Skip to comments.
The threat from Iran grows ever graver
The Telegraph ^
| February 19, 2012
Posted on 02/19/2012 1:08:56 PM PST by NCjim
When the Cold War ended more than two decades ago, the shadow of nuclear catastrophe lifted on both sides of the Iron Curtain. This year, that era of relative comfort could well draw to a close; alternatively, the Wests efforts to prevent that from happening could trigger a crisis of such gravity that countless millions will be affected.
If that sounds like an alarmist prognosis, consider the situation in Iran. Despite an ever-tightening net of economic sanctions not to mention a covert campaign of sabotage Iran is drawing inexorably closer to achieving the ability to build nuclear weapons. At the last count, 6,208 centrifuges were enriching uranium inside a previously secret plant at Natanz, defying six United Nations resolutions which ban the regime in Tehran from operating a single such machine. Meanwhile, a further 412 centrifuges have been moved to another once-secret installation. The latter facility, known as the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, was discovered only by the skill of British, American and French intelligence agencies. With enough space for 3,000 centrifuges, it lies beneath hundreds of feet of rock, meaning that it could be immune from military attack.
Irans scientists may soon be able to present their countrys obdurate and ruthless leaders with an invulnerable means of constructing a nuclear arsenal. As William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, warns in his interview with this newspaper today, any such decision on the part of the regime would trigger a new Cold War in the Middle East without, necessarily, all the safety mechanisms.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: freeworld; iran; nucearwar; threat
1
posted on
02/19/2012 1:09:04 PM PST
by
NCjim
To: NCjim
I hate to say this, but “W” should’ve handled Iran years back. Of course speaking from hindsight, they are a much bigger threat than Iraq ever was.
2
posted on
02/19/2012 1:16:46 PM PST
by
The Sons of Liberty
(Psalm 109:8 Let his days be few and let another take his office. - Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin)
To: The Sons of Liberty
Moscow & Beijing are siding with Iran on this.
3
posted on
02/19/2012 1:20:59 PM PST
by
SandRat
(Duty - Honor - Country! What else needs said?)
To: NCjim
Relax. There isn’t going to be a nuclear war. Zero is going to dismantle so many of our nukes that, when Putin, Iran and the Chicoms present us with an ultimatum, we won’t have any choice but to surrender.
To: LibWhacker
I would change your last word from “surrender” to “submit”, as the arabic word for “submit” is “islam”...
5
posted on
02/19/2012 1:43:05 PM PST
by
null and void
(Day 1125 of America's ObamaVacation from reality [Heroes aren't made, Frank, they're cornered...])
To: LibWhacker
Pretty much that’s the case. And those who read the Book of Revelation see it all coming together.
6
posted on
02/19/2012 2:35:04 PM PST
by
Obadiah
(Why do they put Braille dots on the keypad of the drive-up ATMs?)
To: The Sons of Liberty
I hate to say this, but W shouldve handled Iran years back. Of course speaking from hindsight, they are a much bigger threat than Iraq ever was.
Why hate stating the truth? I've been saying this for a while now, and the ugly truth is, GWB screwed the pooch when it comes to the 'War on Terror' because after taking out Saddam, he lost his balls so far as Iran and North Korea were concerned (the other two 'legs' of that 'Axis of Evil') and for all his yammering about "not allowing Iran to obtain a nuclear weapons capability", he ignored the advice of Dick Cheney AND John Bolton and failed to take action against Iran to neuter their nuke program before it got to this point.
Anybody want more? After meeting with the North Korean defector and author who wrote 'The Aquariums of Pyongyang', detailing the sufferings of his family in Kim Jong Il's concentration camp system, GWB was allegedly asking what could be done to help the North Korean people, and after long consideration, decided the best way to help those poor bastards was to sell them up the river by taking North Korea's regime OFF the list of terrorist supporting nations maintained by the State Department.
My conclusion? There just might be more than mere speculation when it comes to the rumor that the only reason GWB wanted to 'get' Saddam so badly was that he viewed it personally after Saddam had reportedly planned to assassinate Poppy RINO on a visit to Kuwait many years before.
Now there were benefits to overthrowing Saddam, no question of that because if Saddam were still in power, we would have THREE regimes in the region pursuing nuclear weapons, Iraq AND Iran (because Saddam was not about to let the Iranians gain the upper hand, especially in the nuclear field) plus LIBYA because Gaddafi only turned over his nuke program to the UK and the US because he feared that after Saddam, he might be next.
The bottom line? GWB left the job undone, just like Poppy did after the first Gulf War when he sold out the Kurds and allowed Saddam to remain in power.
7
posted on
02/19/2012 2:56:44 PM PST
by
mkjessup
(Let's do to Mitt what his Irish Setter did to him while tied to the roof rack of his station wagon!)
To: NCjim
The Iranians will be involved in the terrorist nuking of a European, Israeli or American city in roughly the next 12 years. They have an agenda and now they have the means, our leaders have failed us for over a decade. It is not fortune telling, it is simple deductive logic. Islamic extremists hate Israel and the West, they need to reinforce their beliefs with dramatic actions, the regime in Tehran keeps getting more radical, they have access to smugglers, they have access to ships, they have many nationals abroad and now they have the ability to make nuclear bombs. I just wonder what a nuclear terrorist attack will do to the world's economy, I can't even begin to think of the innocent victims.
To: NCjim
Yes, Iran cut off the UK from their oil today.
Time to send in the AMERICANS!
The EU through NATO will use us for cannon fodder and to foot the cost of war. We will be sending in troops on some trumped up excuse so Britain France and Germany don’t have to RISK anything or anyone from their own countries.
To: mkjessup
because he feared that after Saddam, he might be nextIf he was nothing else, he was prescient.
10
posted on
02/19/2012 4:27:56 PM PST
by
Glenn
(iamtheresistance.org)
To: NCjim
“The threat from Iran grows ever graver...”
Shhhhh! No one mention this to the President of the United States; he’s got his head in the sand and is hoping the problem will just go away.
Oh, except that if the Israelis handle it on their own, he’ll throw them under the bus and, after they’ve solved the problem on their own, make speeches about how “they shouldn’t have done it.”
To: NCjim
12
posted on
02/19/2012 5:17:34 PM PST
by
familyop
(We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of rotten politics smelled around the planet.)
To: mkjessup
I pray that I am wrong, but between the Norks and Iran, sooner or later a nuke is going to take out an American city.
13
posted on
02/19/2012 6:50:51 PM PST
by
The Sons of Liberty
(Psalm 109:8 Let his days be few and let another take his office. - Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin)
To: Jack Hammer
You think Obama should start a war with Iran, after what he’s done to our military?
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson