Holy shit: Iran to enrich highly enriched uranium if talks fail. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Swebonny;37890630][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'%C3%A9tat[/url] Yup it does seem UK and US did overthrow a democratically elected government in Iran 1953. Had no idea about it.[/QUOTE] A shitty period where the US found that a CIA operative with a million in cash could change a government, South America is a great example. And then there was another revolution because no-one liked the Shah, even the US by that point. Unfortunately rather than a government they approved of, the Ayatollahs came to power and instituted Islamic and revolutionary law. Even then, given the US is now reasonable friends with Communist Vietnam, I think they could have overcome this issue if they tried. There's being open minded and being so open your brain falls out. Yes there is a lot out there that gives a background to the world but the truth isn't like conspiracy theorists say and the polar opposite of mainstream ideas, just a bit different. That shit was a good 60 years ago, there's a lot more recent stuff that shapes the current world.

[QUOTE=Nikota;37890739]The thing about Israel is that theyre good at fighting dirty. Like , for example. The six day war only happened because Israel started to bomb the shit out of everyone and all the countries started to fortify their borders because they recieved news that Israel was going to bomb the shit out of them. Israel won through essentially leading egypt into a trap and holding their entire army hostage through denying them water by any means.[/QUOTE] There's a joke about Jewish buisnessmen here somewhere, but I can't find it.

I hope USA wouldn't join Israel in an attack. Americans DO NOT want another war to deal with. At the most if shit would ever get that bad USA should just send Israel supplies cause you already know they are not going to let their ally fight a war alone.

Here's an idea; lets all just agree that if Iran launches a single nuke we just blast them off the map. I mean really? "We need it for ships" is a load of crap and we know it. So instead of trying to just talk them out of it, just let them do what they want and make a pact to wipe them out if they launch. Think of it as an incentive. If they do launch, they will only do so if there is a good reason behind it. If they do it over something stupid then it will just be natural selection at work. Should do the same thing with North Korea.

[QUOTE=nikomo;37890172]Is it extremely enriched if you enrich highly enriched uranium?[/QUOTE] Double secret enrichment.

[QUOTE=will721;37892753]Here's an idea; lets all just agree that if Iran launches a single nuke we just blast them off the map. I mean really? "We need it for ships" is a load of crap and we know it. So instead of trying to just talk them out of it, just let them do what they want and make a pact to wipe them out if they launch. Think of it as an incentive. If they do launch, they will only do so if there is a good reason behind it. If they do it over something stupid then it will just be natural selection at work. Should do the same thing with North Korea.[/QUOTE] hey dude the entire world is ahead of you by like 40 years on this one

Hold the fuck on, the dude that said this is just a fuckin a MP. Not even the president has that much power in iran, let alone this jerk off.

[QUOTE=OvB;37890250]If I remember right, Iran's underground facilities are too deep for any bunker busters to be effective. A military strike against Iran is doing nothing but throwing rocks at a bee-hive.[/QUOTE] Even more importantly, you can't destroy knowledge with bombs. Bombing a facility is just a minor setback that doesn't solve the actual issue. Israel and the US have been crying about Iranian nukes since the late 1970's. They've always supposedly been mere months away from developing a big red mushroom cloud panic button. I'm sorry if I don't take this seriously anymore. 20% Isn't that highly enriched. You need at least 70% for a proper one, and each subsecutive percentage is much more difficult to achieve than the previous one.

[QUOTE=Chernarus;37890262]That was 1981. Saddam also didnt have F-14's or modern SAM's.[/QUOTE] But then again Israel did [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orchard"]launch an attack[/URL] on a nuclear reactor (?) sometime in ~2007. And the Syrian airforce has MiG-29's. That didnt stop the Israelis. Its contested whether the site was a nuclear reactor or not (like it should matter to an Israeli hating country like Syria). But whats interesting is the lack of response from Syria. [quote]According to a WikiLeaks cable, the Syrian government placed long-range missiles armed with chemical warheads on high alert after the attack but did not retaliate, [B]fearing an Israeli nuclear counterstrike[/B][/quote] :v: Must be so cool to be an Israeli, they get away with everything.

