Who is really in violation of the NPT, Iran or US

Rabs, I don't get your thinking, how did you manage to equate my opinion of bush with denying 911! You need to seriously start questioning where this is comming from!

godofthunder9010 Your onto something there
 
Rabs, I don't get your thinking, how did you manage to equate my opinion of bush with denying 911! You need to seriously start questioning where this is comming from!
I feel the same with about 95 percent of what you say, the majority of which is way farther out there than anything I say.

Gore wouldnt of done the same thing as Bush, he would of tackled 9/11 in a "law enforcement" manner.
 
Rabs, I just don't get how my low opionion of Bush can make you think for a second that I deny 9/11 happened. What is the trigger in your thoughts that made you think:

Uncle Sam does not like Bush, therefore he believes 9/11 never happend and hates all things American!

I am asking you to question what it is that made you jump to that conclusion.

I am of the opinion that Bushes successes in politics is down to making others believe that he is the embodiment of American values (that and enough election rigging to ensure a smooth ride to the white house). I simply believe that his actions confirm that he is not.
 
(that and enough election rigging to ensure a smooth ride to the white house)

Well you compared the US election to that of Irans that puts you on par with nutcases that think 9/11 was commited by the US government. (which isnt ran by oil companies.)
I simply believe that his actions confirm that he is not.

such as?
 
Uncle Sam said:
I am of the opinion that Bushes successes in politics is down to making others believe that he is the embodiment of American values (that and enough election rigging to ensure a smooth ride to the white house). I simply believe that his actions confirm that he is not[the embodiment of American Values].
The part in bold is an unfounded accusation sir. If you can somehow proved that George W "rigged" any election at any point, please offer some evidence. Once upon a time, it was a popular theory that the Moon was made out of Cottage Cheese. It was also completely false. If it is a popular theory that George W somehow tampered with or rigged the elections, that does not make it true.

UNCLE SAM, it seems to me that you the same automatic prejudice against Republicans and Republican Presidents that is so commonplace throughout Europe. Rabs has a hair trigger mind you, but I don't let that rub you wrong. Try to separate your own prejudices from the fact though. If you object to George W, my advice would be to use sustainable facts.
 
gentlemen, you all digress (sp) from the thread....IRAN under the mullas has been a serious threat for years as they do want a world-wide Islamic state and as does PRC and NK want's a communist world-wide domination....fascist Islam is just as dangerous as socialism(communists)....as a matter of fact the NK's routinely take socialist/communism to Islamic proportions....both the Islamic fascists and the socialists world-wide want the U.S. and Isreal to cease to exist....

to Uncle Sam: "I am of the opinion that Bushes successes in politics is down to making others believe that he is the embodiment of American values (that and enough election rigging to ensure a smooth ride to the white house). I simply believe that his actions confirm that he is not."

You have proved President Bush 'rigs' elections? from whom? where did you get the info? what source's? when and why did you get the info? why do you care about American elections when you have enough problems at home? You have a country just about ready for civil war (again). The followers of Islam are OUTBREEDING native born British citizens.
 
Newsflash...

NEWSFLASH... "Kremlin begins to remove head from fourth point of contact... film at eleven."

http://www.mosnews.com/news/2006/01/12/noblockiran.shtml

Russian officials have hardened their criticism of Iran’s decision to resume sensitive nuclear research but analysts said the comments did not signal a major change in Moscow’s position on the Iran nuclear standoff, the AFX news agency reports.

Iran’s decision to resume nuclear research “personally disappoints me and gives some cause for alarm,” Russian news agencies quoted Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov as saying.The minister declined to speculate on whether the growing confrontation over Iran’s nuclear program would lead to action by the UN Security Council, but said things were not moving in a positive direction.

“As a permanent UN Security Council member, Russia reserves the right to act according to the situation. But whatever the case may be, the situation is not developing in the most favorable way.”

Ivanov, who also holds the post of deputy prime minister, spoke as foreign ministers from the three main EU countries leading negotiations with Iran — the UK, France and Germany — prepared to meet Thursday in Berlin to discuss how to proceed on the crisis.

The Russian foreign ministry earlier said it was “deeply disappointed” by Iran’s decision and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov called Tehran’s move a “cause for concern”. That was in sharp contrast to earlier announcements that have supported Iran’s right to a civilian atomic energy program.

