by attacking the US.

The real threat are the terrorists who live without a country, without a government, and have the capability to smuggle a foriegn nuke onto our soil. Hypothetically, if a terrorist smuggles a nuke using a German container ship, does that mean Germany is trying to start a war? Nope. Just means that a terrorist lived in Germany.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Iran is a soveriegn nation that has every right to pursue whatever the fvck national agenda they have. Nuclear power? Fine. Nuclear weapons? Not preferred, but we still can't do a bum fvcking thing about it. Sanctions? So what, they lived with sanctions for decades.

Everyone here is too dense to realize no government in the world would openly engage the US in military combat. Nuclear weapons or not, no country in the world is that stupid.

So nations like Iran and North Korea are not the real threat to the US. They will not commit suicide by attacking the US.

The real threat are the terrorists who live without a country, without a government, and have the capability to smuggle a foriegn nuke onto our soil. Hypothetically, if a terrorist smuggles a nuke using a German container ship, does that mean Germany is trying to start a war? Nope. Just means that a terrorist lived in Germany.

If I wanted to attack the US with a nuclear weapon, I would do it by proxy, not directly.

Nuclear proliferation = bad.

You think it's getting bad after 9/11? Just wait till the nuke goes off, and it won't matter who did it, because they aren't going to take DNA samples or fingerprints off of nuclear dust.

Americans will be screaming at the top of their lungs for revenge, and they will get it. In spades. If it takes a billion lives, they will get it.

 

[Oric]

What kind of a revenge would that be ? Blind shooting ?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Oric
What kind of a revenge would that be ? Blind shooting ?

Think Iraq with nuclear weapons.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Oric
What kind of a revenge would that be ? Blind shooting ?

Figure out where the nuclear material came from. Nuclear weapons don't grow on trees.

Then a B-2 with a couple B83s set to the megaton range would pay a visit to that kind nation.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Oric
What kind of a revenge would that be ? Blind shooting ?

Figure out where the nuclear material came from. Nuclear weapons don't grow on trees.

Then a B-2 with a couple B83s set to the megaton range would pay a visit to that kind nation.

How, precisely, would you find out where it came from?

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Oric
What kind of a revenge would that be ? Blind shooting ?

Figure out where the nuclear material came from. Nuclear weapons don't grow on trees.

Then a B-2 with a couple B83s set to the megaton range would pay a visit to that kind nation.

How, precisely, would you find out where it came from?

They can find out what the makeup of the material was (such a procedure was actually used to clear Iran when a minute amount of highly enriched uranium was found in their centrifuges).

Plutonium is easier since every reactor produces a different mix with different impurity levels on every run of production. Every nation must assay their plutonium many times in the enrichment procecss to insure purity.

I'd say we have a fair shot at figuring out the origin.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

If it's in a reactor.

First, your sample isn't unchanged radioactivity. It's an exploded bomb.
Second, if you could obtain enough unreacted nuclear material, you would need to know what reactor matched that profile.

We couldn't figure out WMDs in Iraq. I don't see the American people sitting around waiting to react until that bit of forensics are done, and given Iraq, my confidence for getting it right under the circumstances is small.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
If it's in a reactor.

First, your sample isn't unchanged radioactivity. It's an exploded bomb.
Second, if you could obtain enough unreacted nuclear material, you would need to know what reactor matched that profile.

We couldn't figure out WMDs in Iraq. I don't see the American people sitting around waiting to react until that bit of forensics are done, and given Iraq, my confidence for getting it right under the circumstances is small.

They say that it can be done post detonation as well by looking at what isotopes are produced and the efficiency of the weapon (how much material is actually burned).

IIRC, The IAEA retains samples of the most of the world's fissionable materials and logs their origin.

 

[mOeeOm]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Iran can have nukes

When the mullahs all die. So I ask, why the hell are they still alive?

Who watched the last episode of "Over There"? Well you see those village idiots in Iraq. Those are the same kind of village idiots who run Iran. Someone needs to send the village idiots back to their village so they can preach to their donkeys.

Ya...some American friends of mine recommended to me because of how stupid and innacruate it is, to watch it as a joke. But don't listen to them though, they didn't vote for Bush, what would they know right?

Did I forget to mention it shows on ''Fox''

 

[HardWarrior]

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
This just made my eyes go :Q

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/iran_nuclear...0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

Why the big-eyes? We share with our buds, why shouldn't Iran? The US would be a much heathier country if we would accept the fact that we don't run the world.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
If it's in a reactor.

First, your sample isn't unchanged radioactivity. It's an exploded bomb.
Second, if you could obtain enough unreacted nuclear material, you would need to know what reactor matched that profile.

We couldn't figure out WMDs in Iraq. I don't see the American people sitting around waiting to react until that bit of forensics are done, and given Iraq, my confidence for getting it right under the circumstances is small.

They say that it can be done post detonation as well by looking at what isotopes are produced and the efficiency of the weapon (how much material is actually burned).

IIRC, The IAEA retains samples of the most of the world's fissionable materials and logs their origin.

I can't say you are wrong, because I simply don't know enough about it. It sounds like assumptions are going to have to be made (efficiency and the like). Are the results going to be certain and conclusive? Incapable of being wrong? Iraq still bothers me, because we "all knew" the WMDs were there, and they weren't. Right now are in Iraq because of that mistake. With a nuclear retaliation in error, how do you undo the damage?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: HardWarrior

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
This just made my eyes go :Q

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/iran_nuclear...0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

Why the big-eyes? We share with our buds, why shouldn't Iran? The US would be a much heathier country if we would accept the fact that we don't run the world.

