Iran launches 'space' rocket

[IceCold]

It's a rant and nothing but.

Ok so things you cant answer becomes a rant. I asked you two simple questions which you seem to skip away.

1) How many WMD's were found in iraq?
2) How would iran benefit from hiding its missile programe and disguise it into a rocket when iran's missile programe is no secret and besides like i mentioned before it will be taken as a threat anyways so whats the purpose?

Now allow me! about wmd's there werent any found in iraq( obiviously to find one, one has to have one) and attack on iraq was launched for two reasons:

1) to secure the oil reserves in iraq, second largest after S.A
2) to safeguard israel's interests in the region.
WMD's were just an excuse to launch an attack.
The same old strategy US wants to practice again with Iran. In this case the supply routes of oil for the US is the real agenda and nuclear card is being played to justify an attack.

I've had to stop reading about half-way through as it's sorta nonsensical (more neo-con/zionist media bleating) and very hard to understand. That's the third time you've referenced neo-con/zionist media. You should provide proof as most American media syndicates are openly traded on the NYSE. Some of your friends here could probably vouch that. However, evidently, you've little faith in western media, IAEA, or the U.N in any case.

Obiviously, it would be hard for you to understand and i dont necessarily blame you, infact americans are known for their thick heads to understand and see things the way they are and not the way the neo-con/zionist media wants them to see.

Oh! One more thing...your facts are wrong. It was a congressman, not a senator. Here's the story and the proper CONTEXT-not that you care one bit.

"A Colorado congressman told a radio show host that the U.S. could 'take out' Islamic holy sites if Muslim fundamentalist terrorists attacked the country with nuclear weapons.

Rep. Tom Tancredo made his remarks Friday on WFLA-AM in Orlando, Fla. His spokesman stressed he was only speaking hypothetically.

Talk show host Pat Campbell asked the Littleton Republican how the country should respond if terrorists struck several U.S. cities with nuclear weapons.

'Well, what if you said something like — if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites,' Tancredo answered.

"You're talking about bombing Mecca," Campbell said.

"Yeah," Tancredo responded.

The congressman later said he was 'just throwing out some ideas' and that an 'ultimate threat' might have to be met with an 'ultimate response.'

Spokesman Will Adams said Sunday the four-term congressman doesn't support threatening holy Islamic sites but that Tancredo was grappling with the hypothetical situation of a terrorist strike deadlier than the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks."

Those are the actual facts of the comments. Please ignore the context of the comments...you know, the part where muslim fundamentalists attack America with multiple nuclear weapons.

Ok! well Let me rephrase my statement here. US is the only country where a presidential candidate stands up and say we need to bomb the holy places of muslims in S.A. Here's his remarks:

WASHINGTON: The US presidential candidate Tom Tancredo said that in his opinion the sacred Muslim cities of Mecca and Madina should be attacked if America is attacked.

The presidential candidate belonging to the Republican Party said in a restaurant that the US should consider attack on the sacred Muslim cities of Mecca and Madina to save America from nuclear attacks.

He said that in case of nuclear attacks they would decide how to target Mecca and Madina. He said this is the only way to save the US from attacks and through which it can be secured.

It may be mentioned that this is not for the first time that any statement regarding attacks on the sacred cities of the Muslims has been issued from Tom Tancredo. Earlier in 2005 also, he said about attacks on Mecca and Madina. http://www.defence.pk/forums/global...ca-madina-should-attacked-if-us-attacked.html
Link: http://www.geo.tv/geonews/details.asp?id=9679&param=1

Now isnt this terrorism justifing to attack the holy places of muslims in S.A if US is attacked by terrorists? You see thats the main problem here. All muslims are labled as terrorists because they are muslims and terrorism is not seen as terrorism but rather linked with religion. Why is that only when Osama say something like this hes called a terrorist and is linked with islamic fanaticism. Why doesnt the same happen with Mr.Tom? Why isnt he called a terrorist and linked with christian or jew fanaticism. Afterall this isnt the first time he has said so.

 

[S-2]

"Now allow me! about wmd's there werent any found in iraq( obiviously to find one, one has to have one)"

500 chemical shells of degraded sarin/mustard recovered to date-

NGIC Declassified Summary

"How would iran benefit from hiding its missile programe and disguise it into a rocket when iran's missile programe is no secret and besides like i mentioned before it will be taken as a threat anyways so whats the purpose?"

Congressional Research Service- Iran's Ballistic Missile Programs: An Overview-Nov. 8, 2007

From the report-

"These assessments do not mean, however, that there is universal agreement within the U.S. intelligence community on the issue of an Iranian ICBM. According to these unclassified statements, some argue that an Iranian ICBM test is likely before 2010, and very likely before 2015. Other U.S. officials believe, however, that there is “less than an even chance” for such a test before 2015. Furthermore, U.S. assessments are also conditional in that an Iranian ICBM capability would have to rely on access to foreign technology, from, for example, North Korea or Russia.9 Finally, it is argued that an Iranian ICBM could develop from an Iranian space program under which a space-launch vehicle program might be converted into an ICBM program. Some have argued that Iran could develop and test such a space launch vehicle by 2010."

Yes. It would be taken as a threat. The question is, what is the nature of the threat? Space-launch vehicles bear striking operational characteristics to ICBMs. Heretofore, Iranian ballistic missile development has been focused more narrowly on the development of IRBMs. Nothing is absolute as so little is known. That my gov't expresses concern, however, from the recent Iranian launch is not an unusual consideration under the circumstances.

"1) to secure the oil reserves in iraq, second largest after S.A"

For whom? From whom? America imported 9.98 mil barrels of oil per day in November. 508,000 barrels per day came from Iraq- 5% of our daily IMPORTS. The EIA would be able to provide you with the exact data but it's a modest amount. It is iraqi oil. Nothing but. The whole world is watching to see if America STEALS Iraqi oil. Some (you) already believe we have. It's untrue.

Iraq has accumulated tremendous cash reserves over the last four years from rising oil prices. Getting the Iraqi gov't to SPEND their largesse to improve the lives of their citizens is now the critical issue.

"2) to safeguard israel's interests in the region."

If so, then Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the GCC states, Kurds, and Iranians have been the unintended beneficiaries by America's actions to remove Saddam and the baath party from power for the purposes of securing Israel. Please explain Israel's "interests" in the gulf region aside from avoiding more SCUD attacks from those who share Saddam's congenital hatred of Jews.

"WMD's were just an excuse to launch an attack."

The laundry list of "excuses" and benefits from such an attack are longer than your arm. Now that you know that WMD WAS found and have the Duelfer report from which to examine the nature of the regime and intent, you can couple that to Saddam's demonstrated use to draw your own conclusions.

"The same old strategy US wants to practice again with Iran. In this case the supply routes of oil for the US is the real agenda and nuclear card is being played to justify an attack."

As I've repeatedly indicated to no avail, those supply routes directly affect the economic health of other nations FAR in excess of America. That they have been threatened by Iran in the past is clear. The 1988 "tankers war" made apparent that Iran was prepared to expand war by targeting oil tankers owned by the GCC states. Kuwait's request to re-flag it's tankers under the stars & stripes, equally, makes clear that our presence to secure the sustained and safe transit of those vessels to points around the globe is a necessity that won't soon disappear.

"...infact americans are known for their thick heads to understand and see things the way they are and not the way the neo-con/zionist media wants them to see."

Sort of a grossly stereotyped description of my 250 million fellow citizens that, understandably, I'll reject as statistically impossible to achieve. It does raise issues about your objectiveness, however. Do 160 million Pakistanis march in similar lock-step?lol: Of course not. It would be foolish to even make that claim. At a minimum, you'd have to convince me that Pakistani society is a more open, media-friendly environment than America. You may believe that. I'm sorry but I wouldn't.

Your concern about Tancredo's comments are interesting. He is one U.S. citizen- representative, presidential (his official campaign site is closed, btw)candidate, or otherwise. No more, and not indicative of official targeting policy nor the wishes/aspirations/attitudes of Americans. In point of fact, he is a "red herring" argument to dissemble reality from speculation.

I don't really indulge conspiracy nonsense. The first World Trade Center attack, Nairobi, Dar es Salaam, and the USS Cole provide sufficient justification that OBL is an enemy of my nation whom I'd kill without hesitation given the opportunity. You'll note no mention of 9/11 there.

I know, IceCold, that you'd agree that I would have no problem (perhaps even here) finding muslim citizens who'd advocate the immediate attack of my nation with any and all means- to include nuclear weapons. Perhaps even yourself, I don't know. I don't, by any stretch, hold Islam, muslims, or arabs, etc.collectively as accountable for those comments, though. To this point it would be the idle wishes of miscreants more likely to harm fellow muslims than myself. That's speculative and, equally, pointless.

