'Site found where Iran building 6,000 km ballistic missile'

[Yoink 7]

I am not advocating war by any means but... we go to war with Iraq on the presumption of removing an unstable madmen with WMDs. Ok the intelligence was wrong but in Iran's case there is irrefutable intelligence. Here is a madman who's weapon development and nuclear program far surpases anything Iraq had. And this madman is directly responsible for aid and funding of just about every commonly know terrorist organization in the Middle East. And has made his intentions clear saying how certain countries should be wiped off the face of the earth. AND hosted a holocaust revionist forum. Now this;

link: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid...icle%2FShowFull

New satellite imagery exposed a site where Iran was developing long-range ballistic missiles, the London-based Times reported Friday.

The site where Jane's Intelligence Review analysts assess that Iran is working on long-range ballistic missiles.

Photo: Courtesy Times

On February 4, Iran launched a "research rocket" as part of its space program, the Islamic Republic announced. Experts have estimated since then, however, that the rocket launch was in fact a field test of Shihab-type ballistic missile.

But four days after the launch another intriguing feature of the test became apparent: analysis of photographs taken by the Digital Globe QuickBird satellite indicated that the launch site of Kavoshgar 1, as the Shihab missile was dubbed by the Iranians, is also the site where Iran is busy developing ballistic missiles with a range of about 6,000 km.

The site, about 230 km southeast of Teheran, was previously unknown and its link with the Iranian weapons program was revealed by Jane's Intelligence Review after the images were studied by a former Iraq weapons inspector.

Using a space program as a façade for a weapons program was the path chosen by Korea until it declared it had passed the nuclear weapon threshold.

Geoffrey Forden, a research associate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said that there was a recently constructed building on the site, about 40 metres in length, which was similar in form and size to the Taepodong long-range missile assembly facility in North Korea.

Jane's Proliferation editor Avital Johanan said analysis of the Iranian site indicated that Teheran may be about five years away from developing a 6,000 km ballistic missile. This would tie in with American intelligence estimates and underlines why President Bush wants the Polish and Czech components of the US missile defence system to be up and running by 2013.

Missiles with a range of 6,000 km, launched from Teheran's environs, can hit not only any Middle Eastern countries, but also any target in Europe, including targets in Britain; almost any target in China and Russia,and most of India.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has announced his country has installed 6,000 centrifuges for the purpose of enriching uranium, a process which can be geared towards either a civilian or military program.

He did however continually reject incentives offered by the West in exchange for Iran halting its own enrichment, including a promise that Russia and other countries supply Iran with all the nuclear fuel it needed for peaceful purposes; Iran continues to deny it is trying to develop atomic bombs.

President Shimon Peres had posited several times in the last few months that there was "no logic" in working diligently towards producing long-range ballistic missiles unless it planned to couple such missiles with nuclear warheads.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb iran

[Yoink 7]

bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb iran

One concern that unlike Hussein, Ahmadinejad was "democratically" elected. Also, Iran's large support of terrorism may make Iraq look like a walk in the park.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Another concern may be that intervening to 'take out' Iran may be serving the interests of Israel more than our own.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It won't happen. We've overstretched ourselves militarily and diplomatically. And they know it. Short of them declaring war on someone else - they're more or less untouchable.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Short of them declaring war on someone else - they're more or less untouchable.

The only countries we need to defend (besides the homeland) are our NATO allies. Iran isn't about to declare war on Turkey or France.

[Yoink 7]

Another concern may be that intervening to 'take out' Iran may be serving the interests of Israel more than our own.

It is the world's problem when nuclear weapons start getting used in the middle east. Unlike limited small scale engagements like incursions into Gaza, Lebanon... any large-scale attack by or against Israel will draw quite a crowd with the impact felt around governments and economic markets across the world

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

It is the world's problem when nuclear weapons start getting used in the middle east.

No. It is the ME's problem.

Why are you and your neocon buddies so eager to spend American blood and fortune defending a nation (Israel) that we are not obligated by treaty to defend?

[Yoink 7]

do you think terrorism ends without Israel?

No

Fundamentalism and fanaticalism will extend to the next fight... and they will find a fight

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

do you think terrorism ends without Israel?

No

Fundamentalism and fanaticalism will extend to the next fight... and they will find a fight

All you're doing is justifying the spending of American blood and treasure in the defense of a nation that does not need - or warrant - defending.

[Ban Hammer 13,346]

time for ground zero ocean.

[Yoink 7]

do you think terrorism ends without Israel?

No

Fundamentalism and fanaticalism will extend to the next fight... and they will find a fight

All you're doing is justifying the spending of American blood and treasure in the defense of a nation that does not need - or warrant - defending.

I at no point advocated war... I just stated that we were willing to invade a nation for reasons which turned out to be false... and if that logic still works then here we have the same reasons to go to war which arent' false yet the U.S. does nothing. Was it oil? I dont'think we should go to war with Iran and I don't think we should have gone to war with Iraq.I posted the article for people to see and post their own conlcusions. I am not trying to get in a pissing match about Israel. I never even mentioned Israel other that what Ahamdinejad has said.

I think it is very naive to assume that when countries in this world are willing to obliterate eachother that other regions of the world shouldn't care.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

... and if that logic still works

It doesn't. It didn't then, and it doesn't now.

I never even mentioned Israel other that what Ahamdinejad has said.

Israel is the only country Ahamdinejad has actually threatened to obliterate. When you trot out tired old talking points in defense of a policy that leads to an attack on Iran, it is Israel's water you are carrying. Whether you explicitly say so or not.

Edited April 11, 2008 by VJ Troll

[Heracles 417]

And #6 and Obama would like to negotiate with them..

[Heracles 417]

Israel is the only country Ahamdinejad has actually threatened to obliterate. When you trot out tired old talking points in defense of a policy that leads to an attack on Iran, it is Israel's water you are carrying. Whether you explicitly say so or not.

Which is irrelevant. Unlike the United States, which publishes military plans and new strategies with 5 minutes of being discussed, most other countries keep their real agenda locked behind closed doors. I doubt he would be building a 6,000km range missile to hit Israel.