Jump to content

Iran has backup nuke facillity


Rob W
 Share

Recommended Posts

Fuck me you cant make this stuff up....... Under the heading "Deployment and working overseas".....

 

 

The world is a very big place. With the Army, you will get to see a lot of it. You might be on adventurous training in the Belize jungle or the Canadian Rockies. You could be part of a peacekeeping mission in the Middle East or delivering humanitarian aid in Africa. When you're posted or deployed abroad, you get to see countries from a unique viewpoint. And you experience different cultures in a way that backpackers never do.

 

:):D :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 283
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Frequently asked Questions

 

Will I have to go to war and if so will I have to kill?

 

Never could there in the history of mankind being a better use of the word "YES"..........but

 

 

As a member of the Army you may be required to carry out operational duties around the world which may involve

hostile conflicts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just had a look at the army recruiting site. This is the picture they have to describe "your day to day life".

 

dailylife_splash.jpg

 

Looks like a piss up in Spain not dodging fucking road mines in Hell.

 

I have a very good friend in the Army who was stationed in Germany initially and he will soon be moving to Canada.

 

When he is in Germany it's seems to be ok, buy a fast tax carand fly down the autobahn but when he was in Iraq he had to avoid roadside bombs and all sorts.

 

Lots of people have been dying in Afghanistan and Iraq and in my opinion needlessly, a few pictures of their sons having a laugh wont relieve greiving parents when their lad dies.

 

I know for a fact that British and American troops have been involved in operations in Iran and I pray to god nobody in this country has to pay the full price of real war again.

 

You are enabled to live your life because many a British soldier died for you and when they were home these lads enjoyed a pint too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just had a look at the army recruiting site. This is the picture they have to describe "your day to day life".

 

dailylife_splash.jpg

 

Looks like a piss up in Spain not dodging fucking road mines in Hell.

 

I have a very good friend in the Army who was stationed in Germany initially and he will soon be moving to Canada.

 

When he is in Germany it's seems to be ok, buy a fast tax carand fly down the autobahn but when he was in Iraq he had to avoid roadside bombs and all sorts.

 

Lots of people have been dying in Afghanistan and Iraq and in my opinion needlessly, a few pictures of their sons having a laugh wont relieve greiving parents when their lad dies.

 

I know for a fact that British and American troops have been involved in operations in Iran and I pray to god nobody in this country has to pay the full price of real war again.

 

You are enabled to live your life because many a British soldier died for you and when they were home these lads enjoyed a pint too!

 

 

Not sure if your having a go at me tom about the picture????? But my point was that the Army are using the picture on their website to portray "day to day life in the army". (misleading advertising to 18 year olds)

 

I have no problem with squaddies or anyone else on the piss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good on them and why shouldn't they. Might actually do the region some good.

 

More nuclear weapons might do the region good? :)

 

 

 

 

And this is pretty damning evidence that it is purely weapons that they are after, not only because of the secrecy, but because the scale they are working in is completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good on them and why shouldn't they. Might actually do the region some good.

 

More nuclear weapons might do the region good? :)

 

 

 

 

And this is pretty damning evidence that it is purely weapons that they are after, not only because of the secrecy, but because the scale they are working in is completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects.

 

What Secrecy? They've announced it more than 180 days before it becomes operable and agreed to inspections. That's like saying Star Trek came out in the summer shrouded in secrecy.

 

Could you also expand on it being 'completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects'? I've not heard that view expressed and would be interested to know more.

Edited by Happy Face
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good on them and why shouldn't they. Might actually do the region some good.

 

More nuclear weapons might do the region good? :)

 

 

 

 

And this is pretty damning evidence that it is purely weapons that they are after, not only because of the secrecy, but because the scale they are working in is completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects.

 

What Secrecy? They've announced it more than 180 days before it becomes operable and agreed to inspections. That's like saying Star Trek came out in the summer shrouded in secrecy.

 

Could you also expand on it being 'completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects'? I've not heard that view expressed and would be interested to know more.

 

 

According to the Times on Saturday they only annonced it because they had been rumbled. It was a pre-emptive anouncement. The Times also said the evidence pointed to weapons manufacture.