[QUOTE=C47;37893231]But then again Israel did [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orchard"]launch an attack[/URL] on a nuclear reactor (?) sometime in ~2007. And the Syrian airforce has MiG-29's. That didnt stop the Israelis. Its contested whether the site was a nuclear reactor or not (like it should matter to an Israeli hating country like Syria). But whats interesting is the lack of response from Syria. :v: Must be so cool to be an Israeli, they get away with everything.[/QUOTE] Yeah, because CHEMICAL FUCKING WEAPONS aren't a big deal or anything, right? Seriously, they have an undeclared nuclear reactor that not only the CIA but fucking IAEA said was probably a nuclear site, armed chemical warheads which are also considered weapons of mass destruction and haven't even signed the Chemical weapons convention, yet the fear of a counter-attack is what makes the Israelis the bad guys?

Is the problem with allowing Iran to make 60% enriched uranium to power their subs and other vehicles via nuclear power so opposed because the West and Israel wouldn't be able to know whether Iran is just enriching to 60% or if they're enriching to 60%+ with secret operations? I suck with all this political crap, but as far as I'm aware, isn't Iran entitled to having uranium capable of powering vehicles just like the rest of the world has? Is the main reason everyone is so against letting Iran do this due to the fact Iran could secretly try and learn as much as possible enriching to 60%, so they could then try enriching further to produce nuclear weapons?

[QUOTE=loopoo;37893356]Is the problem with allowing Iran to make 60% enriched uranium to power their subs and other vehicles via nuclear power so opposed because the West and Israel wouldn't be able to know whether Iran is just enriching to 60% or if they're enriching to 60%+ with secret operations? I suck with all this political crap, but as far as I'm aware, isn't Iran entitled to having uranium capable of powering vehicles just like the rest of the world has? Is the main reason everyone is so against letting Iran do this due to the fact Iran could secretly try and learn as much as possible enriching to 60%, so they could then try enriching further to produce nuclear weapons?[/QUOTE] Pretty much. You need a pretty high enrichment to get weapons but with everything already in place it's just a matter of developing that bit further. There's been a few deals to give them the enriched uranium at that level but they insisted on enriching it themselves. If you want to be a supplier of enriched nuclear substances, it makes sense to do it yourself but it still makes everyone paranoid and suspicious, especially with them being cocks to the IAEA.

Thanks for clearing that up buddy, I appreciate it.

Oh look the Iran's erection in the dickwaving competition got slightly larger

[QUOTE=Devodiere;37893317]Yeah, because CHEMICAL FUCKING WEAPONS aren't a big deal or anything, right? Seriously, they have an undeclared nuclear reactor that not only the CIA but fucking IAEA said was probably a nuclear site, armed chemical warheads which are also considered weapons of mass destruction and haven't even signed the Chemical weapons convention, yet the fear of a counter-attack is what makes the Israelis the bad guys?[/QUOTE] The point was Israel is still capable of carrying out attacks with or without US's help, as opposed to someone saying that its only a thing of the past. And yeah, even though Syria had an undeclared stockpile (which is an different issue), the fact of the matter is that the Israelis carried out an illegal military operation, that under normal circumstances (between two hostile nations) can easily trigger war.

[QUOTE=C47;37893659]The point was Israel is still capable of carrying out attacks with or without US's help, as opposed to someone saying that its only a thing of the past. And yeah, even though Syria had an undeclared stockpile (which is an different issue), the fact of the matter is that the Israelis carried out an illegal military operation, that under normal circumstances (between two hostile nations) can easily trigger war.[/QUOTE] Syria feared a nuclear retaliation, that doesn't mean they'd start a nuclear war on their own. Really one nation using weapons of mass destruction on another is one of the only reasons that nuclear warfare would be considered. The legality of it though is a lot like stealing narcotics and without anyone to enforce anything it's a moot issue really. About them "being able to do whatever they want", two countries with hostile relations will always have issues. The choices are equal footing in which you get shit like the Iraq-Iran war which goes nowhere and kills thousands, or one side is powerful enough to deter any full-scale war where the only result is unequal footing in negotiations and people complaining about it not being fair.

except that is assuming that a war would occur between the two countries and that Israel has a moral right to prevent Iran gaining nuclear weapons to prevent this hypothetical massive loss of life, which I find absurd and fatalistic.