I believe in gun ownership. I do not believe it should be unqualified. Likewise, while I don't like nukes, so far the have only been used in Japan a few generations ago. Make no mistake, countries who want this technology want it for arms as much as anything else. The fact that our poor leadership has encouraged it does nothing to mitigate the literal fallout that could occur if these very dangerous "toys" become widespread.

 

[HardWarrior]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: raildogg
Thank you Bush, thank you Europe and thank you others for letting this happen. But oh well, keep focusing your attention on Iraq while the biggest danger to the world goes unnoticed.

Why shouldn't they have nuclear weapons too?

Well, they freely agreed (by international treaty) not to for starters.

Yup, in exchange for help with peaceful nuclear technology from the existing nuclear powers, a clause which the US has refused to abide by. Moreover, Iran can withdraw from the NPT any time they want, with a 5-year notice. Remember, the NPT is a treaty, not international law. As far as I'm concerned, they'd be utterly stupid not to want their own nuclear deterent, considering the noises coming out of Washingtion and Tel Aviv.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
If it's in a reactor.

First, your sample isn't unchanged radioactivity. It's an exploded bomb.
Second, if you could obtain enough unreacted nuclear material, you would need to know what reactor matched that profile.

We couldn't figure out WMDs in Iraq. I don't see the American people sitting around waiting to react until that bit of forensics are done, and given Iraq, my confidence for getting it right under the circumstances is small.

They say that it can be done post detonation as well by looking at what isotopes are produced and the efficiency of the weapon (how much material is actually burned).

IIRC, The IAEA retains samples of the most of the world's fissionable materials and logs their origin.

I can't say you are wrong, because I simply don't know enough about it. It sounds like assumptions are going to have to be made (efficiency and the like). Are the results going to be certain and conclusive? Incapable of being wrong? Iraq still bothers me, because we "all knew" the WMDs were there, and they weren't. Right now are in Iraq because of that mistake. With a nuclear retaliation in error, how do you undo the damage?

Well we certainly conducted enough nuclear testing over the years that I should hope we are able to figure it out.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: HardWarrior

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: raildogg
Thank you Bush, thank you Europe and thank you others for letting this happen. But oh well, keep focusing your attention on Iraq while the biggest danger to the world goes unnoticed.

Why shouldn't they have nuclear weapons too?

Well, they freely agreed (by international treaty) not to for starters.

Yup, in exchange for help with peaceful nuclear technology from the existing nuclear powers, a clause which the US has refused to abide by. Moreover, Iran can withdraw from the NPT any time they want, with a 5-year notice. Remember, the NPT is a treaty, not international law. As far as I'm concerned, they'd be utterly stupid not to want their own nuclear deterent, considering the noises coming out of Washingtion and Tel Aviv.

I don't think the current rulers of Iran ever requested our help. They took their cash to the Europeans and Russians.

 

[HardWarrior]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: HardWarrior

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: raildogg
Thank you Bush, thank you Europe and thank you others for letting this happen. But oh well, keep focusing your attention on Iraq while the biggest danger to the world goes unnoticed.

Why shouldn't they have nuclear weapons too?

Well, they freely agreed (by international treaty) not to for starters.

Yup, in exchange for help with peaceful nuclear technology from the existing nuclear powers, a clause which the US has refused to abide by. Moreover, Iran can withdraw from the NPT any time they want, with a 5-year notice. Remember, the NPT is a treaty, not international law. As far as I'm concerned, they'd be utterly stupid not to want their own nuclear deterent, considering the noises coming out of Washingtion and Tel Aviv.

I don't think the current rulers of Iran ever requested our help. They took their cash to the Europeans and Russians.

They didn't have to ask, and frankly I've never read anything that would indicate that they haven't asked. Our treaty obligation says we should have made this technology available. Let's not forget that during modern times (from 1953 to this very moment) Washington has done everything possible to make peaceful exchanges with Iran next to impossible. In fact, I'm still waiting to try some of those legendary Iranian pistachios.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: HardWarrior

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: HardWarrior

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: raildogg
Thank you Bush, thank you Europe and thank you others for letting this happen. But oh well, keep focusing your attention on Iraq while the biggest danger to the world goes unnoticed.

Why shouldn't they have nuclear weapons too?

Well, they freely agreed (by international treaty) not to for starters.

Yup, in exchange for help with peaceful nuclear technology from the existing nuclear powers, a clause which the US has refused to abide by. Moreover, Iran can withdraw from the NPT any time they want, with a 5-year notice. Remember, the NPT is a treaty, not international law. As far as I'm concerned, they'd be utterly stupid not to want their own nuclear deterent, considering the noises coming out of Washingtion and Tel Aviv.

I don't think the current rulers of Iran ever requested our help. They took their cash to the Europeans and Russians.

They didn't have to ask, and frankly I've never read anything that would indicate that they haven't asked. Our treaty obligation says we should have made this technology available. Let's not forget that during modern times (from 1953 to this very moment) Washington has done everything possible to make peaceful exchanges with Iran next to impossible. In fact, I'm still waiting to try some of those legendary Iranian pistachios.

Yes they do have to ask. No proof that they didn't ask does not equal proof that they did and were rebuffed. The government still has to approve export of such technology via a request from the private sector on their customer's (theoretically Iran in this case) behalf.