Iran to make major nuclear announcement within days, Ahmadinejad says

[eble 3]

Any ideas?

http://www.news.com.au/world/iran-to-make-major-nuclear-announcement-within-days-ahmadinejad-says/story-e6frfkyi-1226268640796

[slatts 1978]

my bet, just them saying their plant is up and running and powering homes to say to the world "i told ya so"

[PELHAM 10]

The rumours about his ancestry are true? Kabooom lol

Anyone have a seismograph? Maybe the earth will move for a lot of people on Valentines day? Who knows?

Another interesting snippet is they cut off the internet yesterday. The previous day all sites using the HTTPS Protocol were blocked. Millions of Iranians are without access to email, electronic banking services and the web. The Government are denying it but some think it's the start of the long promised North Korean style Iran Intranet. They want to cut the population off from any external information sources.

Edited February 11, 2012 by PELHAM

[mrmoon 19]

Yeah I heard it would be up and running soon, I'm surprised the recent string of assasination's of their scientists hasn't slowed it down anymore.

I think Nato will only invade when they can can be assured they can win let alone fight a world war or once they can completely surround Iran and conquest over Israel's other enemies.

Edited February 12, 2012 by mrmoon

[Dwarden 1125]

any open scale attack on Iran would turn into both sides bloodshed ...

Iran was capable to stall even Iraq invasion which was better equipped

(including recently modernized 155m arty which caused most of terrific Iran losses)

since then Iran has put lot of country income to ongoing modernizing of military

AA network in Iran is N times more complex and modern compared to Iraq

manpad AA is common so any helicopter operations in Iran would lead to massive losses

so let's hope the announcement would lead to more stable peace in region

[Maio 293]

any open scale attack on Iran would turn into both sides bloodshed ...

Iran was capable to stall even Iraq invasion which was better equipped

(including recently modernized 155m arty which caused most of terrific Iran losses)

since then Iran has put lot of country income to ongoing modernizing of military

AA network in Iran is N times more complex and modern compared to Iraq

manpad AA is common so any helicopter operations in Iran would lead to massive losses

so let's hope the announcement would lead to more stable peace in region

I agree with Dwarden on this. Plus something tells me that Iran has some old soviet bombs in storage that's why there was no direct assault from "the west" until now. So if they do show the bomb on TV , it will be a public "keep your hands off" Iran message.

Edited February 12, 2012 by Maio

[Tonci87 163]

any open scale attack on Iran would turn into both sides bloodshed ...

Iran was capable to stall even Iraq invasion which was better equipped

(including recently modernized 155m arty which caused most of terrific Iran losses)

since then Iran has put lot of country income to ongoing modernizing of military

AA network in Iran is N times more complex and modern compared to Iraq

manpad AA is common so any helicopter operations in Iran would lead to massive losses

so let's hope the announcement would lead to more stable peace in region

I think you are right on this. Iran is far stronger than some people might expect. And definately much stronger than Iraq before the war.

[metalcraze 290]

Well you need something to deliver a bomb to something as distant as US first.

[jeza 5416]

Well you need something to deliver a bomb to something as distant as US first.

Or maybe just to Israel

[STALKERGB 6]

Apparently one of the possibilities is the announcement will be that the Fordow Nuclear Plant is operational (and therefore capable of enriching Uranium).

[walker 0]

Hi all

I happened to be wondering through Iran in early 90s, it was around that time there was a rumour that a certain former soviet state received a large amount of liquidity and that Iran might have obtained some 30 or so nuclear shells and MIRV warheads. Had various conversations with people while there, they were very educated oh and not at all the monsters some people portray them as, though like many other countries certain political elements are less open and there tendency to hang around visitors made such conversations somewhat stilted and short. There were lots of former soviet citizens wondering around Iran while I was there. Just an aside.

Kind regards walker

Edited February 12, 2012 by walker

[Dwarden 1125]

i would bet on China :) considering they receiving majority of Iran's oil

[Beagle 684]

any open scale attack on Iran would turn into both sides bloodshed ...

Iran was capable to stall even Iraq invasion which was better equipped

(including recently modernized 155m arty which caused most of terrific Iran losses)

since then Iran has put lot of country income to ongoing modernizing of military

AA network in Iran is N times more complex and modern compared to Iraq

manpad AA is common so any helicopter operations in Iran would lead to massive losses

so let's hope the announcement would lead to more stable peace in region

I had the opportunity to talk to a iran/iraq war veteran as he shared the room with me at boarding school for a year...he said that one rason for iraq to fail was simply the hughe montain line beetween iran and iraq. The defense took place mainly at the montain foot and tank operations in high montain areas were simply impossible for iraquis...and still are for any other force.

Btw. my friend Ali was forced at age 16 into the army....he deserted aged and fled to germany in 1988 aged 17

Iran is a natural fortress.

Edited February 12, 2012 by Beagle

[Flash Thunder 10]

Bomb bomb bomb Iran. Bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran

[rangerpl 13]

Or maybe just to Israel

Just having them in tactical capability would be enough.

[PELHAM 10]

Maybe they will sign up to this?

U.S. Seeks Halt to Production of Nuclear Weapons Materials

At the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament, the United States called for a worldwide halt to the production of materials used in the making of nuclear weapons.

“A verifiable end to the production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons is necessary if we are to create the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons,†Assistant Secretary of State Rose Gottemoeller said January 24.

http://london.usembassy.gov/acda069.html

[walker 0]

Maybe they will sign up to this?

U.S. Seeks Halt to Production of Nuclear Weapons Materials

At the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament, the United States called for a worldwide halt to the production of materials used in the making of nuclear weapons.

“A verifiable end to the production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons is necessary if we are to create the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons,†Assistant Secretary of State Rose Gottemoeller said January 24.

http://london.usembassy.gov/acda069.html

Hi all

In reply to PELHAM do you really think North Korea or Israel or Pakistan would sign up to this?

Dream on mate.

Kind regards walker

[PELHAM 10]

Hi all

In reply to PELHAM do you really think North Korea or Israel or Pakistan would sign up to this?

Dream on mate.

Kind regards walker

I'm eternally optimistic of course lol, but seriously it's a good thing to aim for isn't it? (It was a joke son....)

KTwnwbG9YLE

Edited February 14, 2012 by PELHAM

[mrcash2009 0]

Bomb bomb bomb Iran. Bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran

Watch your face with the domino effect , wha, wha, wha-watch your face with the domino effect .....

[katipo66 94]

Bomb bomb bomb Iran. Bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran

Go US/Israel... u guys are the best... the good guys.

:icon_eek:

[PELHAM 10]

More on the end of the production of material for Nuclear Weapons:

As Iran is a member of the International Conference on Disarmament, I hope one day soon they will endorse this treaty and submit to independant verification along with all the other 65 nations, including Pakistan who is currently blocking the entire process that is supported by the 64 other member nations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conference_on_Disarmament

Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty

The Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT) is a proposed international treaty to prohibit the further production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other explosive devices. The treaty has not been negotiated and its terms remain to be defined. According to a proposal by the United States, fissile material includes high-enriched uranium and plutonium (except plutonium that is over 80% Pu-238). According to a proposal by Russia, fissile material would be limited to weapons-grade uranium (with more than 90% U-235) and plutonium (with more than 90% Pu-239). Neither proposal would prohibit the production of fissile material for non-weapons purposes, including use in civil or naval nuclear reactors.[1]

In a 27 September 1993 speech before the UN, President Clinton called for a multilateral convention banning the production of fissile materials for nuclear explosives or outside international safeguards. In December 1993 the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 48/75L calling for the negotiation of a "non-discriminatory, multilateral and international effectively verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices." The Geneva based Conference on Disarmament (CD) on 23 March 1995 agreed to a establish a committee to negotiate "a non-discriminatory, multilateral and internationally and effectively verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.".[2] However, substantive negotiations have not taken place.

In 2004, the United States announced that it opposed the inclusion of a verification mechanism in the treaty on the grounds that the treaty could not be effectively verified. On November 4, 2004. the United States cast the sole vote in the First Committee of the United Nations General Assembly against a resolution (A/C.1/59/L.34) calling for negotiation of an effectively verifiable treaty. The Bush Administration supported a treaty but advocated an ad hoc system of verification wherein states would monitor the compliance of other states through their own national intelligence mechanisms. [3]

On April 5, 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama reversed the U.S. position on verification and proposed to negotiate "a new treaty that verifiably ends the production of fissile materials intended for use in state nuclear weapons." On May 29, 2009, the CD agreed to establish an FMCT negotiating committee,[4]

However, Pakistan has repeatedly blocked the CD from implementing its agreed program of work, despite severe pressure from the major nuclear powers to end its defiance of 64 other countries in blocking international ban on the production of new nuclear bomb-making material, as well as discussions on full nuclear disarmament, the arms race in outer space, and security assurances for non-nuclear states

[walker 0]

Hi all

While North Korea, Israel and Pakistan refuse to sign and allow inspections, this so called treaty is dead in the water, the US cannot even persuade its great "allie" Israel to sign it, never mind Pakistan and North Korea, and with two of those countries threatening Iran with nukes I doubt Iran will rush to sign it.

So this treaty is a fiction.

Kind regards walker

Edited February 14, 2012 by walker

[PELHAM 10]

Hi all

While North Korea, Israel and Pakistan refuse to sign and allow inspections, this so called treaty is dead in the water, the US cannot even persuade its great "allie" Israel to sign it, never mind Pakistan and North Korea, and with two of those countries threatening Iran with nukes I doubt Iran will rush to sign it.

So this treaty is a fiction.

Kind regards walker

Are you sure you are quoting the proposed Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty there? What you say is true of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which is something different (Iran has signed the NPT which is why it is so often up infront of the Security Council for breaking the agreement.)

The general aims of the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty are supported by all members except Pakistan. That is why I hope that Iran will sign it once the negotiations and terms are finalised. (Israel, Iran and North Korea are also members, NK was the previous chair)

http://www.defencetalk.com/pakistan-nuclear-talks-block-21243/

The Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT) is a proposed international treaty to prohibit the further production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other explosive devices.

The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, commonly known as the Non-Proliferation Treaty or NPT, is a landmark international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament.

In January at the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament, the United States re-affirmed it's call for a worldwide halt to the production of materials used in the making of nuclear weapons.

“A verifiable end to the production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons is necessary if we are to create the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons,†Assistant Secretary of State Rose Gottemoeller said January 24.

http://london.usembassy.gov/acda069.html

Edited February 14, 2012 by PELHAM

[eble 3]

Hasn't Iran stated from the start all nuclear ambitions were for peaceful means only, I haven't seen anyone actually say the Iranians are making a bomb, just the US CIA which changes it's mind every few months saying they are, then they arn't, then they could be etc.

Israel aside which accuses Iran of everything (True or not), as Walker said they are hardly speaking from a position of authority, sticking two fingers up to the UN and yet they expect the Iranians to do it?

Just google US vetoes over Israel, it's a pretty long list to be fair, Sick of the lot of them to be honest, the drive for war with Iran is getting bigger and were all being sucked in.

Just last week the US threw the toys out the pram over Syria and the UN resolution, then today they welcome the next Chinese president like a home coming queen, China relies massively on Iranian oil, any war could be seen as a threat to the national security of China, what would happen then?

A lot of talk at the moment about Israel going it alone in the next few months they haven't the ability to attack all the sites at once, so the Iranians would be able to deploy missiles against Israel bringing the US into the fight, if this went to a ground war it would make Iraq look like a walk in the park.

Edited February 14, 2012 by Eble

[batto 17]

Just last week the US threw the toys out the pram over Syria and the UN resolution, then today they welcome the next Chinese president like a home coming queen.

Yup, I knew it was just for media to make a show.