But Russian analysts said the apparent escalation in official rhetoric on Iran did not signal any major policy shift from Russia, which has argued against referring Tehran to the UN Security Council over the country’s controversial nuclear program. “It’s the first time that such a level of preoccupation is expressed but in my view it’s not a real public condemnation... It remains to be seen whether Russian policy will really change or if it’s only in words,” said Yevgeny Volk, director of the Heritage Foundation in Moscow.“There are too many financial interests of influential groups in the Russian elite linked to sales to Iran,” he continued.

Russia has provided Iran with nuclear technology and is building Iran’s first nuclear reactor at Bushehr at a total cost estimated by observers at $1.2 billion.

Iran on Tuesday announced the end of a two-year suspension of nuclear fuel research, escalating the long-running standoff with the West over its nuclear program.

Washington Post reported Thursday that the Bush administration, working intensely to galvanize international pressure on Iran, has secured a guarantee from Russia that it will not block U.S. efforts to take Tehran’s nuclear case to the U.N. Security Council.

The commitment, made in a Tuesday night phone call between Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, will likely help the United States and its European allies win support from key countries weighing a tougher line in response to Iran’s resumption of sensitive nuclear work.

Vice President Cheney and British Prime Minister Tony Blair suggested Wednesday that Iran now faces the possibility of U.N. economic sanctions if it does not halt nuclear enrichment research it began Tuesday.

According to three senior diplomats who were briefed on the call, Lavrov told Rice that Russia would abstain, rather than vote against U.S. efforts to move the issue from the International Atomic Energy Agency to the Security Council. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack confirmed to reporters that Rice had spoken with Lavrov and other foreign ministers but did not divulge details.

Russia’s pledge was good only for when a vote takes place inside the IAEA. U.S. officials said they remain uncertain as to how Moscow, a traditional ally of Iran’s, would react if the issue gets to the Security Council, where Moscow is one of five countries with veto power.

Still, Bush administration officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity saw the Russian decision as a victory and said they would spend the next several weeks lobbying China for a similar commitment. “We spent much of our time working on the Russians, but we’re now moving the focus to China,” said one administration official who would only discuss the backroom diplomacy on the condition of anonymity.

The White House is hoping the IAEA board will refer Iran’s case to the Security Council before President Bush delivers the State of the Union address at the end of the month, according to two senior administration officials.

Four years ago, in his annual address, Bush referred to Iran as a one of three “axis of evil” countries, along with Iraq and North Korea. But his administration has been criticized by friends and opponents for failing to come up with a strategy to curb Iran’s nuclear program.
Tsk tsk... I'm wagering UN Security Council action with Russia on board, locked, cocked and ready to roll in less than 6 months... who wants a piece of this action?

Never bite the hand that feeds you your reactor parts.
 
Last edited:
Ok chaps, with respect to election rigging there are multiple sources that suggest both sides participated, I don't mean to single out Republicans. Wikipedia also has a wide range of sources that indicate irregularities. I cannot say that I trust everything here but there are a wide variety of sources, some partisan and some that look more indipendent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_U.S._Election_controversies_and_irregularities

I am not saying that wikipedia IS the source of the evidence it merely aggregates data from numerous other sources. I think there is enough here that can be verfified by accessing public records to create a credible case for election rigging.

I have to stress my beef is with bush and his inner circle not all Republicans.

Rabs, I think its clear that your reasoning with respect to my comments is flawed, you should not jump to the conclusion that I deny 9/11 based on my views of Bush, I don't think anyone can logically agree with this view and if there was any doubt let me stress that believe 9/11 did happen and that Islamic extreamists were responsible for it.

With respect to what has happend today with Iran ending its voluntary suspension of nuclear work around enrichment, I have not been surprised by any of the statements made by all concerned parties, what will happen next will be interesting. My 2 pence is that Iran will be hauled in front of the Security Council but that the actual punishment will be far less than the US and EU hope for.

Over to you.
 
Last edited:
Your Wikipedia source said that the number one problem by far was registration, well the problem is not on the side of the government, the problem is that a lot people don't realize that you can't just walk into the polling place and vote, you have to register weeks earlier.
 
And there is a reason that you can't just walk in and vote.
1.) How do we know that the person walking in is even a US Citizen? Sure we should have the means to instataneously look that up, but most locations in the USA are archaic and out of date, technologically speaking. We don't have the means in all locations.
2.) Is the person old enough to be voting?
3.) Farther back in US history, there were numerous ploys where certain corrupt politicians would pay people to go right over and vote for them. Having to register to vote well in advance eliminates that possibility. In other cases, people would vote several times each, AKA "stuffing the ballot box". <--The Democratic Party actually did exactly that with several University Students in Wisconson, and yes Wisconson was close in both George W elections. Voter Registration is in place to keep both sides from cheating, which the will happily do if they get the chance.

You get the idea.
 
Throughout the cold war the Christian Democrats always won elections in Italy because many of their voters had residences in multiple counties (or whatever you call a "voting district"), which allowed them to vote multiple times.
 
DTop's opinions

Uncle Sam said:
With respect to what has happend today with Iran ending its voluntary suspension of nuclear work around enrichment, I have not been surprised by any of the statements made by all concerned parties, what will happen next will be interesting. My 2 pence is that Iran will be hauled in front of the Security Council but that the actual punishment will be far less than the US and EU hope for.

Over to you.
Allow me to look into my crystal ball and consult the oracle and indulge in a personal opinion.
I am of the opinion, mind you it is based on nothing other than my feeling and what the oracle tells me, that Iran already has some sort of nuclear weapon. As I listen to Iran's radical leadership becoming more and more voicferous and increasingly more aggressive in its rhetoric toward the West and toward Russia. I would ask you what country would act this way toward it's only means of supplying itself the means to develop these much sought after weapons unless it no longer needs them?
I also believe that there are two ways to treat nuclear technology in the world. Either stop other countries from gaining it or allow them to develop it for defensive purposes. The second option would be dependent upon the belief that other countries would in fact use this technology for soley peaceful purposes. This would require all parties to consider that the use of nuclear weapons would contaminate their entire area of the world and refrain from using it as a weapon.
Considering the suicidal history of the fundamentalists in the middle east and their penchant for disregarding the lives of others and even their own (they just don't care about either), I think that leaves the world with nothing but the first option; to deny the technology.
I also believe that Iran either has the technology or is a great deal closer to it than many seem to think (30 to 90 days or so). So, the question is what will happen next?
I think we'll see someone take military action against Iran because there is so little, if any time left to deny Iran this technology. I don't know where the action will come from but the main players in this would be the EU, Israel, Russia, and or the U.S.. I think it is too late for U.N. sanctions, embargoes, or anything but direct intervention. Considering Israel's current turmoil in leadership and the U.S. involvement in Iraq, my money is on the EU perhaps in the guise of NATO to be the ones to take action first, I guess we'll find out soon enough.
As I said this is purely speculation on my part.
 
Well, we can sit around for a year and this will happen next. This one is like the old Brylcream commercial, "a little dab will do you."


Teller-Ulam Design of a Fusion Bomb

To understand this bomb design, imagine that within a bomb casing you have an implosion fission bomb and a cylinder casing of uranium-238 (tamper). Within the tamper is the lithium deuteride (fuel) and a hollow rod of plutonium-239 in the center of the cylinder. Separating the cylinder from the implosion bomb is a shield of uranium-238 and plastic foam that fills the remaining spaces in the bomb casing. Detonation of the bomb caused the following sequence of events:
  1. The fission bomb imploded, giving off X-rays.
  2. These X-rays heated the interior of the bomb and the tamper; the shield prevented premature detonation of the fuel.
  3. The heat caused the tamper to expand and burn away, exerting pressure inward against the lithium deuterate.
  4. The lithium deuterate was squeezed by about 30-fold.
  5. The compression shock waves initiated fission in the plutonium rod.
  6. The fissioning rod gave off radiation, heat and neutrons.
  7. The neutrons went into the lithium deuterate, combined with the lithium and made tritium.
  8. The combination of high temperature and pressure were sufficient for tritium-deuterium and deuterium-deuterium fusion reactions to occur, producing more heat, radiation and neutrons.
  9. The neutrons from the fusion reactions induced fission in the uranium-238 pieces from the tamper and shield.
  10. Fission of the tamper and shield pieces produced even more radiation and heat.
  11. The bomb exploded.
All of these events happened in about 600 billionths of a second (550 billionths of a second for the fission bomb implosion, 50 billionths of a second for the fusion events). The result was an immense explosion that was more than 700 times greater than the Little Boy explosion.
 
zander_0633 said:
Nice info! Where did you get those from?

You can check out http://www.howstuffworks.com - a site that gives you detailed information on how things actually work, both by text and graphics/animations. Not just military equipment but also on car parts and other trivial things that are nice to know. Recommended.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top