Iran "Has Atomic Bomb Capability"

Iran 'has atomic bomb capability'



A UN report says Iran now has enough uranium to make an atomic bomb. The UN's nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, says Iran has amassed more than 1,300kg of uranium - well over the amount needed to make a single atomic bomb.
Iran has ignored UN resolutions ordering it to stop enriching uranium, saying its programme is peaceful.
In a separate report about Syria, the IAEA says particles of manmade uranium have been found at a research reactor in the capital, Damascus.
In a confidential report obtained by the BBC, it says the uranium is of a type not included in Syria's declared nuclear material.
The agency is looking into US intelligence reports that Syria had almost built a North Korean-designed nuclear reactor capable of yielding weapons-grade plutonium before Israel bombed it in 2007.
Last year the IAEA found particles of manmade uranium at the remote al-Kibar site in northern Syria.

'Little Progress'

The UN Security Council wants Iran to stop all enrichment programmes pending an IAEA investigation into its uranium development programme.
In its report, the agency said Iran was still defying the Security Council and had so far amassed 1,339kg of low-enriched uranium at its plant in Natanz.
Analysts calculate that anywhere between 1,000-1,700kg of low-enriched uranium is enough to make one atomic bomb.
There were still "outstanding issues which give rise to concerns, and which need to be clarified to exclude the existence of possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear programme", the IAEA said.
The agency says Iran is refusing to allow more rigorous inspections and was blocking requests for access to "relevant information".
Israel has expressed alarm over Iran's nuclear programme, particularly after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for the Jewish state to be "wiped from the map".
However, earlier this week Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Israel did not intend to bomb Iran, adding: "It is not a problem for Israel, it is a problem for the Middle East."


Thoughts? Mine are summed up by the word "*"

 

I bet Israel are * it.

All this time Iran has said it wants to wipe Israel off the map, but Israel were like comon then have a go if you think your hard enough and now Iran has the actual capability to destroy Israel, Israel are now thinking * there serious.

 

It's looking more and more like military intervention is the only option...

It's the same with North Korea. When are these nations going to realise that times have changed? This is meant to be a civilised era, the beginning of a new Enlightenment, yet because of these uncouth idiots we're ever closer to nuclear war

 

I think you should examine the actions of neighbouring Israel and the US before labelling a country as uncouth.

 

They have every right to defend themselves.

 

I didn't mention the country, I'm talking about their leaders. Religiously and egotistically motivated men who cannot accept that others are their equal. Ahdmenijad (sp?) is as hate-filled as Hitler, and Kim Jong-Il is a megalomaniacal egotist.

 

aaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

Is this the time to point out that Israel has an estimated up to 150 nuclear weapons yet is the only country in the world that has never formally admitted to this or been held to account for it.
They are one of four nuclear-armed countries not recognized as a 'Nuclear State' by the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty(NPT), the others are India, Pakistan and North Korea.

One of their own scientists was a whistleblower on this. Mossad kidnapped him from Rome and chucked him in jail for 18 years.

So ask yourself why do Iran want a nuke?

 

Iran want a nuke to go on the offensive. They said they want to destroy Israel, wipe it from the map.

Besides, Israel knows it would lose it's support in the West if it even attempted to use its nukes as an offensive weapon, and that would leave them ridiculously vulnerable.

I'm not trying to justify Israel's arsenal, but their Western support is vital to them and that deters them from using their nukes. Iran and NK have no such restrictions, making their's a real threat.

 

Israel could easily destroy Iran if given the opportunity.

 

Allegedly, that remark by Ahmadinejad was mistranslated. Allegedly.

The guy is obviously a * though.

The most immediate threat though is stateless terror groups buying nukes.

 

for those who are interested in the subject of a "dust up" in the Syria area read Isaiah chapter 17 - it speaks of that which has not yet occurred, but its gonna!

 

Mind games come to the fore here .

 

Why cant they have one, I dont understand how America is allowed one and some others but they dont let other countries have one, either everyone should have one just incase or no-one should be allowed one.

Was it not America that used one on another country?

 

Is this the nuking of Damascus?

If this happens and a book of fairy tales and folklore distilled through dozens of different writers and translations predicted it hundreds of years ago I'd be totally impressed.

No disrespect to any peace lovin' types who follow a holy book but their misinterpretation by politicians and religious leaders has led to the * cloud hovering over that region of the world more than anything else.

 

prepare to be impressed greenprint!!!

 

You don't have your finger over a button do you?

 

* em ,i can do a 20 skimmer


Show me the first Iranian capable of this and I shall go forth and battle

 

Only a matter of time.

 

The countries who signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty have various rights and restrictions placed on them. As a result of the treaty there are a handful of nation with nuclear weapons and nuclear activity and other signatories is closely monitored by the UN.

The treaty is based on three pillars. The first is non-proliferation: The NPT recognises five states as Nuclear Weapon States (NWS), they are France, China, UK, USA and the USSR/Russia. These states are also the five permanent members of the UN Security Council. The NWS's agreed not to transfer "nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices" and "not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce" a non-nuclear weapon state (NNWS) to acquire nuclear weapons (Article I). NNWS's agreed not to "receive," "manufacture" or "acquire" nuclear weapons or to "seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons" (Article II). Additionally, the NNWSs also agreed to submit to monitoring by the IAEA to ensure they were using nuclear power only for peaceful means.


That is why some are allowed nuclear weapons, because they had them at the time. The treaty also forced NWSs to agree that they would not use their weapons except in response to nuclear attacks.

The incident with America was the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end WWII. In hindsight it's morally debateable but at the time the justification was that the death toll would be far less than if the US had invaded, due to the fanatical and suicidal nature of the Japanese population at the time. It could have resulted in casualties of over 20 million had the US invaded.