 

I don't see why anyone would want to defend these lunatics tbh. It's a quite worrying situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good on them and why shouldn't they. Might actually do the region some good.

 

More nuclear weapons might do the region good? :)

 

 

 

 

And this is pretty damning evidence that it is purely weapons that they are after, not only because of the secrecy, but because the scale they are working in is completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects.

 

What Secrecy? They've announced it more than 180 days before it becomes operable and agreed to inspections. That's like saying Star Trek came out in the summer shrouded in secrecy.

 

Could you also expand on it being 'completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects'? I've not heard that view expressed and would be interested to know more.

 

 

According to the Times on Saturday they only annonced it because they had been rumbled. It was a pre-emptive anouncement. The Times also said the evidence pointed to weapons manufacture.

 

I don't see why anyone would want to defend these lunatics tbh. It's a quite worrying situation.

 

I ain't defending the lunatics. I never defended Saddam Hussein either, but once the war drum starts banging you've got to question the justification being given.

 

Iran haven't violated any international law here and have complied fully with the IAEA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good on them and why shouldn't they. Might actually do the region some good.

 

More nuclear weapons might do the region good? :)

 

 

 

 

And this is pretty damning evidence that it is purely weapons that they are after, not only because of the secrecy, but because the scale they are working in is completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects.

 

What Secrecy? They've announced it more than 180 days before it becomes operable and agreed to inspections. That's like saying Star Trek came out in the summer shrouded in secrecy.

 

Could you also expand on it being 'completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects'? I've not heard that view expressed and would be interested to know more.

 

 

According to the Times on Saturday they only annonced it because they had been rumbled. It was a pre-emptive anouncement. The Times also said the evidence pointed to weapons manufacture.

 

I don't see why anyone would want to defend these lunatics tbh. It's a quite worrying situation.

 

 

Who is the only country to use one?

 

Who keeps roaming the world attacking other countries?

 

What has Iran ever done to you?

 

Do you know any Iranians?

 

Have you ever been?

 

And before you give me long lists of human rights issues.....Those could apply to virtually every country from Brazil to China or anywhere in between.

 

If your neighbours all have big nukes pointed in your direction what would you want your leaders to be doing?

 

The west should learn its lessons from History and stop trying to control the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good on them and why shouldn't they. Might actually do the region some good.

 

More nuclear weapons might do the region good? :)

 

 

 

 

And this is pretty damning evidence that it is purely weapons that they are after, not only because of the secrecy, but because the scale they are working in is completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects.

 

What Secrecy? They've announced it more than 180 days before it becomes operable and agreed to inspections. That's like saying Star Trek came out in the summer shrouded in secrecy.

 

Could you also expand on it being 'completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects'? I've not heard that view expressed and would be interested to know more.

 

 

According to the Times on Saturday they only annonced it because they had been rumbled. It was a pre-emptive anouncement. The Times also said the evidence pointed to weapons manufacture.

 

I don't see why anyone would want to defend these lunatics tbh. It's a quite worrying situation.

 

I ain't defending the lunatics. I never defended Saddam Hussein either, but once the war drum starts banging you've got to question the justification being given.

 

Iran haven't violated any international law here and have complied fully with the IAEA.

 

That wasn't my understanding. Admittedly I'm not fully read up about this so I'll leave it for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good on them and why shouldn't they. Might actually do the region some good.

 

More nuclear weapons might do the region good? :(

 

 

 

 

And this is pretty damning evidence that it is purely weapons that they are after, not only because of the secrecy, but because the scale they are working in is completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects.

 

What Secrecy? They've announced it more than 180 days before it becomes operable and agreed to inspections. That's like saying Star Trek came out in the summer shrouded in secrecy.

 

Could you also expand on it being 'completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects'? I've not heard that view expressed and would be interested to know more.

 

 

You do realise they only "announced" it because it had been discovered and was literally just about to be made public. :(

 

They didn't "come clean"..... they were discovered and beat their opponents to the punch (and clearly their PR and Propaganda has worked because people like you believe they "came clean" :D), but only because they had to. :)

 

 

 

 

 

So now we've explained that to you, lets address the second part. :D

 

It's a very small facility, completely useless for enriching the amounts they'd need for even fledgling energy generation use, it is however a perfect size for producing the small amounts needed for weapons use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good on them and why shouldn't they. Might actually do the region some good.

 

More nuclear weapons might do the region good? :)

 

 

 

 

And this is pretty damning evidence that it is purely weapons that they are after, not only because of the secrecy, but because the scale they are working in is completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects.

 

What Secrecy? They've announced it more than 180 days before it becomes operable and agreed to inspections. That's like saying Star Trek came out in the summer shrouded in secrecy.

 

Could you also expand on it being 'completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects'? I've not heard that view expressed and would be interested to know more.

 

 

According to the Times on Saturday they only annonced it because they had been rumbled. It was a pre-emptive anouncement. The Times also said the evidence pointed to weapons manufacture.

 

I don't see why anyone would want to defend these lunatics tbh. It's a quite worrying situation.

 

 

Who is the only country to use one?

 

Who keeps roaming the world attacking other countries?

 

What has Iran ever done to you?

 

Do you know any Iranians?

 

Have you ever been?

 

And before you give me long lists of human rights issues.....Those could apply to virtually every country from Brazil to China or anywhere in between.

 

If your neighbours all have big nukes pointed in your direction what would you want your leaders to be doing?

 

The west should learn its lessons from History and stop trying to control the world.

 

And which country is ran by islamic fundamentalists that claim they would wipe Israel off the face of the Earth if they had the capability? Iraq was never a real problem, fighting in Afghanistan is pointless, but Iran, they are the greatest threat to World Peace imo. Leave them to their own devices and there will be a nuclear holocaust in the Middle East.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good on them and why shouldn't they. Might actually do the region some good.

 

More nuclear weapons might do the region good? :)

 

 

 

 

And this is pretty damning evidence that it is purely weapons that they are after, not only because of the secrecy, but because the scale they are working in is completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects.

 

What Secrecy? They've announced it more than 180 days before it becomes operable and agreed to inspections. That's like saying Star Trek came out in the summer shrouded in secrecy.

 

Could you also expand on it being 'completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects'? I've not heard that view expressed and would be interested to know more.

 

 

According to the Times on Saturday they only annonced it because they had been rumbled. It was a pre-emptive anouncement. The Times also said the evidence pointed to weapons manufacture.

 

I don't see why anyone would want to defend these lunatics tbh. It's a quite worrying situation.

 

I'd also add, the guy that owns The Times...he's the same one who owns Fox "Yeehaw let's bomb the eye-rackies" News.

 

Scott Ritter (Iraq weapons inspector and ex-marine) had this to say...

 

In any event, the facility is now out of the shadows, and will soon be subjected to a vast range of IAEA inspections, making any speculation about Iran's nuclear intentions moot. Moreover, Iran, in declaring this facility, has to know that because it has allegedly placed operational centrifuges in the Qom plant (even if no nuclear material has been introduced), there will be a need to provide the IAEA with full access to Iran's centrifuge manufacturing capability, so that a material balance can be acquired for these items as well.

 

Rather than representing the tip of the iceberg in terms of uncovering a covert nuclear weapons capability, the emergence of the existence of the Qom enrichment facility could very well mark the initiation of a period of even greater transparency on the part of Iran, leading to its full adoption and implementation of the IAEA additional protocol. This, more than anything, should be the desired outcome of the "Qom declaration".

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/ci...ant-inspections

 

Seems to me those on the attack are basing it on what they don't know and what they fear, rather than what we do know, which has not been shown to pose any threat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is the only country to use one?

 

Who keeps roaming the world attacking other countries?

 

What has Iran ever done to you?

 

Do you know any Iranians?

 

Have you ever been?

 

And before you give me long lists of human rights issues.....Those could apply to virtually every country from Brazil to China or anywhere in between.

 

If your neighbours all have big nukes pointed in your direction what would you want your leaders to be doing?

 

The west should learn its lessons from History and stop trying to control the world.

 

 

Iran != Iranians.

 

There's plenty of decent Iranians, and many of them are still being imprisoned, tortured and killed as we speak.

 

 

 

 

The Iranian regime is scary though, of all the people in the world they are probably the most likely to a) use a nuclear weapon in anger and :) supply others with them (see how they fuelled the conflict in Iraq, most explosives used by any of the 3 major factions in Iraq can be traced back to Iran).

 

Allowing Iran, under its current regime, to develop nuclear weapons would be a hideous mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good on them and why shouldn't they. Might actually do the region some good.

 

More nuclear weapons might do the region good? :)

 

 

 

 

And this is pretty damning evidence that it is purely weapons that they are after, not only because of the secrecy, but because the scale they are working in is completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects.

 

What Secrecy? They've announced it more than 180 days before it becomes operable and agreed to inspections. That's like saying Star Trek came out in the summer shrouded in secrecy.

 

Could you also expand on it being 'completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects'? I've not heard that view expressed and would be interested to know more.

 

 

According to the Times on Saturday they only annonced it because they had been rumbled. It was a pre-emptive anouncement. The Times also said the evidence pointed to weapons manufacture.

 

I don't see why anyone would want to defend these lunatics tbh. It's a quite worrying situation.

 

I'd also add, the guy that owns The Times...he's the same one who owns Fox "Yeehaw let's bomb the eye-rackies" News.

 

Scott Ritter (Iraq weapons inspector and ex-marine) had this to say...

 

In any event, the facility is now out of the shadows, and will soon be subjected to a vast range of IAEA inspections, making any speculation about Iran's nuclear intentions moot. Moreover, Iran, in declaring this facility, has to know that because it has allegedly placed operational centrifuges in the Qom plant (even if no nuclear material has been introduced), there will be a need to provide the IAEA with full access to Iran's centrifuge manufacturing capability, so that a material balance can be acquired for these items as well.

 

Rather than representing the tip of the iceberg in terms of uncovering a covert nuclear weapons capability, the emergence of the existence of the Qom enrichment facility could very well mark the initiation of a period of even greater transparency on the part of Iran, leading to its full adoption and implementation of the IAEA additional protocol. This, more than anything, should be the desired outcome of the "Qom declaration".

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/ci...ant-inspections

 

Seems to me those on the attack are basing it on what they don't know and what they fear, rather than what we do know, which has not been shown to pose any threat.

 

Iran is guilty of deception at the very least, fuck knows what else they have.

 

As for the Times, imo it's editorials are balanced and their journalists have free-reign. I could just as easily make a cliched comment about the Graunidad tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good on them and why shouldn't they. Might actually do the region some good.

 

More nuclear weapons might do the region good? :)

 

 

 

 

And this is pretty damning evidence that it is purely weapons that they are after, not only because of the secrecy, but because the scale they are working in is completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects.

 

What Secrecy? They've announced it more than 180 days before it becomes operable and agreed to inspections. That's like saying Star Trek came out in the summer shrouded in secrecy.

 

Could you also expand on it being 'completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects'? I've not heard that view expressed and would be interested to know more.

 

 

According to the Times on Saturday they only annonced it because they had been rumbled. It was a pre-emptive anouncement. The Times also said the evidence pointed to weapons manufacture.

 

I don't see why anyone would want to defend these lunatics tbh. It's a quite worrying situation.

 

 

Who is the only country to use one?

 

Who keeps roaming the world attacking other countries?

 

What has Iran ever done to you?

 

Do you know any Iranians?

 

Have you ever been?

 

And before you give me long lists of human rights issues.....Those could apply to virtually every country from Brazil to China or anywhere in between.

 

If your neighbours all have big nukes pointed in your direction what would you want your leaders to be doing?

 

The west should learn its lessons from History and stop trying to control the world.

 

And which country is ran by islamic fundamentalists that claim they would wipe Israel off the face of the Earth if they had the capability? Iraq was never a real problem, fighting in Afghanistan is pointless, but Iran, they are the greatest threat to World Peace imo. Leave them to their own devices and there will be a nuclear holocaust in the Middle East.

 

I honestly dont know the answer to this, but apart from battles between their neighbour Iraq, have they actually ever attacked any other country either by war or terrorism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good on them and why shouldn't they. Might actually do the region some good.

 

More nuclear weapons might do the region good? :(

 

 

 

 

And this is pretty damning evidence that it is purely weapons that they are after, not only because of the secrecy, but because the scale they are working in is completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects.

 

What Secrecy? They've announced it more than 180 days before it becomes operable and agreed to inspections. That's like saying Star Trek came out in the summer shrouded in secrecy.

 

Could you also expand on it being 'completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects'? I've not heard that view expressed and would be interested to know more.

 

 

You do realise they only "announced" it because it had been discovered and was literally just about to be made public. :(

 

They didn't "come clean"..... they were discovered and beat their opponents to the punch (and clearly their PR and Propaganda has worked because people like you believe they "came clean" :D), but only because they had to. :)

 

 

 

 

 

So now we've explained that to you, lets address the second part. :D

 

It's a very small facility, completely useless for enriching the amounts they'd need for even fledgling energy generation use, it is however a perfect size for producing the small amounts needed for weapons use.

 

 

International law doesn't require them to though. Unlike the USA, Iran generally comply with international law.

 

And on your second point, I got that from the first time you said it. All you did there was repeat it. I was asking more for a source so I can judge it's level of impartiality for myself. Not that I doubt you. Just interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good on them and why shouldn't they. Might actually do the region some good.

 

More nuclear weapons might do the region good? :)

 

 

 

 

And this is pretty damning evidence that it is purely weapons that they are after, not only because of the secrecy, but because the scale they are working in is completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects.

 

What Secrecy? They've announced it more than 180 days before it becomes operable and agreed to inspections. That's like saying Star Trek came out in the summer shrouded in secrecy.

 

Could you also expand on it being 'completely impractical for energy use, but perfect for weapons projects'? I've not heard that view expressed and would be interested to know more.

 

 

According to the Times on Saturday they only annonced it because they had been rumbled. It was a pre-emptive anouncement. The Times also said the evidence pointed to weapons manufacture.

 

I don't see why anyone would want to defend these lunatics tbh. It's a quite worrying situation.

 

 

Who is the only country to use one?

 

Who keeps roaming the world attacking other countries?

 

What has Iran ever done to you?

 

Do you know any Iranians?

 

Have you ever been?

 

And before you give me long lists of human rights issues.....Those could apply to virtually every country from Brazil to China or anywhere in between.

 

If your neighbours all have big nukes pointed in your direction what would you want your leaders to be doing?

 

The west should learn its lessons from History and stop trying to control the world.

 

And which country is ran by islamic fundamentalists that claim they would wipe Israel off the face of the Earth if they had the capability? Iraq was never a real problem, fighting in Afghanistan is pointless, but Iran, they are the greatest threat to World Peace imo. Leave them to their own devices and there will be a nuclear holocaust in the Middle East.

 

I honestly dont know the answer to this, but apart from battles between their neighbour Iraq, have they actually ever attacked any other country either by war or terrorism?

 

They want to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth, for starters. Fundamentalist Islamic theocracies tend to worry me a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/ci...ant-inspections

 

Seems to me those on the attack are basing it on what they don't know and what they fear, rather than what we do know, which has not been shown to pose any threat.

 

 

And if they have another secret facility (Iran is a HUGE place after all) that no one yet knows about?

 

That would be another matter, if it was within 180 days of being operational.

 

Not sure why you've quoted my pooint about the fear of unknowns with a fear mongering unknown, as if that proves any point other than mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly dont know the answer to this, but apart from battles between their neighbour Iraq, have they actually ever attacked any other country either by war or terrorism?

 

 

War not really, they simply aren't powerful enough (except when they are illegally taking UK forces that they know are basically ordered to surrender to threat of force, of course).

 

 

 

However they've been implicated in an awful lot of terror attacks (ignoring Iraq which as Fop said they've basically provided much of the explosive and arms used by Shiite, Sunni and Al-Qaeda insurgents), and the whole Palestine/Israel issue.

 

In fact if you believe some people Lockerbie was an Iranian backed attack, not Libyan at all. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They want to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth, for starters. Fundamentalist Islamic theocracies tend to worry me a bit.

 

I think he was referring more to the regime in Jerusalem that keeps expanding Jewish settlements into Gaza in contravention of international law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.