 

[dabong1]

Bluff! whatever you wish, but have you heard anything about ISRO's commercial lauch vehicle corp called "Antrix" then care to get your words back..

If india has launched iranian spy satellite's or is planning on doing so then i will take my words back.......if not then would you agree that india is making anti iranian manovoures.

Don't worry about it! just provide me with your residential address I will send you packet full of delicous Indian Sweets on very next day of launching of Iranian spy satellite aboard Indian launcher.

Thanyou....i like ghulam jamaan and berhfee

 

[KENT]

If india has launched iranian spy satellite's or is planning on doing so then i will take my words back.......if not then would you agree that india is making anti iranian manovoures.

See mate, it is not that India has been indulging in anti Iranian manovoures. Launching of isreali spy satellite was completely commercial one and there was nothing anything as Iranian centeric, heck ISRO don't even know about technical details of Isreali SAR... let alone thinking about india's intention of positioning it over Iranian Nucler installation. Suppose if india denied that launching, then Isreali might have taken the help of NASA or European space agency which would depreive Indian commercial launching satellite programme. By then every country in world would have think twice before thinking about launching their satellite over aboard Indian PSLV. Same with Iran, if they want to their satellite aboard Indian launcher at very cheap price then they are most welcome.

Thanyou....i like ghulam jamaan and berhfee

Done.

 

[dabong1]

See mate, it is not that India has been indulging in anti Iranian manovoures. Launching of isreali spy satellite was completely commercial one and there was nothing anything as Iranian centeric, heck ISRO don't even know about technical details of Isreali SAR... let alone thinking about india's intention of positioning it over Iranian Nucler installation..

I hope you reach the same conclusions that its all economics and nothing military if china launched a satellite for pakistan.

Suppose if india denied that launching, then Isreali might have taken the help of NASA or European space agency which would depreive Indian commercial launching satellite programme. By then every country in world would have think twice before thinking about launching their satellite over aboard Indian PSLV..

i doubt that very much.....but still nice excuse.

Same with Iran, if they want to their satellite aboard Indian launcher at very cheap price then they are most welcome...

As i said before it would be great for iran to call indias bluff and say they want a commercial satellite to be put into orbit........i doubt very much if india would hazard its new found friendship with US/israel.

 

[KENT]

I hope you reach the same conclusions that its all economics and nothing military if china launched a satellite for pakistan.

When China can give assistance to Pakistan in Nucler and Missile technology, then where this launching of satellite for pakistan is a big deal.

i doubt that very much.....but still nice excuse.

It's upto you to decide, since both of our can differ.

As i said before it would be great for iran to call indias bluff

Call it whatever you want, just let iranian express their feeling about satellite launching from Indian PSLV then you will see a kind of a hot reception from ISRO.

and say they want a commercial satellite to be put into orbit........i doubt very much if india would hazard its new found friendship with US/israel.

Have you ever heard about the news US delibrate hurdle to stop Isreali spy satellite launching from PSLV in september, then only India manage to do the same within few month, so I have every right to admit that we can launch iranian satellite even at the cost of jeopardizing relationship with US/Isreal which is quite evident from recent fret in Indo-Russian relation. If India cave in to the US pressure and abdon the launching of isreali satellite then your admission hold the true.

 

[ahussains]

Iran must have Russians support i have toughts about its abilities

 

[dabong1]

"Now allow me! about wmd's there werent any found in iraq( obiviously to find one, one has to have one)"

500 chemical shells of degraded sarin/mustard recovered to date-

NGIC Declassified Summary

FOXNews.com - Sarin, Mustard Gas Discovered Separately in Iraq - U.S. & World

"A roadside bomb containing sarin nerve agent recently exploded near a U.S. military convoy, the U.S. military said Monday.

" [ . . . ]

"Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the results were from a field test, which can be imperfect, and said more analysis was needed.

"[ . . . ]

". . . U.S. military units [also] discovered mustard gas that was used as part of an IED. Tests conducted by the Iraqi Survey Group — a U.S. organization searching for weapons of mass destruction — and others concluded the mustard gas was 'stored improperly,' which made the gas 'ineffective.'

"They believe the mustard gas shell may have been one of 550 projectiles for which former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein failed to account when he made his weapons declaration shortly before Operation Iraqi Freedom began last year. Iraq also failed to then account for 450 aerial bombs with mustard gas. That, combined with the shells, totaled about 80 tons of unaccounted for mustard gas.

"[ . . . ]

"It was a weapon that we believe was stocked from the ex-regime time and it had been thought to be an ordinary artillery shell set up to explode like an ordinary IED and basically from the detection of that and when it exploded, it indicated that it actually had some sarin in it," [Brig. Gen. Mark] Kimmitt said.
So, from two reports of two small, separate groups of Iraqi insurgents who did not even know they were in possession of what might have been inactive sarin or mustard gas misplaced by Saddam Hussein after the 1991 Gulf War, the Fox News propaganda machine goes to work and a fool like yourself believes that some 500 shells containing mustard gas and sarin were found in Iraq after Dubya's March 2003 invasion.

Just to be clear, the math worked the other way around. To wit, using the very facts found in the Fox News Report:

1. Prior to the US March 2003 invasion of Iraq, Saddam Hussein failed to account for some 550 projectiles that he was known to have back in 1991; sometime later, an additional 450 aerial bombs with mustard gas were also unaccounted for.

2. Exactly *ONE* IED (i.e., "Improvised Explosive Device") that *MIGHT* have contained sarin was detonated by a small group of Iraqi insurgents who apparently had no idea that the IED might have contained sarin.

3. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld cautions that "the results were from a field test, which can be imperfect, and said more analysis was needed."

4. In a separate unrelated incident, U.S. military units discovered some mustard gas from the same 1991 stockpile that had been stored improperly and thus been rendered ineffective.

5. In that same news report, a former Iraqi nuclear scientist is quoted as telling Fox News that "he believes many similar weapons stockpiled by the former regime were either buried underground or transported to Syria."

In a more recent report by Fox News in June 2003, Senator Rick Santorum cited a declassified report by the National Ground Intelligence Center as stating, "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent." However, in that same Fox News report:
"Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.

'This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991,' the official said, adding the munitions 'are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war.'"
In sum, if there is any mustard gas or sarin from 1991 stockpiles that was moved to Syria (no evidence of that, BTW) or that is now in the possession of Iraqi insurgents, it is a direct consequence of the fact that Dubya failed to allow weapons inspectors from the U.N. to complete their inspections in Iraq.

Hahahaha........you fell for the zionist media lie again.
Your post is so lame i can only be bothered to answer your first BS fact.

Dick Cheney Was Right

A taste of the lie that was spread by the israeli/zionist agents

 

[S-2]

This was the question posed by IceCold.

"1) How many WMD's were found in iraq?"

My answer was correct. Misplaced, pre-1991 stockpiles intentionally undeclared, whatever-the weapons were present. Combined with the evidence of the Duelfer report it's clear that saddam was bent on hiding a WMD program and believed it possible.

For myself, I'm satisfied that a great number of weapons were probably moved to Syria in the months prior to the war. That seems plausible. Certainly there was more than adequate time to do so surreptitiously. What's more important is the retention of programs to be revived once sanctions were lifted. Coupled with a recent and documented past history of WMD use, to include his own citizens, it's difficult to deny that Hussain was a pervasive regional threat.

"Hahahaha........you fell for the zionist media lie again.
Your post is so lame i can only be bothered to answer your first BS fact."

Tacky and rude. Perhaps forgivable if it mattered, but being tacky, rude, and wrong is the real laugh. Your anti-semitism ranks with IceCold's. Turning the U.S. media into some neo-con/jewish-zionist controlled anti-muslim, Pakistan, arab propaganda machine is a dangerous self-deception. It clearly ignores the many mediums and personalities and syndicates that are non-jewish and who would resent being characterized as such. Our market is just that huge that even your grossest misrepresentation of the truth can't distort it.

AIPAC has disclaimed many of the same organizations as anti-zionist as IceCold did in his unattributed tirade elsewhere-notably the N.Y. Times. That, of course, ignores the public's hold in ownership and viewership. Acquisition through the open market is entirely possible as many are traded there daily. Ratings generate advertising. Without it, media fails.

Finally, access is unlimited. Anybody can play the game and display their message. Everybody does, including jews. That's because Americans don't fear being taken off the air or have our printing presses closed.

However, to be fair, if muslim and arab-Amercans, etc. feel that they have a perception issue in the eyes of the American public- and it matters...Compete. You will never dictate perception but you might improve it with the correct message. That will cost thought and money.

Isn't that, for instance, the point of Al-Jazerra America? Somebody in Al-Jazerra thinks that there's a market worth investing in America. It should be interesting tracking their success but irrelevant to the broader point that they can do so. That's what matters most.

In Pakistan it seems a little different.

 

[Trooper]

great news ! this is really great!!!