Unveiled....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8274903.stm

*waits for Jedd to tell us there is no reason they shouldn't be able to have a secret facility*

Truthfully Sixee for someone who is on this forum as much as you are, you don't pay attention much do you? Jedd is often one of the first to criticize Iran's leadership.

I didn't even have to go back 6 months!

http://ayonae.com/showthread.php?t=12256

Well I'm not bored enough to link you to all of the Iranian election stuff, but stop being a troll and start to think for yourself for a change please. If you have something useful to add to the discussion, please add it. Else, shoo.

I read all of his responses to the Iranian elections. It kind of reminded me of an excited chihuahua; lots of barking, but no real action.

I would have been impressed if he had gotten on a plane, and went over there to show his support....but that didn't happen.

And if I'm not thinking for myself, could you kindly tell me who is doing my thinking for me? I'd love to hear your informed response.

Back on subject: Is there anyone that is really suprised by all of this? Is the next step that we actually have to let them develop a nuclear weapon before we come down on them like a ton of bricks?

Nobody would come down on them like a ton of bricks even if they did. The nuclear proliferation treaties have been a joke for a long time, as there is no backing authority and always a vested backing interest from some major power who is nominally a signatory anyway.

The bottom line is unless there are real consequences for Iran itself (unlikely and expensive) and China and Russia (diplomatically possible at least), they're going to keep muddling along.

It wasn't enforced for India, Pakistan, South Africa, North Korea, or Israel; this is why so many have been saying that there needs to be a strong carrot-and-stick approach instead of just the stick, which has been proven completely and totally ineffective as a foreign policy tool, despite vehement protests to the contrary from the ostrich conservatives (see Cuba, NK, China, South America, Pakistan, Iran, et al).

We'll have to see where the current diplomacy track is going, but the last one painted us into a corner in several dimensions.

Well I'm not bored enough to link you to all of the Iranian election stuff, but stop being a troll and start to think for yourself for a change please. If you have something useful to add to the discussion, please add it. Else, shoo.

YEs becuase having a different opinion then someone else is being a troll..:rolleyes::rolleyes:

*waits for Jedd to tell us there is no reason they shouldn't be able to have a secret facility*

Come on, Osi. This isn't stating a different opinion than Jedd. It IS blatantly trolling.

I'll admit, I was trolling just a tad.

Regardless, if we try the carrot and stick approach, would it be better to let Russia and China feel the pain, as it were? Let them be the 400lb gorillas that get Iran to cooperate?

Because we all ready know how they feel about America. Death to us, and all....

lol oh man Sixee you are a hoot.

First of all I have said from the beginning that I see no issue with Iran procuring Nuclear weapons... That much is clear. I hate the government and how it treats its people but I know Iran is NO threat to the world.

Secondly, Iran was the one that unveiled the secret facility in a report to the UN last week, therefore this is no SHOCKER... They did what they are supposed to do and released more information to the UN.

Thirdly, I don't fly to another country to fight wars often.

When has Iran ever been interested in the carrot? They want weapons, no amount of carrots is going to dissuade them.

I read something the other day where Sarkozy (sp) was talking fairly tough about it being time to start putting the foot down, so to speak, with these countries like Iran and North Korea. If that meant that France would actually take part in some hands on actions to curtail nuclear proliferation, I would be at the head of the line to applaud them.

As for Iran, I find it interesting that Ahmanutjob and Khameni keep proclaiming that nuclear weapons are contrary to their religious beliefs, and it would be sinful to possess them; yet, they keep wanting to do things in secret. If they were willing to do things openly, it has already been stated that they could get assistance for developing reactors to provide power for the country.

When has Iran ever been interested in the carrot? \

No one has ever given them a value proposition that involves re-inclusion into the international community. They've never had the option of playing the game straight, just look at our official condemnations and under the table support (thanks Reagan for funding and arming the same despots you gave reason to fight us).

To provide a comparable perspective, North Korea: They exist in a diplomatic limbo vaguely recognized by SK and China, most of their people are a day or two away from starvation, their economy is non-existent. Of course they want nuclear weapons, their only leverage is being enough of a threat to not be ignored.

Why has no one offered to build nuclear reactors for them and teach them to run them under supervision? It's got to be cheaper than maintaining the DMZ. We've established that our stance is empty bravado, we're never going to actually invade Iran or North Korea. Puffing up at their every move is only rewarding their attempts to be threatening. If we were ever going to depose either government we would have done it decades ago, and they know it.

Wait, so Iran are building a race of carrot robot killers?? I'm so confused.

lol oh man Sixee you are a hoot.

First of all I have said from the beginning that I see no issue with Iran procuring Nuclear weapons... That much is clear. I hate the government and how it treats its people but I know Iran is NO threat to the world.

Secondly, Iran was the one that unveiled the secret facility in a report to the UN last week, therefore this is no SHOCKER... They did what they are supposed to do and released more information to the UN.

Thirdly, I don't fly to another country to fight wars often.

Only revealing after they were warned and knew the proof was coming to the table.

Time to end the charade, blockade the govt into the stone age, that won't take long.

Only revealing after they were warned and knew the proof was coming to the table.

Time to end the charade, blockade the govt into the stone age, that won't take long.

Hell yeah! Lets get into another military campaign in the middle east, that's the solution to everything.

We can let them have nukes, its working well in Pakistan.

Time to end the charade, blockade the govt into the stone age, that won't take long.

Yeah, it's only taken 60 years and counting with North Korea. Fix that right quick.

It isn't so much of a secret when our intelligence agencies have known about it since 2006 (and maybe earlier).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/6231906/Iranian-nuclear-site-has-been-under-surveillance-since-2006.html
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-nuclear-site26-2009sep26,0,1423460.story?track=rss

Hell yeah! Lets get into another military campaign in the middle east, that's the solution to everything.

Best slow down and read before you apply your Huffington decoder ring.

Yeah, it's only taken 60 years and counting with North Korea. Fix that right quick.

Eh, imho most of the actions taken have been horribly mutilated by running them through the media circus first.

... the North Korean state media circus?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8277040.stm

- ROFL, what a provocation!

Pakistan has missiles and nuclear warheads that can reach Israel already. And their government has proven that they're far more friendly with the Taliban than they are with the US (or Israel).

Pakistan has missiles and nuclear warheads that can reach Israel already. And their government has proven that they're far more friendly with the Taliban than they are with the US (or Israel).

Yes, but we've more influence with Pakistan ( another mistake mind you ) than we do Iran. I know I was pissed to help retrofit old F16's to send off to Pakistan. We , atm, play far too many kissy kissy games with that govt.

No Malse, don't be intentionally obtuse please....

The Media court overall has been a mistake. If you're going to take action do so....don't have it weighed by those with outside agendas and expect a clean decision.

I'm not being obtuse, you're not making sense. How does the media response to 60 years of forced isolation have anything to do with whether or not it has its desired effect in NK? Their ruling regime is as strong as ever, possibly more so, than it was when we embarked on this. I don't see how Dan Rather had much say in that at all.

Feeling a bit introspective here, and I've been considering Malse's point of view. I don't think our bravado really gets us anywhere as far as bargaining power, because we are in essence reacting to their bravado and flaunting, proving that we're willing to snap at the bait Iran et al. dangles in front of us.

To me, it feels like the more we seek to project a strong front, the more we drive the silent masses (both there and here) into agreeing with the extremists on either side of the issue. I don't purport to be knowledgeable in such things, but since the strong unyielding fatherly figure front hasn't worked, maybe its time to unclench the fist we keep shaking and offer a more friendly greeting.

I'd be willing to hope that if that we can bring Iran's silent masses into a more modernized state of living, we would bring a strong portion of them away from the extremists that believe blowing themselves up to kill the foreign devils was a good plan. Why blow up the hand that is feeding you?

