Report says Iran not working on "nookyaler" weapons

[markjs]

Iran: Nuke Report Means US Should Ease
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI – 7 hours ago

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran on Tuesday touted a new U.S. intelligence report as vindication that its nuclear program is peaceful. But it was unclear if the finding would lead to any immediate warming in U.S.-Iranian relations, including on key issues like Iraq.

Iranian officials insisted Washington should take a less hawkish stance and drop attempts to impose new sanctions in light of the report's conclusion that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program in late 2003 and has shown no signs of resuming.

President Bush ruled out any change in policy. He said sanctions were still needed to force Iran to stop uranium enrichment, which he warned could be used for building atomic warheads someday. France and Britain also said pressure must be maintained on Tehran.

"Intelligence" person, representing our nations finest in the field: "Mr President, you're just paranoid, ease up."

Dubya: 'Not til we rule Iraqistan and Sirius, I will find a 'scuse for more war since it's the only way I know how to stimulificate the economy, and whatever other hidden agendafications are we want to impose. So Dick, how are we gonna sell this one?'

Cheney: 'Georgie, we pay you to pose for cameras, leave the evil conspiracies to those uf us twisted enough to sell the poison kool aid, and make people come back for more if it doesn't kill 'em the first time.'

*Cheney wishes George was just a very lifelike ventriliquists doll, and rues the day he agreed to the order of the ticket he rode in on.*

You know, until Americans rule the world guys like this are just gonna believe these people don't share our relgion, so we cant trust them, so lets just work on exterminating them.

He says they are working on nukes, all evidence we can gather says no, he says their lying without actually saying they are lying. He wants war with Iran, all the Republican candidates do (I hope not but save for Giuliani, I can't imagine that they don't, and perhaps even Giuliani), but they know that if they start it before he leaves office, it will be political suicide that could potentially kill the party off permanent like.

But if they get elected, and I mean any Republican, I think we will be invading Iran in his first term, and if they can rig the next election after that, Syria in the second term, unitl we start world war three and the rest of the world defeats us.

I'd take bets on that, but it is againt the rules here, hope I never have to find out.....

 

[Gonz]

You know, until Americans rule the world guys like this are just gonna believe these people don't share our relgion, so we cant trust them, so lets just work on exterminating them.

"Mr Mark, you're just paranoid, ease up."

 

[ResearchMonkey]

If only, ....every girl I ever dated high school belived my honorable intentions...

 

[Cerise]

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200712u/nie-iran

The President's position regarding a nuclear Iran hasn't changed.

If Iran shows up with a nuclear weapon at some point in time, the world is going to say, what happened to them in 2007? How come they couldn’t see the impending danger? What caused them not to understand that a country that once had a weapons program could reconstitute the weapons program?

How come they couldn’t see that the important first step in developing a weapon is the capacity to be able to enrich uranium? How come they didn’t know that with that capacity, that knowledge could be passed on to a covert program? What blinded them to the realities of the world? And it’s not going to happen on my watch.

The President has NEVER said that Iminajihad is "working on nukes." He HAS pointed out that Iran is enriching uranium.

Your B.D.S. is running wild.

But it is a fact that rpgs and assault rifles made in Iran have been found in Iraq, and Iranian militia have been captured and killed by US forces in Iraq.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=47669

Liberals. You would rather support a terrorist state---one that would just as soon kill you than look at you---than your own country. See anything wrong with that?

Iminajihad has expressed more than once his desire to destroy Israel and the United States.

Iran is asking to get their ass kicked. They will indicate when they want it.

Iran threatened Monday to attack some 170 American targets in the Middle East and around the world if it is attacked by Israel or the US, Israel Radio reported. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411524152&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

http://www.truthusa.com/IRAN.html

 

[chcr]

The President has NEVER said that Iminajihad is "working on nukes." He HAS pointed out that Iran is enriching uranium.

Semantic bullshit. The implication is clear.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

Semantic bullshit. The implication is clear.

So what does "wipe it off the map" imply?

 

[chcr]

So what does "wipe it off the map" imply?

Nothing at all. States it quite clearly, don't you think?

 

[ResearchMonkey]

 

[spike]

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200712u/nie-iran

The President's position regarding a nuclear Iran hasn't changed.

Because his position is rarely based on facts. Why would the truth change anything?

The President has NEVER said that Iminajihad is "working on nukes." He HAS pointed out that Iran is enriching uranium.

He has certainly made plenty of scare tactic statements implying that Iran was working on weapons.

But it is a fact that rpgs and assault rifles made in Iran have been found in Iraq, and Iranian militia have been captured and killed by US forces in Iraq.

Most of the people fighting us from foreign countries come from Saudi Arabia. What's your point?

You would rather support a terrorist state---one that would just as soon kill you than look at you---than your own country. See anything wrong with that?

I think everyone should be able to see the flaws in your rhetoric. How is pointing out the truth supporting terrorists states and not your country? I would say ignoring the truth and sticking with rhetoric is not supporting your country.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

If you could just get past spewing exact same rhetoric in every thread you might be worth paying attention to.

"I think everyone sees..."
"tangental blather...Whats your point?"
Bush lies, if...
"your rhetoric "(applied to anything un-you)...
"everyone knows..."

same shit over and over, well programmed and trained responses.

Ever so original thoughts, just like the rest of them

 

[spike]

So you have nothing to add yet again but vague BS insults? Grow up man.

 

[SouthernN'Proud]

You know, until Americans rule the world guys like this are just gonna believe these people don't share our relgion, so we cant trust them, so lets just work on exterminating them.

He says they are working on nukes, all evidence we can gather says no, he says their lying without actually saying they are lying. He wants war with Iran, all the Republican candidates do (I hope not but save for Giuliani, I can't imagine that they don't, and perhaps even Giuliani), but they know that if they start it before he leaves office, it will be political suicide that could potentially kill the party off permanent like.

But if they get elected, and I mean any Republican, I think we will be invading Iran in his first term, and if they can rig the next election after that, Syria in the second term, unitl we start world war three and the rest of the world defeats us.

I know I'm going to regret this. I know I shouldn't do it. I know this is an exercise in futility. Pearls before swine, blood out of a turnip, pick whatever analogy you prefer. I know I'll never really get what I ask for in less than 17 paragraphs. I know these things. Yet still I ask...


Exactly how anxious are you for America to be defeated/overtaken/destroyed? (Take your pick of the three; I see them as equals.) To what lengths would you, personally, go to see it happen? What is the dividing line in your eyes between criticism and opposition? Is there a point where you could envision yourself actually supporting American policy against those who wish us harm? If a foreign military force landed on the shores of (insert State of your choice here) and opened fire, what exactly would be your reaction? If a foreign entity executed American citizens en masse, what emotion would you experience initially? If a fellow American dies while trying to protect you, do you feel...anything? Is there any issue on which you would trust your own government over the government of another nation? Do you not realize that the citizens of these other countries you are so anxious to support don't have the right or the freedom to question their leaders, as you do so frequently...and yet still you seemingly endorse the notion? Does that not ever strike you as counter-productive? Do you think for one second that the typical man-about-town average citizen of any of these countries wouldn't change places with you in a nanosecond, yet you still berate the very basic building blocks of the system that allows you to openly hate it so much?

Please, take your time. I work two jobs now in an effort to pay off my mounting medical bills, so it'll likely be tomorrow before I have an opportunity to read this thread again.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

So you have nothing to add yet again but vague BS insults? Grow up man.

Like you offer ANYTHING, and answer almost NOTHING.

Iran and North Korea are the states of most concern to us. The United States’ concerns about Iran are shared by many nations, including many of Iran’s neighbors. Iran is continuing to pursue uranium enrichment and has shown more interest in protracting negotiations and working to delay and diminish the impact of UNSC sanctions than in reaching an acceptable diplomatic solution. We assess that Tehran is determined to develop nuclear weapons--despite its international obligations and international pressure. This is a grave concern to the other countries in the region whose security would be threatened should Iran acquire nuclear weapons.

HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE GLOBAL SECURITY ASSESSMENT STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD - July 11, 2007 -Dr. Thomas Fingar

Gee, that was just FOUR months ago...so uh, whats changed and where? (in four months.


...start twisting it

 

[spike]

Like you offer ANYTHING, and answer almost NOTHING.

More bullshit. Thanks.

Gee, that was just FOUR months ago...so uh, whats changed and where? (in four months.

I have no idea what has changed. Maybe being determined to do something isn't the same as doing it. Maybe Mr. Fingar was just wrong. Your report makes no mention of what that assessment is based on so it's pretty hard to tell.

What do you think has changed?

 

[catocom]

IMO, my conspiracy theory is that the pres. is just rying to ease tensions
on Iran so we can get our agents in there a little easier.
*adjusts foil hat*

 

[ResearchMonkey]

first off, ...you're welcome.

2nd. Dunno, neither you or I will ever see the real report info.

Seems this fella maybe politically motivated.


...why do you suppose he changed his tune? ...come on, you always seem to know what everyone thinks.

 

[spike]

You're really just not capable of posting without some sort of BS are you?

Why all the trolling?

 

[ResearchMonkey]

Can't give an answer I see....

...so let make you seem like some poor little victim. ....awwww *wipes tear*

Oh I know, I theres was nothing of substance in there...

So weak and defensless, so sad. (argumentively speaking)

No mojo in your keyboard...

OMAHA, Neb. — President Bush, trying to keep pressure on Iran, called on Tehran Wednesday to "come clean" about the scope of its nuclear activities or else face diplomatic isolation.

Two days after a new intelligence report said that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program four years ago, Bush demanded that Tehran detail its previous program to develop nuclear weapons "which the Iranian regime has yet to acknowledge."

Source

Suppose he knows things we don't ....or is he just fear mongering?

Yeah yeah, more fox news, can't be true, more nonsense that makes sense therefore must be lies created by Halliburton etc. [jeopordy music]...which excuse will he choose to not answer? [/jeopordy music]...

 

[spike]

I had already answered the question you asked. Pay attention and stop trolling.

It's getting pathetic at this point. Did you not get enough attention as a child?

The traditional definition of a troll refers to a member of a community or usenet group who makes posts deliberately designed to attract responses of outrage or indignation. It is the troll's intent to "hook" unsuspecting members into responding, (hence the term "trolling"), thus providing him/her self with the satisfaction of knowing they have impact on others.

Victim? Yea right

Suppose he knows things we don't ....or is he just fear mongering?

He's asking them for information. Sounds like he wants to know things that he doesn't currently know. What was your point?

 

[ResearchMonkey]

Naw, I'm giving you every chance to make a statement, you're focusing on me. (as usual)

See, I don't trust Iran or the UN, I certainly have learned NOT to trust Progessives, Liberals and the rest of the usual suspects.

Iran = Threat
Iraq ='ed Threat
IslamoRadical = Threat
Subversive Leftist Progressive Enlightened Liberal = Threat


I read your innuendos and statements and consider them as a whole, I'm guessing you fit somewhere in my threat list.

Being PC has never been a trait I've cared for. I think for too long we have let jerk-offs go unchallenged. Always feearing the victimization and belittlement you so readily rely on as your defense or argument.

I'm sick and tired of the liberal lies, manipulation, bullshit. ...so is most of America.

Your Heydey is over, too many Americans are waking up, The Giant is once again Awakening. The minority skweeky wheel is about to get greased.





Come on Comrade, tell me about how good and honest Iran really is