• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Inspectors find evidence of uranium enriched beyond that needed for reactors in Iran

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,747
13,866
136
Ok I understand your position. Iran should continue to alienate itself by refusing to change even if offered a chance to have nuclear energy and have sanctions lifted. No problem. As for the rest of your post it's fluff. Be prepared for military options next year if they bravely embrace their stupidity as you wish. That's what you want and that's what's likely. I'm pretty much done with this exchange. I wanted to know if you thought Iran ought to cooperate (you'll protest that they have of course) and the answer is a resounding no.
Nice strawman with attendant denial. Of course you're done with this exchange- It's the easy way out of cognitive dissonance.

I hope that the 5+1 & Iran can come to an agreement acceptable to all, but we really haven't seen even the outline of such, other that the 5+1 backing away from the "cease all enrichment now" stance. So there's some reasonable hope for it.

I would also support an even more extensive agreement, a grand bargain with Iran that would normalize relations entirely.

Our hardliners merely reinforce their hardliners, lend them patriotic support by rank & file Iranians. In the absence of perceived outside threats, hardliners everywhere gain little traction, particularly in any sort of democracy or something near to it. It seems clear that no matter how much we might want regime change in Iran, it'll have to come from within, and a general reduction of tensions sets the stage for that, if not a convulsive change, then a gradual one.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,880
4,212
126
Nice strawman with attendant denial. Of course you're done with this exchange- It's the easy way out of cognitive dissonance.

I hope that the 5+1 & Iran can come to an agreement acceptable to all, but we really haven't seen even the outline of such, other that the 5+1 backing away from the "cease all enrichment now" stance. So there's some reasonable hope for it.

I would also support an even more extensive agreement, a grand bargain with Iran that would normalize relations entirely.

Our hardliners merely reinforce their hardliners, lend them patriotic support by rank & file Iranians. In the absence of perceived outside threats, hardliners everywhere gain little traction, particularly in any sort of democracy or something near to it. It seems clear that no matter how much we might want regime change in Iran, it'll have to come from within, and a general reduction of tensions sets the stage for that, if not a convulsive change, then a gradual one.
I'm for a comprehensive agreement that satisfies Iran's nuclear power needs and the concerns of the 5+1 so it appears we agree on that.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
Oh, yeh- aspersions wrt to possible concealment from 2004- "possible ground scraping activities"

Basically, you're willing to believe anything that confirms the suspicions already planted in your head.
The problem that exists is Iran is unwilling to allow anything to reduce those suspicions.

They are playing the same game that Saddam did.

Stating that they have nothing; yet preventing verification of such statements.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,747
13,866
136
The problem that exists is Iran is unwilling to allow anything to reduce those suspicions.

They are playing the same game that Saddam did.

Stating that they have nothing; yet preventing verification of such statements.
The US position has been a catch 22 all along, until just recently.

First, cease all enrichment, even though the IAEA has found no diversion of materials from the enrichment activities taking place. Otherwise, there will be no dialogue, only increasing sanctions. We'll threaten attack, both by ourselves & our nasty little mid-eastern dog, Israel.

We'll let you start back up after you prove that you've never engaged in "nuclear weapons related activities", a condition you never agreed to in the first place, something you can't prove to our complete satisfaction no matter what. We'll always have endless questions & concerns. If it can be shown that you ever did such a thing, we'll use that as reason for denial in perpetuity.

We'll contend that "nuclear weapons related activities" are the central issue rather than the actual creation of weapons grade materials, as if you can create weapons w/o them. We'll use the IAEA as a foil to do that.

It's a policy designed to create impasse, force the Iranians to fold. But they haven't. Instead, they raised the bet with the creation of their Fordow facility & the stockpiling of material enriched to 20%, all under IAEA supervision. So that policy has failed.

Apparently, we've come to the conclusion that doubling down on Fail isn't very smart, that we'd really rather avoid war if a reasonable alternative can be found, and have changed our position accordingly.

It'll take some additional unwinding before we can claim compromise as victory, stifle the domestic raving that the Bush Admin encouraged & nurtured, but we may get there.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,747
13,866
136
Is the IAEA back in Iran and allowed to inspect all their facitilites?
Just stop it. They never left. How else would one of their inspectors have been killed in a recent car crash in that country? How else would they know of the production error that created material enriched to 27%?

You discredit yourself in even hinting that they ever left, abandoned their job.

Hell, I addressed that line of bullshit back on page 1 of this thread, with linkage-

http://www.firstpost.com/world/iaea-finds-higher-grade-uranium-trace-in-iran-sources-321787.html
 
Last edited:

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
44,383
4,162
136
Pictures shot from orbit on Friday indicate Iran "razed" two structures at its Parchin armed forces installation since early last month, bolstering fears of a possible effort to "destroy evidence" of experimentation applicable to a potential nuclear-bomb preparation effort, a think tank in Washington said on Wednesday (see GSN, May 30).

Iran has turned down multiple requests by the International Atomic Energy Agency for a trip to Parchin, where the U.N. nuclear watchdog believes the govenment might have assembled a tank for performing nuclear weapon-usable combustion studies, Reuters reported (see GSN, Nov. 9, 2011). Tehran insists its atomic ambitions are strictly nonmilitary in nature.

The pictures show imprints "made by heavy machinery used in the demolition process," according to the analysis by the Institute for Science and International Security. "The newest image raises concerns that Iran is attempting to raze the site prior to allowing an IAEA visit. The razing of the two buildings may also indicate that Iran has no intention to allow inspectors access soon."

Shortly before the ISIS assessment's release, the Vienna, Austria-based nuclear agency presented what were apparently comparable pictures (Fredrik Dahl, Reuters I, May 31). Agency safeguards chief Herman Nackaerts displayed to envoys pictures taken from space of the Iranian installation in May as well as last November, according to attendees.

International relations officials said a picture shot near the end of this month shows the elimination of two or potentially three limited-size structures adjacent to the primary site on which IAEA inquiries have focused.

"It was like a demolition area," a Western envoy stated.

Envoys said Nackaerts reaffirmed the necessity for an IAEA trip to the complex aimed at resolving related questions, but he did not suggest what activities were under way at the site (Fredrik Dahl, Reuters II, May 31).
http://www.nti.rsvp1.com/gsn/article/iran-seen-eliminating-sections-suspected-nuclear-site/?mgh=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nti.org&amp;mgf=1

These concerns are not politically motivated BS from the likes of Dick Cheney. These are legitimate concerns being raised by the appropriate international agencies.

If there is an innocent explanation, Iran should let the IAEA investigators clear this matter up.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,880
4,212
126
http://www.nti.rsvp1.com/gsn/article/iran-seen-eliminating-sections-suspected-nuclear-site/?mgh=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nti.org&amp;mgf=1

These concerns are not politically motivated BS from the likes of Dick Cheney. These are legitimate concerns being raised by the appropriate international agencies.

If there is an innocent explanation, Iran should let the IAEA investigators clear this matter up.
Now Dave, what have I said again and again? You must not voice a reasoned concern ;)

In all seriousness Iran either has been up to something or sure wants us to believe there is. It would be better for all for everything to come out.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,747
13,866
136
http://www.nti.rsvp1.com/gsn/article/iran-seen-eliminating-sections-suspected-nuclear-site/?mgh=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nti.org&amp;mgf=1

These concerns are not politically motivated BS from the likes of Dick Cheney. These are legitimate concerns being raised by the appropriate international agencies.

If there is an innocent explanation, Iran should let the IAEA investigators clear this matter up.
In other words, prove a negative- prove you're innocent, right?

Innocent of what, exactly? Anything we can claim to be "nuclear weapons related activity", obviously, and as if any of it can overcome the lack of of weapons grade materials to make the Big One...
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,880
4,212
126
In other words, prove a negative- prove you're innocent, right?

Innocent of what, exactly? Anything we can claim to be "nuclear weapons related activity", obviously, and as if any of it can overcome the lack of of weapons grade materials to make the Big One...
Since Iran is cooperating with the IAEA then they will have access right? When? When they bulldoze everything away? That would be a Saddam game and potentially fatal. You might bring up virtually anything, but that's hardly the point. They cooperate as the 5+1 sees fit or nasty things might happen. Not a good time to play chicken.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
You'd think if Iran had nothing to hide, they'd invite the IAEA in along with select media to film the IAEA being let in and say, We will have reps with you the entire time, however you are allowed wherever you feel you need to go. Have fun!

Somehow Iraq, and now Iran, didn't want to go that route. It's odd that these countries think they have something to hide given how low on the totem pole they are, I guess delusions of grandeur or something...

Chuck
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,747
13,866
136
Since Iran is cooperating with the IAEA then they will have access right? When? When they bulldoze everything away? That would be a Saddam game and potentially fatal. You might bring up virtually anything, but that's hardly the point. They cooperate as the 5+1 sees fit or nasty things might happen. Not a good time to play chicken.
I'm not the one who's brought up virtually anything, but rather the govts feeding information to the Security Council & the IAEA, causing loss of focus wrt the central issues of enrichment & nuclear weapons.

I really, really, really want somebody to explain how any nation can create nuclear weapons w/o weapons grade materials, or how Iran could create them in facilities & from LEU monitored by the IAEA. Once that's done, then I'll be easily convinced that the peripheral issues of the past amount to more than a small hill of beans.

It doesn't matter what Iran "really" wants or what efforts they made in the past wrt weapons research if they don't have the right stuff to make weapons. The IAEA assures us that they don't, and that they aren't making any as far as anybody can tell.

We can move forward from there, or we can mire the process in recriminations, suspicions & accusations about the past, continue to deny the dangerous reality of continuing to do so.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY