Page 54 of 80 FirstFirst ... 444525354555664 ... LastLast
Results 531 to 540 of 796

Thread: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

  1. #531
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by Mya View Post
    in other words EagleAye , with America or without America..... Israel will do what it has to do.
    Oh yes, they will. But they should hold back and not jump before it's necessary. If they don't jump the gun, they may easily find the US and also the UK and France at their side as well. Possibly even Germany (who have been threatened). This nuclear problem is not only Israel's problem, it's a concern for many other countries. If all work together, Iran's nuclear program will be set back not just temporarily, but for many years to come.
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

  2. #532
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by MKULTRABOY View Post
    If hes talking NPT... I'd like to see it too.
    Here you go, from the ISIS Foundation:
    http://www.isis-online.org/publicati...violations.pdf

    Specific NPT Violations
    From the mid-1980s to 2003 Iran violated its safeguards agreement with the IAEA by failing to
    declare numerous activities required by Iran’s safeguards agreement with the IAEA, primarily
    involving experiments with nuclear material. Though several IAEA reports describe these
    violations, the November 2004 report provides an especially detailed summary of Iran’s overall
    nuclear program, including specific NPT violations.2 According to the IAEA, Iran failed to
    declare the following major activities:
    • Uranium Imports: Iran failed to report that it had purchased natural uranium (1,000 kg of
    UF6, 400 kg of UF4, and 400 kg of UO2) from China in 1991, and its subsequent transfer for
    further processing. Iran acknowledged the imports in February 2003.
    • Uranium conversion: Iran did not inform the IAEA of its use of the imported uranium in
    tests of its uranium conversion processes, including “uranium dissolution, purification using
    pulse columns, and the production of uranium metal, and the associated production and loss
    of nuclear material.” Iran acknowledged this failure in February 2003.
    • Uranium enrichment: Iran failed to report that it had used 1.9 kg of the imported UF6 to
    test P1 centrifuges at the Kalaye Electric Company centrifuge workshop in 1999 and 2002.
    In its October 2003 declaration to the IAEA, Iran first admitted to introducing UF6 into a
    centrifuge in 1999, and into as many as 19 centrifuges in 2002. Iran also failed to declare the
    associated production of enriched and depleted uranium.
    • Hidden Sites: Iran did not declare to the IAEA the existence of a pilot enrichment facility
    at the Kalaye Electric Company Workshop, and laser enrichment plants at the Tehran
    Nuclear Research center and at Lashkar Ab’ad. Because experiments at these sites involved
    the use of nuclear material in equipment, Iran was obligated to report them to the IAEA.
    • Laser Isotope Enrichment Experiments: Iran failed to report that in 1993 it imported 50
    kg of natural uranium metal, and that it used 8 kg of this for atomic vapor laser isotope
    separation (AVLIS) experiments at Tehran Nuclear Research Center between 1999 to 2000,
    and 22 kg of the metal for AVLIS experiments at Lashkar Ab’ad between 2002 to 2003.3
    These activities were ultimately acknowledged in an October 2003 declaration.
    • Plutonium Experiments: Iran did not report to the IAEA that it had produced uranium
    dioxide (UO2) targets, irradiated them in the Tehran Research Reactor, and then separated
    the plutonium from the irradiated targets. Iran also failed to report the production and
    transfer of waste associated with these activities and that it had stored unprocessed irradiated
    targets at the Tehran Nuclear Research Center. In later meetings with the IAEA, Iran said
    that it conducted the plutonium separation experiments between 1988 and 1993 using
    shielded glove boxes at the Tehran Nuclear Research Center.