Let them both wipe each other off the map. In fact why not just wipe everywhere off the map, start again and try to be nicer to each other next time. Bunch of fucking babies crying and moaning over who can build what, and where, and when. Fuck them all. Not trying to be edgy here, just had enough of these guys playing around with matches inside a room soaked in gasoline.

[QUOTE=entertainer89;37893941]Let them both wipe each other off the map. In fact why not just wipe everywhere off the map, start again and try to be nicer to each other next time. Bunch of fucking babies crying and moaning over who can build what, and where, and when. Fuck them all. Not trying to be edgy here, just had enough of these guys playing around with matches inside a room soaked in gasoline.[/QUOTE] That's slightly more complicated than that.

[QUOTE=entertainer89;37893941]Let them both wipe each other off the map. In fact why not just wipe everywhere off the map, start again and try to be nicer to each other next time. Bunch of fucking babies crying and moaning over who can build what, and where, and when. Fuck them all. Not trying to be edgy here, just had enough of these guys playing around with matches inside a room soaked in gasoline.[/QUOTE] You mightn't be trying to be edgy, but you're coming off like a knife.

[QUOTE=will721;37892753]Here's an idea; lets all just agree that if Iran launches a single nuke we just blast them off the map. I mean really? "We need it for ships" is a load of crap and we know it. So instead of trying to just talk them out of it, just let them do what they want and make a pact to wipe them out if they launch. Think of it as an incentive. If they do launch, they will only do so if there is a good reason behind it. If they do it over something stupid then it will just be natural selection at work. Should do the same thing with North Korea.[/QUOTE] That already is the case. The concern is not that Iran is going to launch a nuke, but that they will give one to some terrorist cell that will detonate one in Manhattan. Good luck proving that Iran did it in that scenario.

[QUOTE=FunnyBunny;37894209]That already is the case. The concern is not that Iran is going to launch a nuke, but that they will give one to some terrorist cell that will detonate one in Manhattan. Good luck proving that Iran did it in that scenario.[/QUOTE] This, coupled with the fact that any country with a nuclear power plant, including Iran, has capabilities to build nuclear dirty bombs. I'm sure it'll be fun, having Jerusalem/Manhattan/London/anyotherpossibletarget rendered inhabitable for next fifty or so years.

Semi off topic but what could Israel actually do on it's own against Iran?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37890306]Iran is still fairly outgunned as far as air power goes. Bomb military and/or civilian targets until the government submits to Israeli will.[/QUOTE] Or try not to start a completely useless war that will end with totally unnecessary suffering and a shit ton of money down the drain. Yeah, that sounds like a smart idea, stir up more shit in the world and just make it worse.

I'm more concerned about forces in other middle eastern countries than the conflict around Iran and Israel; I have no doubts that missile or air strikes would be ordered on places such as KAF and Bastion just to kill as many of our troops and destroy as many aircraft as possible. I would imagine in such an event, however, the repercussions would turn parts of Iran's cities into smoking rubble piles.

[QUOTE=entertainer89;37893941]Let them both wipe each other off the map. In fact why not just wipe everywhere off the map, start again and try to be nicer to each other next time. Bunch of fucking babies crying and moaning over who can build what, and where, and when. Fuck them all. Not trying to be edgy here, just had enough of these guys playing around with matches inside a room soaked in gasoline.[/QUOTE] if i become prime minister i will make you my foreign secretary you know your shit

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;37896134]if i become prime minister i will make you my foreign secretary you know your shit[/QUOTE] you might as well appoint a weight hanging by a thread over a "nuke" button.

[QUOTE=Fippe;37894388]I'm sure it'll be fun, having Jerusalem/Manhattan/London/anyotherpossibletarget rendered inhabitable for next fifty or so years.[/QUOTE] But aren't they inhabitable now? :v:

enrichment overload enriched highly enriched uranium that has been ENRICHED

You only need 5% enrichment for nuclear power stations Anything higher and its obvious they are aiming for nuclear weapons (which need 90-95%)