It is worth reflecting on the fact that the 9/11 attacks were supposedly a statement of Al Quida and crew wanting the US to stay out of Middle East affairs. With the surge of patriotism and lust for revenge, no one in power seemed to want to ask if we were in the wrong. It's still hard to see Iraq or Afghanistan coming out as a positive, and certainly tampering with Iran isn't going to make things better. We are, at the moment, the playground bully. The game of, "We get nukes, 'cause we're better than you," doesn't do much for the West's international image. Whether the fear of Iran is justified or not (I'd just as soon they didn't have nukes, to be honest) we cannot continue to push countries around and then be shocked when they don't play by our rules.

Secondly, Iran was the one that unveiled the secret facility in a report to the UN last week, therefore this is no SHOCKER... They did what they are supposed to do and released more information to the UN.

Here I tend to agree that it is not necessarily accurate to describe this as a "secret" facility. My understanding is that signatories to the NPT are not required to report a facility until it is within 180 days of receiving the first nuclear materials and going into operation. As far as I can tell, Iran has complied with that in this case.

It remains to be seen whether Iran allows inspectors to monitor ongoing operations (which is where the inspections actually mean something). The inspectors need to watch for traces of weapons grade material which would be the true indication of a weapons program. If they are not allowed to monitor the plant in an ongoing fashion, then it is time to start complaining and taking additional measures.

Of course, today they also successfully tested a missile that can mount a nuclear warhead and reach Israel and Europe, so we can expect someone to blow something up shortly (probably Israel).

Honestly, how long would Iran really last if it launched a nuclear missile at any country? I'll say 25:30, 30 seconds for the responding launch process and 25 minutes for the response missile flights, and I think 25 minutes is a very conservative estimate.

I don't think they are suicidal.

Iran would probably last about negative 24 hours, as soon Israel got wind of launch preparations I'd put money on the pre-emptive strike plans they've had for decades going into effect. Given the relatively small number of population centers, there is no such thing as a limited nuclear exchange.

Well...lets hope we can stop Israel from attacking. A war there would be devastating for not only the middle east but for us. Oil prices would skyrocket, there is no way we could protect Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, The Gulf shipping etc.. We don't have the troops or the money or desire.

Much of the conversation here on this issue is grounded in the same grandiose mindset that has caused most of our problems with the region; how WE will be impacted, how OUR oil will cost more, and so on. There are a number of other countries that also deal with Iran, the Saudis, Iraq, Kuwait, etc.

I am not all that convinced that if Israel were to attack Iran that the U.S. might just be told in firm language to stay out of the matter while Israel was dealt with by those in closer proximity who have just as much reason to keep the oil flowing as we do.

I don't doubt the volume of diplomatic exchanges going back and forth right now between Israel and the U.S. and Russia and China and the EU is truly massive as leaders seek to contain this before it snowballs into a conflict that will make everyone a loser.

A few cause and effects:

Iran continues. Sanctions ensue.

Effect: Iran feels even more empowered to build their "deterant" as they get backed further into a corner. Plus, they won't ever be completely on their own. There are plenty of governments who hate the West more than they hate Iran's government and will find it profitable to aid Iran in their causes.

Iran finally test detonants their nuclear device.

Effect: Arms race in the Middle East. Possible military action on the part if Israel.

Israel does some form of strike, however unlikely.

Effect: Might not be any. Iran has the advantage. Israel has to use gravity bombs flown in by aircraft over Iraq with no mid-air refueling so it would be a suicide run. Iran has ballistic missiles. Would Israel want to sacrifice its airforce? Probably not. If anything they could do something covert to slow down ( but not even come close to ending) the Iranian weapons program but that is it. All they could do is find out exactly where the facilities are, pack a subsonic longer range aircraft, such as an airliner, full of explosives and fly it into the target. Israel is hamstrung and Iran will be able to dictate policy to Israel due to Israel's forces being defensive and logistically limited in nature while Iran can project power. Most any outside nation you would hope might be smart and not touch it with a 10 foot pole.

End result:

The Arab (IE Muslim) world unites under Iran, willingly or not, and becomes a major global player due to being able to project power via nuclear tipped ballistic missles as well as manipulate energy costs with inpunity. Israel becomes irrelevant. Fuel prices don't change much as long as everyone plays along. Trying to take any oil fields by force in the Middle East will result in having to weigh in the consequences of a nuclear strike. In the end the asshole becomes the asshole with nukes and most of the world's hydrocarbons, between Russia and the Middle East, are now tied up by powers hostile towards the West. China will make out like a bandit of course since they have either buddied up with Russia and Iran or have at least kept a strong but friendly distance.

Best thing for us: Get off the oil tit. We either have to reinvent ourselves domestically and take a hard look at our lifestyle as Americans or be less squimish about going to war and the burden of massive loss of life in order to defend the status quo. Tell Israel they are on their own. End the Middle East peace process and let the fear of Iranian nukes keep the region in check. The US is rapidly waning in power and influence. Its time for us as Americans to take care of ourselves and allow our own domestic energy production to carry alot of the burden. We really can't afford to always be in the center if everything anymore so why not just let this play out on its own?

Iran finally test detonants their nuclear device.




Khameni and the other clerics in the ruling council have consistently maintained that nuclear weapons are a sin in the eyes of Allah, which is why Iran would never consider a weapons program.

Ahmanutjob and the Revolutionary Guard want the power and might of the superpowers, as well as the deterrent effect having such weapons gives.

There have already been indications of friction between Ahmanutjob and Khameni, and Ahmanutjob has replaced many in the military leadership and other important positions with his allies.

Before we see any test of a nuclear weapon, I believe there will first be a revolution, of sorts, in Iran. Because the religious council has kept the populace muzzled for the most part, they might not get much support from the citizens when Ahmanutjob and the Revolutionary Guard establish a new form of government with the religious council playing no role, other than as advisors. Ahmanutjob will become the new Saddam of the region.

Then, we will see nuclear testing commence.



Of course, if inflation and unemployment are not brought under control, the populace might rise up against him before he gets too far with any of his plans. :rolleyes:

Don't buy into that dog and pony show. Khameni is just playing good cop.

End result:

The Arab (IE Muslim) world unites under Iran, willingly or not, and becomes a major global player due to being able to project power via nuclear tipped ballistic missles as well as manipulate energy costs with inpunity. Israel becomes irrelevant. Fuel prices don't change much as long as everyone plays along. Trying to take any oil fields by force in the Middle East will result in having to weigh in the consequences of a nuclear strike. In the end the asshole becomes the asshole with nukes and most of the world's hydrocarbons, between Russia and the Middle East, are now tied up by powers hostile towards the West. China will make out like a bandit of course since they have either buddied up with Russia and Iran or have at least kept a strong but friendly distance.



I agree a nuclear detonation by Iran will immediately lead to equivalent programs springing up in the Sunni Arab countries, particularly Saudi Arabia. They have the money to buy a program and no desire to be controlled by Iran. There have even been quiet suggestions amongst the Arabs that the Saudis allow Israel to overfly their country to strike the Iranians if they request it. Israel *does* have some mid air refueling capability, but striking that far would almost certainly require US permission unless they swung way out into the Indian ocean and attacked from the south (which is very limiting to them). Israel also is reputed to have cruise missiles on their diesel subs and, god forbid, the ability to hit Iran with nuclear tipped missiles if reports are to be believed.

At some point, Russia is going to wake up to the fact they are assisting a fundamentally hostile regime with fanatic tendencies to develop nuclear armed missiles. I don't think their support of Iran will continue past a test detonation, as it will be clear to all they have been made chumps of and will be in range of Iranian missiles even before the US is. That may slow down the Iranians a bit. The question remains what will China do? Their support of North Korea has cooled somewhat since NK went nuclear, but will they try to use Iran as a foil against the US or will they see Iran as a problem for them as well?

That said, any attack on Iran would be catastrophic for everybody. Likewise, an Iranian nuclear strike on Israel would be even more catastrophic. The only way out that doesn't end in tragedy for everybody is for some sort of diplomatic solution to abate the scenario. Or a revolution in Iran to put a less belligerent regime in place.

I also agree that as Americans (and Europeans), the best thing we can do for ourselves is to frantically work towards getting off the oil tit as soon as possible. Sooner or later we will need to anyway, best get it done under our terms.