    Documents about Work with Uranium Metal: The IAEA first reported the existence of this
    document in November 2005, describing it as containing “procedural requirements for the
    reduction of UF6 to metal in small quantities, and on the casting and machining of enriched,
    natural and depleted uranium metal into hemispherical forms….”6 Iran claims that it received
    this document, which concerns the process necessary to machine uranium metal into a form
    suitable for use in a nuclear weapon, unsolicited from the Khan network, and that it has not
    performed any such research. Though the document has been placed under IAEA seal, Iran has
    denied IAEA requests for a copy. Most recently IAEA inspectors were told they could not take
    notes from the document, and that some notes already taken must be destroyed.7

    Experiments with Plutonium:
    Like the matter of HEU and LEU contamination, this is a long
    outstanding issue with the IAEA, involving multiple iterations of IAEA requests for information,
    Iranian explanations and subsequent IAEA requests for clarification. The IAEA’s conclusion,
    expressed in its report of April 28, 2006, is that “the Agency cannot exclude the possibility—
    notwithstanding the explanations provided by Iran—that plutonium analysed by the Agency was
    derived from source(s) other than the ones declared by Iran.”11 Simply stated, this could mean
    that Iran either acquired undeclared plutonium from foreign sources, or separated indigenously
    more than it has declared to the IAEA.
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

  3. #533
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    06-28-17 @ 10:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,909

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    That's certainly a possibility and it would surprise me if it hasn't already been discussed in hushed tones in some back room. It won't be the first choice or the second but I'd bet it's in the playbook somewhere.
    I agree. Obama would not give a green light as his efforts have been to curtail Iran's efforts through sanctions and diplomatic means.

  4. #534
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    06-28-17 @ 10:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,909

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    Oh yes, they will. But they should hold back and not jump before it's necessary. If they don't jump the gun, they may easily find the US and also the UK and France at their side as well. Possibly even Germany (who have been threatened). This nuclear problem is not only Israel's problem, it's a concern for many other countries. If all work together, Iran's nuclear program will be set back not just temporarily, but for many years to come.
    I beleive Israel will be "backed" by these countries even if they are the aggressors. The stakes are still the same nothing will change, only the time frame will be expedited. Even Iran's allies, namely Russia, does not want a confrontation nor the risk that Iran will have a nuclear arsenal to unleash. There always seems to be a problem with Iran's nuclear plants which delays progress.

    An Iranian lawmaker said the country's first nuclear power plant will not start up by late August as planned and blamed the delay on Russia, which is building the facility. "We believe the Russians are not being honest ... about the plant," Jalalian said. He urged Iranian officials to clarify the terms of the deal through "transparent and firm talks, without any 'buts' or 'ifs'." Jalalian said Iran had already paid at least twice more than the planned construction costs on the project, and additional funds are being demanded.

    The contracts with the Russians have no "clear financial ceiling, timetable and end date," he said, also claiming that the Russian partner had reneged on a promise to transfer technology to Iran, as promised in the deal.
    Iran Nuclear Plant Launch Reportedly Delayed Again


    Then there is the question where do the Israeli's hit first. An attack simply does not make sense at this point.


    A strike on Iran would pose tough test for Israelis

  5. #535
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by Connery View Post
    I beleive Israel will be "backed" by these countries even if they are the aggressors. The stakes are still the same nothing will change, only the time frame will be expedited. Even Iran's allies, namely Russia, does not want a confrontation nor the risk that Iran will have a nuclear arsenal to unleash. There always seems to be a problem with Iran's nuclear plants which delays progress.

    Iran Nuclear Plant Launch Reportedly Delayed Again

    Then there is the question where do the Israeli's hit first. An attack simply does not make sense at this point.

    A strike on Iran would pose tough test for Israelis
    Russia is a fair-weather friend of Iran at best. Iran has a habit of biting the hand that feeds it, and Russia knows this. Russia would oppose regime change (and thus its business dealings with Iran), but are unlikely to do anything more than complain about strikes on Iran.

    Israel can do significant damage all by itself. It doesn't need to completely destroy Iran's nuclear program. It merely needs to set the program back long enough for sanctions to have more effect. The obvious targets are anything related to uranium processing. That's the primary problem. It would be politically clever of Israel to leave the Buseshr reactor and any targets close to Tehran alone. Hit Natanz and Fordo hard. This will not eliminate Iran's uranium processing only delay the chance for refining it to weapons grade, the ultimate goal.

    Much ado is made of Iran's sites as though they are ALL buried as deeply as at Qom. They are not. Most of Iran's sites are targetable with standard munitions. Some that are buried are still reachable by penetrators already in Israeli hands.

    And Qom isn't as impervious as documented in many press releases.

    Consider that when Israel attacks, the IRIAF has no choice but to rise and meet them. Israeli F-15Is will cut them down like wheat. Within a day, Israel will have Air Superiority, Within 2 days, Israel will have Air Dominance (a separate thing, and better). This is a critical detail. With Air Dominance, Israel will have the flexibility to move where they want, when they want, unopposed. They don't have to invade Iran per se, they can simply place troops where they want them and extract them again at leisure. At this point, Israel can load up commandos in C-130s and parachute them at Qom. Security at Qom would probably be strong so this will not be a small group. The commandos can take the facility, or at least tactically important areas, set charges and leave. Doubtless, Iranian troops will move to defend Qom, but since Israeli aircraft operate unopposed they can place Iranian troops under constant fire. They'll be unable to move effectively. The commandos should be done within a few hours. Extraction would occur at nearby Manzariyeh airport.

    This is all doable but very risky and very difficult. It must happen fast or it will fail. But then Israel is very good at such things. Still, Israel would be FAR better off if they waited for the US (and allies) to work in a coordinated attack. Some expect Israel may attack between April and June. Israel should wait even longer than that. It may be that sanctions do the job and no attack at all is necessary. Israel must avoid an attack as much as the US does. Israel acting alone would draw international consternation far more than Israel acting in part with a coalition. When rockets fall in Israeli civilian centers it barely makes the news, but if an Israeli soldier spits in the dirt of the West Bank it's an international incident. Knowing this, Israel must restrain itself and avoid inevitable political fallout if at all possible.
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

  6. #536
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    08-09-13 @ 08:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,600

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Excellent map.. and you can see that Iran is the natural transit route to move Caspian crude and gas from the Stans south to the Persian Gulf.


    Quote Originally Posted by Connery View Post
    I beleive Israel will be "backed" by these countries even if they are the aggressors. The stakes are still the same nothing will change, only the time frame will be expedited. Even Iran's allies, namely Russia, does not want a confrontation nor the risk that Iran will have a nuclear arsenal to unleash. There always seems to be a problem with Iran's nuclear plants which delays progress.


    Iran Nuclear Plant Launch Reportedly Delayed Again


    Then there is the question where do the Israeli's hit first. An attack simply does not make sense at this point.


    A strike on Iran would pose tough test for Israelis

  7. #537
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    Well, I seriously doubt we would do that to one of our longest and staunchest allies. But it's clear to me that Obama has put significant pressure on Israel to cool off.
    Sometimes tough love is necessary.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  8. #538
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    That map's a little outdated. I don't think we have any bases left in Iraq. That only leaves bases in Afghanistan (where we're engaged in a war) and bases in Turkey being adjacent to Iran. Nothing south and/or west of Iraq can get to Iran directly, Iraq cuts off access even from Kuwait.
    We can still easily bring more force to bear from Israel and our current bases on Iran than they could defend against.

    Would you agree that sanctions from the Security Council qualify? I can't imagine Russia or China, both of which are friends of Iran, allowing sanctions if there were no violations.

    Sanctions Committee - 1737
    I could not find any NPT violations referenced.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  9. #539
    Professor xpiher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    04-23-12 @ 10:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,993

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    An Israeli attack on Iran with out US back up after the fact would be suicidal. I don't believe Israel is suicidal. The USSR had nukes on the verge of their collapse.
    I meant to comment on this when I first saw it. The USSR collapsed, but afaik, most nukes were stationed in Russia. Even if that wasn't the case, Russia had control over those sites. If Russia had a chance of collapsing during the break up of soviet bloc your analogy would be better.
    Hayek - too liberal for republicans

  10. #540
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    Here you go, from the ISIS Foundation:
    http://www.isis-online.org/publicati...violations.pdf
    Thanks but these are not determinations made by the UN.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

Page 54 of 80 FirstFirst ... 444525354555664 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •