Printable View
Sure when your party isn't full them I will.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
:x
Learn to internet nub.
Btw I completely agree with Haoh on this. Iran is the "actual" threat Iraq wasn't Gozen, let it go. He's right.Quote:
Originally Posted by haohmaru
North Korea has both of em smoked however.
No, actually you're both wrong. You've just misspoken again.Quote:
Originally Posted by youandwhosearmy
k your call.
The difference is clear, it's just none of you are seeing it. During the 90s the only threat was that they 'might' be 'starting' a program by getting materials. That's not a threat. Not compared to now when Bolton says they either 'HAVE weapons' or are 'DANGEROUSLY close' to having them. That's a threat, and it's patently false, thus it is fear-mongering. No one believed they had weapons to be afraid of until this administration began yelling that they weren't just trying to make them, but that they HAD made them. That's the difference.
Then why do I remember back in the late 70's early 80's about Iran being a threat? This fear of Iran was way before Bush 2.
September 1985
The foreign ministers of Iran, Syria, and Libya say that their countries should develop nuclear weapons to counter the Israeli nuclear threat.
—Haaretz (Tel Aviv), 9 September 1985; in Mati Peled, Worldwide Report, 9 January 1986, pp. 61-63
1995
John Holum, director of the US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, says Iran might be able to produce a nuclear bomb by 2003. [Note: In March 1997, Holum says Iran might be able to produce a bomb by 2005-2007.]
—Anthony H. Cordesman, "Iran and Nuclear Weapons: A Working Draft," Center for Strategic and International Studies, 7 February 2000.
January 1995
The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists releases a report on Iran's nuclear program. According to the report, US officials, such as James Woolsey, the former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency have put the timeframe for Iran's nuclear program to be weapon-capable by early next century. According to the report, Iran needs fissile material to build a nuclear weapon, and its prospects for manufacturing this material are not very high unless it overcomes certain logistical obstacles such as management issues, the lack of technological and technical skills, as well as the general lack of infrastructure. Although Iran has the money to acquire this material from illicit foreign sources, US intelligence officials say that dependence on foreign sources for this material is uncertain, and Iran's tactic is expected to contain plans to develop an indigenous facility to produce fissile materials as well. Iran has been in the market for the acquisition of dual-use material, but has so far not succeeded in acquiring fissile materials. Iran has several research reactors, one provided by the United States that runs on low-enriched uranium, and others provided by China; none of which are believed to be capable of weapons production. The United States had also provided 'hot cells,' which are "heavily shielded rooms with remotely operated arms used to chemically separate material irradiated in the research reactor, possibly including plutonium laden 'targets'." Additionally, according to sources in the US government "China has also helped Iran create nuclear fuel facilities for uranium mining, fuel fabrication, uranium purification, and zirconium tube production, and it may soon supply facilities to produce uranium metal and uranium hexafluoride." China also signed in 1992 a "preliminary agreement" for the supply of two 300MW electric light water reactors, without specified delivery dates. All of China's activities however are reportedly consistent with the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), as well as being under IAEA safeguard. China is not thought to be helping Iran with weapons production. It is not clear according to US sources that Iran has made a choice about having an indigenous production of fissile material or whether to acquire it from illicit sources. According to Warren Christopher, US Secretary of State, Iran has been in the market for "heavy water research reactors that are best suited to producing weapon-grade plutonium, not electricity." According to a senior US government official, Iran is now focusing on centrifuge designs and "looking toward a pilot plant, possibly large enough to produce enough highly enriched uranium for nuclear weapons." Iran however still lacks the technical capability to manufacture these centrifuges and still has to rely on the import of technical skill as well as the hardware. [Note: The United States gave Iran hot cells in the 1960s; see 1960s.]
—David Albright, "An Iranian Bomb?," The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (Washington, DC) January 1995, <http://www.bullatomsci.org>, accessed 7 July 2002.
5 January 1995
US Defense Secretary William Perry says Iran may be closer than previously thought to getting a nuclear weapon. "How soon...depends how they go about getting it," he says. He says Iran could get a bomb from the former Soviet Union, which could happen in "a week, a month, five years." He says if Iran gets enough fissile material, "five years is on the high end," while otherwise it "will take them much longer than five years," though this time could be shortened by hiring experts from the former Soviet Union.
—Associated Press, 5 January 1995; in Gulf 2000, <http://www1.columbia.edu>.
9 January 1995
In a joint press conference in Jerusalem with US Secretary of Defense William Perry, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin says "without foreign aid, Iran will reach nuclear capability within seven to 15 years." Perry says that time could be even shorter if Iran gets fissile material from another country.
—"Rabin, Perry Address Iranian Threat," Israel Television Channel 1 Network (Jerusalem), 25 July 1995; in FBIS Document FTS19970523002907, 23 May 1997.
9 January 1995
The Iran Brief reports that, according to US and Israeli intelligence officials, Iran will acquire a nuclear bomb "in more or less five years." [Note: See the other 9 January 1995 for a different estimate.] The report says US Department of Energy (DOE) officials have "almost no doubt" that Iran obtained nuclear material from the Central Asian Republics, and "if Iranians maintain this intensive effort to get everything they need, they could have all their components in two years. Then it will be just a matter of technology and research."
—"Iran Ever Closer To The Bomb," Iran Brief, 9 January 1995, p. 8.
10 January 1995
CIA Director James Woolsey tells the Senate intelligence committee that Iran is most likely to continue developing nuclear weapons through indigenous resources; in which case it might have a weapon by 2000. He also says "Iraq and Iran...have the basic technology to eventually develop [nuclear] weapons."
—David Albright, "An Iranian Bomb?," The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, January 1995, <http://www.bullatomsci.org/issues/1995/ja95/ja95.albright.html>; US Congress, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Global Threat Assessment, Testimony of CIA Director James Woolsey, 10 January 1995; in Anthony H. Cordesman, "Threats and Non-Threats From Iran," Center for Strategic and International Studies, 26 January 1995
20 January 1995
US Secretary of State Warren Christopher states that Iran is undertaking a "crash effort to develop nuclear weapons." He expresses concern that other countries are assisting Iran in developing nuclear technology. According to a US official, Christopher's comments are targeted at Russia, which recently concluded a contract with Iran for the completion of two nuclear reactors. US diplomats indicate that it will be more difficult to secure Congressional approval for Russian aid if the contract is implemented. Sources say the United States is intensifying its efforts on several fronts to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons; including discouraging Russia and China from selling nuclear reactors to Iran.
—Steven Greenhouse, "US Seeks To Deny A-Plants To Iran," New York Times, 24 January 1995, p. A4;
Daniel Williams and Thomas W. Lippman, "Christopher Charges Iran Continues Nuclear Program," Washington Post, 21 January 1995, p. A11.
13 February 1995
US Secretary of State Warren Christopher states that the Iranian-Russian nuclear deal should not go forward because Iran is a sponsor of international terrorism. He says that the United States might discontinue aid to Russia if the contract is implemented. According to US officials, Iran is now the "biggest potential nuclear threat in the developing world."
—"US State Secretary Christopher Stated...," Mainichi Shimbun, 14 February 1995.
15 March 1995
The New York Times reports that, according to Western intelligence officials, Iran uses dozens of locations in Europe to smuggle nuclear weapons-related technology into Iran. Iran seeks to obtain equipment from several sources, and then dismantles it into small pieces to be shipped on different circuitous routes to Iran. Iran uses small aircraft to ship parts to Poland and other Eastern European countries, sometimes via Vienna or Brussels, to be trucked to cargo ships or put on cargo planes to Iran. Pakistan and Syria also reportedly receive items to transship to the Iranian nuclear program. The officials indicate that Iran uses many of the same smuggling routes and contacts that Pakistan and Iraq used to develop their nuclear weapons programs. Intelligence officials believe the small Hartenholm airport, located north of Hamburg in Germany, is used by its Iranian owners as part of this Iranian nuclear smuggling network [Note: See 1993 entry.]
—Chris Hedges, "Nuclear Trail—A special report; A Vast Smuggling Network Feeds Iran's Arms Program," The New York Times, 15 March 1995, p. A1.
And on and on and on and on. What they (meaningless people like the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, etc...) sounds very similar to what's being said today and this predates Bush by many, many years.
Stop it, g0zen.
Haoh, did you even read my post? I said that yes they were talking about Iran trying to START a program, but not that they had FINISHED one and HAD nukes. That's the difference with what they're saying today, try to understand it. Geez, like talking to a brick wall.Quote:
Originally Posted by haohmaru
-_' so?Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Are you blind to no one in this thread giving a shit about that? No one is argueing that what they are saying is not diffirent. Everyone is simply saying that there has been a generial fear of IRAN before bush jr.
It's like you're not even reading what everyone else is saying.
This is the name of my porn folder.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Who said Iran has nukes? In any event, that bears no relevance to the argument that you're presenting - that GWB and Co. are responsible for "fear mongering" as if it's something new and unique when it pertains to Iran. There have been nuclear ambition fears about Iran since the late 1970's and GWB has nothing to do with that, with Clinton and his cabinet statements on Iran, or the fact that Iran is percieved to be among the greatest threats (nation-wise) in the 20th and 21st centuries. This crap has been going on for decades, so quit trying to change the argument and read what's being written. The facts are that even in the 1990's, the U.S. government said Iran was very close to nuclear capability and predicted that they would have had them by now. That GWB and the U.S. government are saying the same exact thing now is hardly a reason to crucify them. Talk about Iraq, big oil, and other crap all you want, but you're way off base on this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen