Iran: crisis looming over nuclear plans

[Replicant]

BBC article on Iran's threats to re-start the process of enriching uranium.

What you all think?

[Raider179]

Depends on whether this is true.

A major U.S. intelligence review has projected that Iran is about a decade away from manufacturing the key ingredient for a nuclear weapon, roughly doubling the previous estimate of five years, according to government sources with firsthand knowledge of the new analysis.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/01/AR2005080101453_pf.html

If its 10 then lets finish in Iraq and let our boys rest for a couple years. If it's 5, give Isreal the thumbs up to take care of business.

[Monk]

The talks have always been a stall tactic.  This was Iran's agenda from the git go.

[Gunthr]

We're going to find out more in September when the newly elected top hat in Iran goes before the UN to address allegations that he was involved in the US embassy/hostage take-over years ago.  (He has been identified by hostages)

He will be laying out his nuclear intentions then too.

[Hangtime]

Originally posted by Gunthr
We're going to find out more in September when the newly elected top hat in Iran goes before the UN to address allegations that he was involved in the US embassy/hostage take-over years ago.  (He has been identified by hostages)

He will be laying out his nuclear intentions then too.

WHAT??!!!! A hostage taker is in charge.. effindamnation!

Oh lordy, be still; my heart!

MORE DATA PLEASE!

[Toad]

Now hear this, now hear this: Stand By. Return all weapons to "full safe" condition. Do not, Repeat, Do Not go off half-cocked. That is all.


Ahmadinejad not man in Tehran embassy photo

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A CIA analysis has concluded a hostage-taker pictured in an old photo at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran is not Iranian President-elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a U.S. official said on Friday.

The analysis compared photos of Ahmadinejad and an embassy hostage-taker whom former U.S. hostages identified as the newly elected Iranian leader. It found discrepancies serious enough to suggest the two are different men.

"If there's a case to made that Ahmadinejad was one of the hostage-takers, it will not be made on the basis of those photographs," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of sensitive nature of the subject matter.

[Hangtime]

Thanks!!

*whew*

[Skydancer]

I think if we got rid of our nuclear weapons / facilities we might have more of a leg to stand on when we tell others they can't have em. If not we  as atomic nations are mere hypocrytes.

To be honest never liked em or wanted em particularly when as a kid in Suffolk I knew there were rather more of em than I wanted on my doorstep and based far too close for comfort.

Never wanted a PWR like the one at 3mile Island built at Sizewell B either but the govt did it anyhow!



 

Just two of the things I supported back then when my hair was longer!

[FalconSix]

I used to think we should just bomb them (and NK) into the ground for violating the NPT, but then a buddy of mine told me that enriching uranium isnt even illegal. Anyone can legally enrich uranium, so what moral or legal right do we have to stop them?

[Maverick]

IIRC the Isreali's still have some F16's and F15's. Could be a short lived problem.......

[FalconSix]

The IAF would have to fly over at least two arab countries and would need inflight refueling both ways. Sounds tricky to me.

[Torque]

considering the history between iran and imperial western countries, you'd have to be a rather insane iranian not to want nukes for a deterrent.

[Raider179]

Originally posted by FalconSix
I used to think we should just bomb them (and NK) into the ground for violating the NPT, but then a buddy of mine told me that enriching uranium isnt even illegal. Anyone can legally enrich uranium, so what moral or legal right do we have to stop them?

ummmm no

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,430649,00.html

Sources tell Time the IAEA has concluded that Iran actually introduced uranium hexafluoride gas into some centrifuges at an undisclosed location to test their ability to work. That would be a blatant violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to which Iran is a signatory.

The IAEA declined to comment. A senior State department official said he believed El Baradei was trying to resolve the issue behind the scenes before going public. But experts say the new discoveries are very serious and should be handled in public. "If Iran were found to have an operating centrifuge, it would be a direct violation [of the non-proliferation treaty] and is something that would need immediately to be referred to the United Nations Security Council for action," says Jon Wolfstahl of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace


North Korea....

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/nuke-uranium.htm

In an announcement that shocked the world, Washington said on 16 October 2002 that North Korea had admitted to secretly developing nuclear weapons, in violation of a 1994 agreement with the US.

President Bush, Republic of Korea President Kim Dae-Jung, and Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi agree that North Korea's program to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons is a violation of several agreements and called on North Korea in a statement 26 October 2002 to dismantle the program in a prompt and verifiable manner. The three leaders agreed that North Korea's program to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons is a violation of the Agreed Framework, the Non-Proliferation Treaty, North Korea's IAEA safeguards agreement, and the South-North Joint Declaration on Denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. The three leaders called upon North Korea to dismantle this program in a prompt and verifiable manner and to come into full compliance with all its international commitments in conformity with North Korea's recent commitment in the Japan-North Korea Pyongyang Declaration.

So as you can see if they want to use the "legal" way, there is plenty of violation to stand on.

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by FalconSix
The IAF would have to fly over at least two arab countries and would need inflight refueling both ways. Sounds tricky to me.

  Hehe....don`t think that would be much of a prob.
  Highly possible an unmarked, "nonexistent" tanker could just happen to be in the neighborhood if needed.

[FalconSix]

Originally posted by Raider179
ummmm no

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,430649,00.html

Sources tell Time the IAEA has concluded that Iran actually introduced uranium hexafluoride gas into some centrifuges at an undisclosed location to test their ability to work. That would be a blatant violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to which Iran is a signatory.

The IAEA declined to comment. A senior State department official said he believed El Baradei was trying to resolve the issue behind the scenes before going public. But experts say the new discoveries are very serious and should be handled in public. "If Iran were found to have an operating centrifuge, it would be a direct violation [of the non-proliferation treaty] and is something that would need immediately to be referred to the United Nations Security Council for action," says Jon Wolfstahl of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Just because a reporter or journalist tells you it's a "blatant violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty" does not make it so. You'll notice the IAEA actually declined to comment. I've read the text of the NPT myself. There is nothing in the text pertaining to enriching uranium. The only illegal act is actually developing a weapon. Enriched uranium is also used as reactor fuel for compact reactors (nuke subs etc.)

NK is in "blatant violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty" by their own admission so that's a no-brainer. Bombs away.