From what I understand, Iran told the IAEA that they are operating the facility in question. They are required under the non-proliferation agreement to announce it 180 days before the facility actually produces nuclear material. They complied with this.

Israel has refused to comply with the non-proliferation agreement and has defied the IAEA on numerous occasions, actually they have never complied with anything concerning nuclear weapons or production of nuclear materials.

So, just out of curiosity why is it that Iran is being portrayed as the aggressor and Israel as the defender of the law?

It is mostly due to perceptions of intent, but also because there is no legality to holding a country that never signed the NPT (like Israel or India) to its provisions. Iran did sign the treaty (giving it access to foreign nuclear expertise and equipment in the first place) and has on occasion apparently violated it (though I agree not in this case). The public statements of Iranian leaders regarding Israel's existence do not inspire confidence that Iran's program is peaceful.

Israel gets a pass (rightly or wrongly) from the west in particular because:

a: Holocaust guilt

b: Israel is an actual democracy that is severely outnumbered and surrounded by implacable enemies (most of whom are decidedly anti-democratic) that are openly hostile to its existence.

c: They have already reputedly had nuclear weapons for at least forty years without using them in war, predating the NPT the same as the other major nuclear powers. If they have to give up theirs, we have to give up ours.

Watching the rerun of "The Daily Show from last night, and Jon Stewart once again puts things into the right perspective:

There could be a radioactive Qum-shot!

Hmm Looks like there is nothing to see here...



GENEVA — Iran (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/iran/index.html?inline=nyt-geo) agreed on Thursday in talks with the United States and other major powers to open its newly revealed uranium enrichment plant (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/26/world/middleeast/26nuke.html) near Qum to international inspection in the next two weeks and to send most of its openly declared enriched uranium outside Iran to be turned into fuel for a small reactor that produces medical isotopes, senior American and other Western officials said.

Iran’s agreement in principle to export most of its enriched uranium for processing — if it happens — would represent a major accomplishment for the West, reducing Iran’s ability to make a nuclear weapon quickly and buying more time for negotiations to bear fruit.

Mr. Obama said Tehran must allow international inspectors into the site near Qum within the next two weeks, a timeline Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, agreed to here.

The atomic energy agency’s director general, Mohamed ElBaradei (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/e/mohamed_elbaradei/index.html?inline=nyt-per), will travel to Tehran this weekend to discuss the details and timing of the inspections, officials said. But the Americans also want Iran to cooperate with the inspectors and make personnel and documents about the site near Qum available.

Besides the scheduling of another meeting, the main practical accomplishment on Thursday was Iran’s agreement in principle — to be worked out by experts later this month in Vienna — to ship what American officials called “most” of its declared stockpile of lightly enriched uranium to Russia and France to be turned into nuclear fuel.

While American officials refused to specify the amount, other Western officials said it could be 1,200 kilograms, or more than 2,600 pounds, of enriched uranium, which could be as much as 75 percent of Iran’s declared stockpile. While there may be hidden stocks of enriched uranium, such a transfer, if it occurs, “buys some time” for further negotiations, a senior American official said.

Given the assessment that Iran has made enough low-enriched uranium to produce at least one nuclear weapon at some time in the future, a sharp reduction in its stockpile would be “a confidence-building measure to alleviate tensions and buy us some diplomatic space,” the official said.
Israel, the nation most concerned about a nuclear-armed Iran, has been informed of the discussions, another American official said.

Iran’s uranium is enriched to about 3.5 to 5 percent, the officials said; the Tehran reactor for making medical isotopes, last powered by Argentine-made fuel in 1993, needs uranium enriched to 19.75 percent, still far below weapons grade. And that uranium must then be fabricated into metal rods for the reactor.

Iran had told the International Atomic Energy Agency that it needed fuel for the Tehran reactor before December 2010. Washington, with its allies, pushed the agency to offer Iran the fuel, but made from Iran’s own enriched uranium as a feedstock. Mr. Jalili agreed to that in principle on Thursday.



http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/world/middleeast/02nuke.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss