Skip to comments.
Iran 'building bomb-proof nuclear site'
Australian ^
| September 29, 2007
Posted on 09/28/2007 8:27:46 AM PDT by Perdogg
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
To: BMIC
21
posted on
09/28/2007 8:42:55 AM PDT
by
lonestar67
(Its time to withdraw from the War on Bush-- your side is hopelessly lost in a quagmire.)
To: Perdogg
This is just a small version of what the Russian’s have in the Ural mountains.
Shush! We don’t talk about that - the ruskies are our friends now.
To: pennboricua
Zero hour approaches...
(And as if on cue, my iPod on shuffle plays “The Final Countdown” by Europe...)
To: Perdogg
We may not be able to get a bomb to the bottom of it, but we can sure seal it up. Every underground facility has to have a way in. When that 20,000 lb penetrator crushes the first 1000 feet of that entry shaft, there will be a lot of lonely Iranian scientists and technicians down below.
24
posted on
09/28/2007 8:44:12 AM PDT
by
SampleMan
(Islamic tolerance is practiced by killing you last.)
To: Perdogg
The new site in central Iran consists of a "vast underground area beneath the Karkass mountains linked to the surface by two tunnels and connecting with a third tunnel" to the Natanz nuclear complex 5km away, Mr Abrichamtchi said. "The site is protected against aerial attack. If Natanz is bombed, it won't be touched," he said. " The beauty of underground sites is that they can't (necessarily) be bombed.
The problem with underground sites is that their entrances can be bombed.
25
posted on
09/28/2007 8:44:49 AM PDT
by
r9etb
To: Eric in the Ozarks
“My father taught me many things here - he taught me in this room. He taught me - keep your friends close but your enemies closer.”
To: DCBryan1
...it was said that the missile crews could drop the warhead into the Soviet PM's afternoon Tea through a window if the ballon ever went up. I read once that there are nukes that are so accurate that you could,from 5000 miles away,aim one at the pitcher's mound at Yankee Stadium and it would hit somewhere within the stadium.
27
posted on
09/28/2007 8:46:04 AM PDT
by
Gay State Conservative
(If martyrdom is so cool,why does Osama Obama go to such great lengths to avoid it?)
To: darkwing104
Dear Iran,
There is no such thing as “bomb-proof”.......................
28
posted on
09/28/2007 8:46:21 AM PDT
by
Red Badger
(ALL that CARBON in ALL that oil & coal was once in the atmosphere. We're just putting it back!)
To: Perdogg
The guts of the facility may be so deep under the mountain that they’re bomb-proof. However, the entrances and exits are most certainly not bomb proof. And what good is their facility once it’s completely sealed up under a mountain?
29
posted on
09/28/2007 8:46:27 AM PDT
by
this is my name not yours
(Free speech is the escape valve that keeps some people from picking up a rifle.)
To: Perdogg
“Its time for Bush to make the call.”
He’s too preoccupied with global warming.
30
posted on
09/28/2007 8:46:39 AM PDT
by
JZelle
To: Perdogg
Bomb-proof. Sounds like a bet to me.
31
posted on
09/28/2007 8:46:56 AM PDT
by
joebuck
To: SampleMan
32
posted on
09/28/2007 8:46:56 AM PDT
by
r9etb
To: r9etb
Which makes for some very sad people inside.
Being buried alive is my worst nightmare. As such, it’s exactly what I’d love to see happen to “Dinner Jacket’s” “best and brightest.” Couldn’t happen to a better buncha guys.
To: SampleMan
Great minds think alike...and so do ours :)
34
posted on
09/28/2007 8:48:49 AM PDT
by
this is my name not yours
(Free speech is the escape valve that keeps some people from picking up a rifle.)
To: Gay State Conservative
Cue John Sterling:
An AAAAAAAAA BOMB! FROM AAAAAAAAAAAAA ROD!
To: Red Badger
30,000 pound penatrator
36
posted on
09/28/2007 8:50:07 AM PDT
by
evets
(beer)
To: DCBryan1
You bet ch.
37
posted on
09/28/2007 8:50:43 AM PDT
by
ANGGAPO
(LayteGulfBeachClub)
To: Slapshot68
>>>
Yeah, their nukes are for electricity. Anyone who still believes that is lobotomized.<<<
Well, its undeerground isn't it - they need electricity for the lights! Geeeez!
[//sarcasm]
38
posted on
09/28/2007 8:50:57 AM PDT
by
HardStarboard
(Take No Prisoners - We're Out of Qurans)
To: Slapshot68
>>>
Yeah, their nukes are for electricity. Anyone who still believes that is lobotomized.<<<
Well, its underground isn't it - they need electricity for the lights! Geeeez!
[//sarcasm]
39
posted on
09/28/2007 8:51:26 AM PDT
by
HardStarboard
(Take No Prisoners - We're Out of Qurans)
To: DCBryan1
Actually I did not like the Pershing Missile. It was a superb weapon, actually to good. From launch to impact it was about 12 minutes from Western Europe to Moscow. It was thus a destabilizing weapon. It put the Soviets in position of use them or lose them scenario if they detected any type of launch.
Mistakes can be made. During the cold war a Norwegian rocket launch (nothing military it was an atmospheric research rocket) made the Soviets think they were under attack. The channels of communication in Russia did not get the message to the military about the Norwegian launch. The Norwegians had informed the Soviets of their planned launch. It is this precise scenario that made the Pershing dangerous to stability. The Pershing thus was a bad defensive weapon but an excellent first strike weapon.
40
posted on
09/28/2007 8:52:06 AM PDT
by
cpdiii
(Roughneck, (Oil Field Trash and Proud of It) Geologist, Pilot, Pharmacist, Iconoclast.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson