Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Iran two years away from becoming nuclear weapons state says MI6 chief

This thread is sponsored by:
Announcements Posted on
Applying to Uni? Let Universities come to you. Click here to get your perfect place 20-10-2014
    • Thread Starter
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Speaking at the Civil Service Live event in Olympia he said that Iran was now “two years away” from becoming a “nuclear weapons state”. He said that “when that moment came” Israel or the United States would have to decide whether to launch a military strike.

    “The Iranians are determinedly going down a path to master all aspects of nuclear weapons; all the technologies they need,” he said. “It’s equally clear that Israel and the United States would face huge dangers if Iran were to become a nuclear weapon state.”

    Sir John said that without MI6’s work dealing with the threat, “you’d have Iran as a nuclear weapons state in 2008 rather than still being two years away in 2012.”
    Sir John said it was up to MI6 to “delay that awful moment when the politicians may have to take a decision between accepting a nuclear-armed Iran or launching a military strike against Iran.”

    When that moment came, he said: “I think it will be very tough for any prime minister of Israel or president of the United States to accept a nuclear-armed Iran.”
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...#disqus_thread

    Interesting. I'm not really sure the validity of his statements though, the intelligence for Iraq's WMD's was erroneous. I'm really hoping this is just a general statement rather than a prop for another war. I mean, pretty much all experts agree that a war with Iran isn't a good idea. Iran is also stronger than Iraq was and Iraq wasn't even a easy battle. And getting rid of the regime will just prop up another similar regime because the people will definitely not support any pro-western politicians if they invade.
    • 30 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Iran is such a complicated issue though. I'm getting a bit sick and tired of people coming out the wood work and just calling for a military strike ( which I admit I have wrongly done in the past) without explaining, what sort of strike do they mean? Airstrkes or an invasion? What are their plans for the Iranian regime, since surely they are going to have to remove it and put in place one that will not go for nuclear weapons. And how will they deal with the repercussions, economic and the rise in terror attacks that will follow any strike. And of course proof that they are pursuing a nuclear weapon since a lot of different people are saying a lot of different things.

    As for this being propaganda, I find it hard to believe, Iran is doing research into nuclear triggers and have their nuclear facilities buried deep in underground bunkers. This is hardly the way to prove your program is peaceful.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Smacks of Iraq: version 2 to me
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hevlar.kelmet)
    Smacks of Iraq: version 2 to me
    Hardly. The Iranian regime - as abhorrent as it is - hasn't used chemical weapons to commit genocide on its own soil, hasn't launched aggressive wars against two of its neighbours, and has mainly (though not entirely) been on the U.S.' side against al-Qaeda, unlike the Iraqi regime which praised the 9/11 attacks and had a mural painted which portrayed Saddam Hussein gloating over them.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	3rd-infantry-saddam-911.jpg 
Views:	98 
Size:	203.0 KB 
ID:	162806

    "...the American cowboys are reaping the fruit of their crimes against humanity" ~ Saddam Hussein
    • 52 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Even if they did have them, they wouldn't attack with them, as they would all die.
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    How are everybody so sure that Iran has nuclear weapons?
    • 30 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blueray)
    Even if they did have them, they wouldn't attack with them, as they would all die.
    Generally the fear of an Iranian bomb is not that they will nuke someone else but that they will either allow nuclear materials of some kind to get into the hands of various terrorist groups. Or a nuclear bomb will allow them to do whatever they please in the world without any fear of repercussion. Much like North Korea does, if they wanted to do they could overtly sponsor terrorist attacks on the US or Israel there is very little these states could do in return.
    • 23 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    We are already in the nightmare situation because India and Pakistan have them, as well as Israel, that's three states that are more volatile than Iran. The genie has already got out of the bottle.

    I agree that Iran should not have access to nuclear weapons but it needs to be done with a credible approach of disarmament throughout the region, including India, Pakistan and Israel.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JamesNeedHelp2)
    How are everybody so sure that Iran has nuclear weapons?
    they don't, he's saying within 2 years they will develop the capability to build them. That still doesn't mean they will actually build them, but that should they want to, they could.
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dirac Delta Function)
    they don't, he's saying within 2 years they will develop the capability to build them. That still doesn't mean they will actually build them, but that should they want to, they could.
    oh right.
    • 15 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I dont see why this is such an issue? the Iranians are suicidal nut jobs they know full well they could never and almost certainly will never use the bomb when they get it if we let states like Pakistan and North Korea get and keep it why are they getting so up in arms about Iran surely those 2 rogue states are far worse...
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    the thing is for me, I don't think it is fair, usa has nuclear weapon. so who is it to say no other country can have a nuclear weapon. to me it just seems like they just want a another war with an other middle-east country.
    • 52 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Generally the fear of an Iranian bomb is not that they will nuke someone else but that they will either allow nuclear materials of some kind to get into the hands of various terrorist groups. Or a nuclear bomb will allow them to do whatever they please in the world without any fear of repercussion. Much like North Korea does, if they wanted to do they could overtly sponsor terrorist attacks on the US or Israel there is very little these states could do in return.
    They could bomb them?
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    It's 8 years ago all over again
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The issue here is twofold.

    Firstly, look at where Iran is - right on the Persian Gulf. One THIRD of the Worlds oil passes through the Straits of Hormuz. If they acquire a nuke then they will be able to close/control the Straits at will, (as they have been posturing about for a while). The result of this if it were to happen? Global economic turmoil and a potential energy crisis.

    Secondly, there is the bad feeling aimed at Israel by the Iranian leadership. Israel will feel threatened if Iran obtain the nuke, and will more than likely launch a pre-emptive strike to prevent any potential attack. The Iranian response would be brutal and aimed at many states, not just Israel. This would also result in the aforementioned economical and energy crises.

    This is not another Iraq situation. Irans nuclear programme is well documented.
    • 30 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blueray)
    They could bomb them?
    Risks nuclear retaliation that's the point.
    • 52 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Risks nuclear retaliation that's the point.
    So they don't want the balance of power to shift
    • 30 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blueray)
    So they don't want the balance of power to shift
    Pretty much. No state in a position of power would.
    • 52 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Pretty much. No state in a position of power would.
    So why are you against this? More balance is better?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Generally the fear of an Iranian bomb is not that they will nuke someone else but that they will either allow nuclear materials of some kind to get into the hands of various terrorist groups. Or a nuclear bomb will allow them to do whatever they please in the world without any fear of repercussion. Much like North Korea does, if they wanted to do they could overtly sponsor terrorist attacks on the US or Israel there is very little these states could do in return.
    The US gave Saddam Chemical and Biological weapons. So there is major hypocrisy on the part of the US and it's friends.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: July 30, 2012
New on TSR

Submitting your UCAS application

How long did it take for yours to be processed?

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.