US / Russia to cut nukes

[Woody1985]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8136918.stm

[Sylar]

Good, but I'd rather see countries like N.Korea and Iran take this step!

[da-robster]

Good now they can blow the world up 4 times over not 3650 times over.

[Betty Boop]

Good, but I'd rather see countries like N.Korea and Iran take this step!

Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons. :confused:

[Sylar]

Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons. :confused:

I should rephrase...

I'd rather they were taking steps to provide evidence they are not proliferating an arsenal of nuclear weapons. I don't trust that their current program is peaceful. Not with that maniac at the helm.

[Sir David Gray]

Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons. :confused:

Give them time...

[Betty Boop]

Give them time...

There is only one country in the Middle East with nuclear weapons.

[CropleyWasGod]

I should rephrase...

I'd rather they were taking steps to provide evidence they are not proliferating an arsenal of nuclear weapons. I don't trust that their current program is peaceful. Not with that maniac at the helm.

... just what was said about Iraq a few years back. :devil:

[Sylar]

There is only one country in the Middle East with nuclear weapons.

Do you believe the current proliferation of nuclear power in Iran is with peaceful intention, considering the have violated UN laws and denied access to IAEA delegates?

There is only one confirmed country in the Middle East with nuclear weapons, and even if Iran don't already have them, something needs to be put in place to ensure it remains that way (im not suggesting military intervention). They'll view a reduction in arsenal by the Russians and Americans as an opportunity - not a stepping stone.

All in my humble opinion of course :greengrin

[Sir David Gray]

There is only one country in the Middle East with nuclear weapons.

Allegedly. :wink:

Although Israel adopts a policy of ambiguity regarding their nuclear weapons, I do believe that they possess them.

Regardless of what they say, I believe that Iran's ultimate aim is to develop nuclear weapons. As long as they have a guy like Ahmadinejad in power, I don't believe for one second that their nuclear programme is peaceful. I also believe that Syria has at least limited nuclear capabilities as well.

I strongly believe that the presence of nuclear weapons, particularly in the Middle East, will be the cause of a major war in the not too distant future and that they will be used to catastrophic effect.

Obama can try all he likes, he (or anybody else) will never rid the world of nuclear weapons.

[Betty Boop]

Do you believe the current proliferation of nuclear power in Iran is with peaceful intention, considering the have violated UN laws and denied access to IAEA delegates?

There is only one confirmed country in the Middle East with nuclear weapons, and even if Iran don't already have them, something needs to be put in place to ensure it remains that way (im not suggesting military intervention). They'll view a reduction in arsenal by the Russians and Americans as an opportunity - not a stepping stone.

All in my humble opinion of course :greengrin

Well the head of the IAEA, says that there is no evidence that Iran is trying to seek nuclear arms capability.
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22980.htm

[(((Fergus)))]

The United Kingdom is rich in mineral resources, principally oil.

Having little or no oil reserves of its own, Iran has long taken an active interest in UK internal affairs. In 1953, the Iranian secret service, in conjunction with the Soviet KGB, deposed the democratically elected UK prime minister who was about to nationalise the UK oil industry. The reins of power then passed to an Iranian-backed monarch who granted extensive concessions to Iranian companies while opening the floodgates to Eastern and Islamic popular culture. Although tolerated out of self-interest by the ruling elite, the increasingly autocratic king was swept from power by a pro-Christian nationalist uprising in 1978.

In the ensuing period of political instability, the Republic of Ireland seized the opportunity, in 1980, to retake the disputed Ulster territories. Iran naturally sided with Ireland, providing both financial and material assistance – including secret and illegal weapons technology. In the eight years of war that followed, between 500,000 and 1,000,000 UK servicemen and civilians are believed to have lost their lives.

In 2001, Iran invaded and occupied the Netherlands, ostensibly to halt the flow of drugs from that country. Two years later, it also invaded the Irish Republic, which over the preceding 10 years had alienated its former sponsor. Both countries now have puppet regimes and are major staging posts for the Iranian military machine. Despite the overwhelming odds, the UK continues to support resistance movements in both these countries.

Other important regional players include Norway - a long-standing member of the Pan-Islamic Treaty Alliance (PITA) - and France, which has its own nuclear arsenal.

Most importantly of all, Iran provides major financial and military support to the UK's sworn enemy in the region: Belgium. Like France, Belgium has an extensive arsenal of nuclear weapons built with Iranian funding and expertise. The majority of these weapons are believed to be targeted at UK cities.

For almost 30 years, the Iranian navy has maintained a significant presence in the English channel, Irish Sea and North Sea. In one infamous incident in 1988, an Iranian guided missile cruiser shot down a British Airways civilian airliner over the Pas de Calais killing all 290 passengers and crew aboard. The Iranian Navy currently operates two aircraft carrier battle groups in UK coastal waters and regularly holds major exercises in the North Sea.

According to Iranian intelligence reports, the UK is currently developing its own nuclear capability, potentially with a view to weaponisation. These moves have been openly condemned as "blatant provocation" by the Iranian and Belgian governments.

[Sylar]

The United Kingdom is rich in mineral resources, principally oil.

Having little or no oil reserves of its own, Iran has long taken an active interest in UK internal affairs. In 1953, the Iranian secret service, in conjunction with the Soviet KGB, deposed the democratically elected UK prime minister who was about to nationalise the UK oil industry. The reins of power then passed to an Iranian-backed monarch who granted extensive concessions to Iranian companies while opening the floodgates to Eastern and Islamic popular culture. Although tolerated out of self-interest by the ruling elite, the increasingly autocratic king was swept from power by a pro-Christian nationalist uprising in 1978.

In the ensuing period of political instability, the Republic of Ireland seized the opportunity, in 1980, to retake the disputed Ulster territories. Iran naturally sided with Ireland, providing both financial and material assistance – including secret and illegal weapons technology. In the eight years of war that followed, between 500,000 and 1,000,000 UK servicemen and civilians are believed to have lost their lives.

In 2001, Iran invaded and occupied the Netherlands, ostensibly to halt the flow of drugs from that country. Two years later, it also invaded the Irish Republic, which over the preceding 10 years had alienated its former sponsor. Both countries now have puppet regimes and are major staging posts for the Iranian military machine. Despite the overwhelming odds, the UK continues to support resistance movements in both these countries.

Other important regional players include Norway - a long-standing member of the Pan-Islamic Treaty Alliance (PITA) - and France, which has its own nuclear arsenal.

Most importantly of all, Iran provides major financial and military support to the UK's sworn enemy in the region: Belgium. Like France, Belgium has an extensive arsenal of nuclear weapons built with Iranian funding and expertise. The majority of these weapons are believed to be targeted at UK cities.

For almost 30 years, the Iranian navy has maintained a significant presence in the English channel, Irish Sea and North Sea. In one infamous incident in 1988, an Iranian guided missile cruiser shot down a British Airways civilian airliner over the Pas de Calais killing all 290 passengers and crew aboard. The Iranian Navy currently operates two aircraft carrier battle groups in UK coastal waters and regularly holds major exercises in the North Sea.

According to Iranian intelligence reports, the UK is currently developing its own nuclear capability, potentially with a view to weaponisation. These moves have been openly condemned as "blatant provocation" by the Iranian and Belgian governments.

.....

[marinello59]

:confused:

Your entire post confuses me throughout to be honest, but that one takes the cake...

PC Database (http://www.planecrashinfo.com/1988/1988.htm)

Unless it's too early and I'm completely missing the post!

I would say that was indeed the case.:greengrin

[Sylar]

Re-read after getting into Uni - :doh:

[CropleyWasGod]

As I alluded to in my previous one-liner, it strikes me that so much of this mirrors what was happening in the run-up to the Iraq war. The same things are being said about Iran's capability (yes, they have them... no they haven't), as well as whether they should have it (why should they have it? why shouldn't they?).

I am concerned that we are going back down that same road again. Surely not?

It's interesting that, according to something I read recently.... wish I could find it... the FBI (CIA?) agents who interrogated Saddam testified that he said that .... his stance on WMD's was nothing more than a bluff to make Iran think that he had them.

So... might Iran be doing the same?

[da-robster]

Allegedly. :wink:

Although Israel adopts a policy of ambiguity regarding their nuclear weapons, I do believe that they possess them.

Regardless of what they say, I believe that Iran's ultimate aim is to develop nuclear weapons. As long as they have a guy like Ahmadinejad in power, I don't believe for one second that their nuclear programme is peaceful. I also believe that Syria has at least limited nuclear capabilities as well.

I strongly believe that the presence of nuclear weapons, particularly in the Middle East, will be the cause of a major war in the not too distant future and that they will be used to catastrophic effect.

Obama can try all he likes, he (or anybody else) will never rid the world of nuclear weapons.

But ultimately is it not ahyatollah in power and it's bad enough when a religous fanatic of any religion is in power but one with nuclear weapons would be dreadful. If he does however have them.

However what really irritates me is Brown lecturing them on nuclear weapons. This is the same man who is going to waste billions of taxpayers money on a pointless weapon.He obviously needs to stop thinking that Britain is a major power and realise that no one would want to bomb us unless we with no consideration and for no reason invade there country.

In summary if a country next to them was attacked on trumped up evidence of having WMD by another two nuclear country then surely you would need something to defend yourselves.The way forward is for britain and Iran to have equal dialogue not patronising hypricritical comments from gordon brown.

Rant over :greengrin

[steakbake]

Maybe I'm cynical, but...

They've both still got weapons of mass destruction.
They'll probably scrap the ones they were intending to scrap anyway.
There are newer, more devastating weapons that they'll keep as part of the deal.

To be honest, they don't need the stockpiles they have. Even just a dozen or so nukes each would be enough to "strip the paint off your house and give your kids a permanent orange afro" and propel us all coughing and cancerous, back to the stone age.

As for Britain updating Trident, seriously, lets just give up the pretence here and now.