Iran bomb-grade uranium not expected before 2013: State Dept
(AFP) »
Posted By lebanonnews
4 months, 2 weeks ago
in News
A cameraman films inside the Isfahan Uranium Conversion Facilities (UCF), 420 kms south of Tehran in 2007. The State Department's intelligence bureau has...
Read Full Story at world-breaking-news.comyr.com »
120 Views Share Story 8 Comments Report
Submitted By:
lebanonnews
World Breaking News
Admin of site : World Breaking News: all about breaking news, newspapers, middle east and world news (Iran, Iraq, middle east conflict, north ...
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 8 (view all)
-
0%
beavith14 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
WTF?
Reply
"has no evidence that Iran has yet made the decision to produce highly enriched uranium, and INR assesses that Iran is unlikely to make such a decision for at least as long as international pressure and scrutiny persist," the document said."
no evidence is not the same as negative evidence, that they WON'T go to weaponization.
the heavy water plant at Isfahan is nothing more than to be used in same process to make plutonium from natural uranium, just like the Pakistanis did.
are we trying to be blissfully ignorant?-
100%
Dionys4 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"no evidence is not the same as negative evidence, that they WON'T go to weaponization."
Reply
You're a child molester.
I know there's no evidence, but it's not the same as negative evidence, that you're not a child molester.
Therefore you must be executed. Or put in prison for life. Or have your penis removed.
Are you trying to be blissfully ignorant?
-
-
100%
traveler20004 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
First a few remarks:
Reply
1/ I do prefer Iran NOT having nuclear weapons, specially with the kind of gouvernment they have.
2/ I do think the US was right in using its nuclear weapons on Japan. After all they started the war and it was for the US less costly in (US, and probably Japanese as well) human lives.
3/ At the same time, a nuclear (weapons) free WORLD would be ideal.
4/ Not directly on topic, but to avoid misunderstanding, I do believe Israel (NOW) has the right to exist (and SELF defense), but so do the Palestinians.
However,
What right (and I hate to say it) do we "the West" and especially the US have to forbid another country to have nuclear weapons?
Saying "WE can have it, but NOT YOU...", is a little hypocritical.
The more so that we turn a "blind eye" to some other countries (apart for the first 3 or 4, namely US, Russia/USSR, UK and France), such as Pakistan, India, and last but not least Israel.
Personally I'm more worried about North Korea, than Iran.
It is a historical fact that Iran has NEVER attacked an other country (whatever rhetoric and aggressive tones they publicly use). Not even in self defense. This can not be said for some other countries now having nuclear weapons (even non declared weapons, thus illegal, which makes it even worse). e.g. US, Pakistan, India, Israel.
The remark you make **...no evidence is not the same as negative evidence...** is over used. See where it lead the US (and the world) concerning the WMD in Iraq.
The best way is to negotiate in a POSITIVE way, and CONVINCE them, again, in a POSITIVE way, not to have not to make those nuclear weapons.
How would YOU react, if some one told YOU not to do nor to have what they do or have, and even allow some of your enemies to do or to have it.
Iran is just thinking (dreaming) of having a nuclear weapon, or even just and only threatening to wanting one. And, at best it will take them 3 or 4 years before they can even start making in (meaning not even having then yet).
Yet, we make a whole deal of it and threaten them.
At the same time, we don't say any thing about e.g. Israel....-
Neutral
Thinker224 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
>How would YOU react, if some one told YOU not to do nor to have what they do or have, and even allow some of your enemies to do or to have it.
Reply
Police officers carry guns but they routinely tell people on the streets not to carry guns. Guess what? Most people don't carry guns. Those who do have to deal with police officers.
> ...at best it will take them 3 or 4 years before they can even start making in (meaning not even having then yet).
It took the US two years to build (and use) atomic bombs FROM SCRATCH some 65 years ago using 1940s technology. What makes you (and many other no less naive individuals) to believe that it will take much longer for the Iranians to do the same using 21st Century technology? -
Neutral
Thinker224 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> we make a whole deal of it and threaten them.
Reply
At the same time, we don't say any thing about e.g. Israel...
Well, it's not the guns that are scary, it's the people carrying these guns. Most people do not have a problem with police officers carrying guns but the very same people are concerned with the very same guns in the hands of violent murderers. Why is it, in your opinion?
> The best way is to negotiate in a POSITIVE way, and CONVINCE them, again, in a POSITIVE way, not to have not to make those nuclear weapons.
What would you suggest the US to offer the Iranians "in a POSITIVE way" in order to CONVINCE them, again, in a POSITIVE way, not to have not to make those nuclear weapons?
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.