Iran 1 Step Closer to Nukes

[nullzero]

"WASHINGTON, Feb. 2 ? International nuclear investigators have confirmed that Iran is beginning to install equipment in the large underground chamber in Natanz, the center where Iranian officials have said they will move to industrial-scale enrichment of uranium, according to foreign diplomats and American officials."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/03/world/middleeast/03iran.html?ref=world

Something big is going to happen very soon. I know the U.S. and the espically Israel will never let a nuclear Iran happen. I am expecting in the next 4 months we may see a air strike and cruise missile strike on the nuclear sites. Time is ticking I believe we are on the verge of a expanded war very soon...

 

[jpeyton]

Fun stuff.

Hitting hardened underground targets with cruise missiles will be a challenge.

Natanz is one we know about. How many exist that we don't know about? You have to remember that Iran had their nuclear program hit with airstrikes decades before (by Israel), so they likely made contingencies for such things to happen again.

All in all, I see air strikes delaying Iran's progress by 6-12 months.

 

[conjur]

Diplomats in Vienna told The Associated Press that hundreds of technicians and laborers were ?working feverishly? at the Natanz facility, near Tehran, over the past week. The news agency said that by Thursday, pipes, wiring, control panels and air-conditioning had been installed ? setting the stage for hooking up the centrifuges that spin uranium into enriched levels.

The process can lead to making nuclear fuel for power plants, or for nuclear weapons if the uranium is enriched to higher levels. The United States and some European countries have accused Iran of having a clandestine weapons program, though Iran contends that its program is peaceful.

So, while the article headline implies centrifuges are being installed, that doesn't appear to be the case.

Also, looks like the US is trying to paint this as something more dire and evil than perhaps is really happening:

This weekend, ambassadors from several countries are invited by the Iranians to visit the plant at Isfahan, where Iran produces the uranium gas that is fed into centrifuges for enrichment. American officials dismissed the invitation as a diplomatic stunt, meant to create a false sense of openness about the program.

Oh, and btw, here's a little reminder that even 30 years ago, Iran was trying to build nuclear power because the "oil is running out"

 

[imported_Shivetya]

don't worry, they will only detonate peaceful nuclear bombs, instead of radioactive slag and a crater you will get 72 virgins and poppies.

i know the left hates Bush and that is their right, but damn Iran is run by a bunch of madmen who have never shown restraint and their official talk is anything but peaceful.


When the first Iranian nuke goes off outside of their country what will you say then?

 

[compuwiz1]

Originally posted by: Shivetya
don't worry, they will only detonate peaceful nuclear bombs, instead of radioactive slag and a crater you will get 72 virgins and poppies.

i know the left hates Bush and that is their right, but damn Iran is run by a bunch of madmen who have never shown restraint and their official talk is anything but peaceful.


When the first Iranian nuke goes off outside of their country what will you say then?

Blame the liberals and the conservatives?

 

[Jhhnn]

Even the NYT publishes Admin agitprop. So much for the so-called "Liberal Media".... with Schulte's remarks being particularly disingenuous. IAEA inspectors are onsite at every operating Iranian facility, as required. Given that Natanz is not yet operational, or even close, there's no need for inspectors...

and this bit, from jpeyton-

"Natanz is one we know about. How many exist that we don't know about?"

Well, if they had ones we didn't know about, and wanted to keep their program "secret", why would they move ahead with Natanz, which will be under IAEA scrutiny, rather than at their "secret" facilities? Make sense out of that, if you can...

The Iranians, and all the other signatories to the NPT, have the right to enrichment under IAEA supervision. No matter what else is being said, nobody is claiming that the Iranians aren't doing what they signed up for when they accepted the NPT years ago. They didn't sign up for open-ended regulations designed to prevent them from exercising that option, and neither did anybody else.

A deal's a deal, until you want to welch on it, which is what the Bush Admin is trying to accomplish wrt the Iranian program. No matter what level of compliance is offered, there'll always be some new hurdle, some set of demands designed to prevent the deal going through. Just the way it is.

Shortly, I'm sure, we'll get the whole "appeasement" song and dance... There's only one 800lb gorilla in international politics, and that's the US under the Bush Admin. And everybody has been working very hard to appease that monster- from the IAEA to the security council, and even the Iranians. But there's none possible- the Admin has their hearts set on regime change in Iran, and will settle for nothing less, no matter what means are required to reach that end... they're just trying to whip up public sentiment to support their actions.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: conjur
Oh, and btw, here's a little reminder that even 30 years ago, Iran was trying to build nuclear power because the "oil is running out"

We were out of oil well over 30 years ago, how come we aren't fully on Nookeela power?

 

[MadRat]

They'll use a penetrator tipped with a nuke and contend it was their uranium enrichment that caused the explosion. Dumb people will believe it.

 

[rickn]

there really is no stopping Iran, they have the technical knowledge at this point, unless we go in and kill all their scientiests as well. if we bomb, they just reconstitute and go further underground. Regime change would be good, but attacking Iran won't bring that about. If anything all iranians will just rally around the gov't and then really desire nukes. then you have a whole country who wants nukes.

 

[MadRat]

Iran is the France of the middle east. They might be strong in some highly technical areas, but lone wolfs eventually will need outside help to survive.

 

[rickn]

Originally posted by: MadRat
Iran is the France of the middle east. They might be strong in some highly technical areas, but lone wolfs eventually will need outside help to survive.

as long as iran has tons of oil and natural gas, they'll always have friends in high places. why do you think the Russians continuously pat them on the back, good job.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: conjur
Oh, and btw, here's a little reminder that even 30 years ago, Iran was trying to build nuclear power because the "oil is running out"

We were out of oil well over 30 years ago, how come we aren't fully on Nookeela power?

<sarcasm mode>
It's obviously the fault of NIMBY liberal commies
</sarcasm mode>

 

[Aimster]

U.N has cameras setup at this facility.

 

[Rainsford]

Maybe I'm just not watching enough Fox News scare-a-thons...but is there actually any proof that Iran's nuclear ambitions are anything other than peaceful. Obviously we'd be silly to trust them, but a truly peaceful nuclear program would look EXACTLY like what they are doing now...yet people are acting like they are conducting nuclear bomb testing at this very moment. Yes, I know, they are all terrible people who want to destroy America and all that, but the actual evidence seems in rather short supply.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Maybe I'm just not watching enough Fox News scare-a-thons...but is there actually any proof that Iran's nuclear ambitions are anything other than peaceful. Obviously we'd be silly to trust them, but a truly peaceful nuclear program would look EXACTLY like what they are doing now...yet people are acting like they are conducting nuclear bomb testing at this very moment. Yes, I know, they are all terrible people who want to destroy America and all that, but the actual evidence seems in rather short supply.

Ya know, usually it takes a generation for history to repeat itself.

The neocons just took us through a wormhole and are doing it in less than 5 years. Or maybe that was a rabbit hole....

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Maybe I'm just not watching enough Fox News scare-a-thons...but is there actually any proof that Iran's nuclear ambitions are anything other than peaceful. Obviously we'd be silly to trust them, but a truly peaceful nuclear program would look EXACTLY like what they are doing now...yet people are acting like they are conducting nuclear bomb testing at this very moment. Yes, I know, they are all terrible people who want to destroy America and all that, but the actual evidence seems in rather short supply.

What raises the major flag to many nations is that Iran is investing heavily in an ever expanding Uranium enrichment program while the nation does not have a single operational nuclear power reactor.

Uranium enrichment if of course the fastest way to a weapon since the relatively sophisticated implosion system is not required to achieve critical mass unlike Plutonium nor the reactors to produce said Plutonium.

 

[2Xtreme21]

Originally posted by: Shivetya
don't worry, they will only detonate peaceful nuclear bombs, instead of radioactive slag and a crater you will get 72 virgins and poppies.

i know the left hates Bush and that is their right, but damn Iran is run by a bunch of madmen who have never shown restraint and their official talk is anything but peaceful.


When the first Iranian nuke goes off outside of their country what will you say then?

Mmm, it's begun. Link Iran with fundamentalist muslim extremists. Good job, you learned well!

Edit: In response to your 2nd inane comment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran

You should read up on the power structure in that country and realize that big bad Ahmadinejad has no power to make decisions for himself.

 

[Aimster]

Iran is going to detonate a nuclear bomb where and why?

 

[brxndxn]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Maybe I'm just not watching enough Fox News scare-a-thons...but is there actually any proof that Iran's nuclear ambitions are anything other than peaceful. Obviously we'd be silly to trust them, but a truly peaceful nuclear program would look EXACTLY like what they are doing now...yet people are acting like they are conducting nuclear bomb testing at this very moment. Yes, I know, they are all terrible people who want to destroy America and all that, but the actual evidence seems in rather short supply.

They've fvcking said they're planning on making nuclear bombs. And, their fvcking president has said Israel and America will be destroyed.

If someone tells me 'I'm gonna hit you', I punch him first. I do not wait for his fist to come flying at my face.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Maybe I'm just not watching enough Fox News scare-a-thons...but is there actually any proof that Iran's nuclear ambitions are anything other than peaceful. Obviously we'd be silly to trust them, but a truly peaceful nuclear program would look EXACTLY like what they are doing now...yet people are acting like they are conducting nuclear bomb testing at this very moment. Yes, I know, they are all terrible people who want to destroy America and all that, but the actual evidence seems in rather short supply.

What raises the major flag to many nations is that Iran is investing heavily in an ever expanding Uranium enrichment program while the nation does not have a single operational nuclear power reactor.

Uranium enrichment if of course the fastest way to a weapon since the relatively sophisticated implosion system is not required to achieve critical mass unlike Plutonium nor the reactors to produce said Plutonium.

Perhaps I'm not versed enough in nuclear physics to get the point, but it would seem like they would need to enrich Uranium BEFORE being able to produce a working nuclear power plant. As I understand what's been revealed to the public (which could always be wrong of course), their investment isn't so much about quantity as it is about quality. At this point they are simply trying to enrich it to the point where it could work in ANY kind of nuclear reaction, whether in a power plant or in a bomb. It's not like they are making vast quantities without using it in nuclear power plants. Like I said, while they may not be trustworthy, it seems like the path they are on would be the same regardless of their end goals of either making a bomb or nuclear power plants.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: brxndxn

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Maybe I'm just not watching enough Fox News scare-a-thons...but is there actually any proof that Iran's nuclear ambitions are anything other than peaceful. Obviously we'd be silly to trust them, but a truly peaceful nuclear program would look EXACTLY like what they are doing now...yet people are acting like they are conducting nuclear bomb testing at this very moment. Yes, I know, they are all terrible people who want to destroy America and all that, but the actual evidence seems in rather short supply.

They've fvcking said they're planning on making nuclear bombs. And, their fvcking president has said Israel and America will be destroyed.

If someone tells me 'I'm gonna hit you', I punch him first. I do not wait for his fist to come flying at my face.

They did, huh. I must have missed that. I've certainly heard the rhetoric about "destroying America and Israel", but words are cheap, especially in that part of the world. And as far as promising to make nuclear weapons, I don't think THAT has ever been said.

Edit: As for your "self-defense" strategy, that is, with all due respect, a damn stupid approach to life. Are you telling me you go around hitting everyone who has ever talked trash in your direction? Like I said, words are cheap, and while I'd have trouble remembering all the times someone got in my face, I can count on one hand the number of times that trash talking has escalated into an actual fight. You're approach assumes everyone is some sort of violent lunatic who will always back up their words with actions, even if you see no sign on them doing so. But what you're really doing is making sure that EVERY conflict escalates as far as possible...something that wouldn't happen under most circumstances, on either a personal or nation-state level.

A far better approach is to really be able to tell the point at which you've crossed the point of no return, and that violence is the only option. "Attack first, just to be sure" is the kind of stupid-ass bullshit that causes more problems than it solves.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Maybe I'm just not watching enough Fox News scare-a-thons...but is there actually any proof that Iran's nuclear ambitions are anything other than peaceful. Obviously we'd be silly to trust them, but a truly peaceful nuclear program would look EXACTLY like what they are doing now...yet people are acting like they are conducting nuclear bomb testing at this very moment. Yes, I know, they are all terrible people who want to destroy America and all that, but the actual evidence seems in rather short supply.

What raises the major flag to many nations is that Iran is investing heavily in an ever expanding Uranium enrichment program while the nation does not have a single operational nuclear power reactor.

Uranium enrichment if of course the fastest way to a weapon since the relatively sophisticated implosion system is not required to achieve critical mass unlike Plutonium nor the reactors to produce said Plutonium.

Perhaps I'm not versed enough in nuclear physics to get the point, but it would seem like they would need to enrich Uranium BEFORE being able to produce a working nuclear power plant. As I understand what's been revealed to the public (which could always be wrong of course), their investment isn't so much about quantity as it is about quality. At this point they are simply trying to enrich it to the point where it could work in ANY kind of nuclear reaction, whether in a power plant or in a bomb. It's not like they are making vast quantities without using it in nuclear power plants. Like I said, while they may not be trustworthy, it seems like the path they are on would be the same regardless of their end goals of either making a bomb or nuclear power plants.

Reactor grade uranium is available form a number of sources, Russia most applicable here. Iran is finally coming close (by that I mean sometime in the next 5 years, maybe) to getting their only reactor online. They have been working on it for 30 years or so off and on. They have let no contracts to build other plants which typically takes 5 years or more once the contractors are told to start.

Normal reactor grade fuel is typically only in the single digit % of U235 content for light water reactors. Given the reported size of Iran's enrichment efforts concluding they are likely trying to build the bomb isn't much of a reach.

 

[Sinsear]

Originally posted by: brxndxn

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Maybe I'm just not watching enough Fox News scare-a-thons...but is there actually any proof that Iran's nuclear ambitions are anything other than peaceful. Obviously we'd be silly to trust them, but a truly peaceful nuclear program would look EXACTLY like what they are doing now...yet people are acting like they are conducting nuclear bomb testing at this very moment. Yes, I know, they are all terrible people who want to destroy America and all that, but the actual evidence seems in rather short supply.

They've fvcking said they're planning on making nuclear bombs. And, their fvcking president has said Israel and America will be destroyed.

If someone tells me 'I'm gonna hit you', I punch him first. I do not wait for his fist to come flying at my face.

I'm not a fan of Iran by any means, but they never said they are planning on making nuclear weapons. They have said on a consistent basis that they are developing nuclear power plants and technology for peaceful purposes.

But they (the jackass dictator of that country) have frequently called for the demise and annihilation of Israel and the US.

 

[brxndxn]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: brxndxn

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Maybe I'm just not watching enough Fox News scare-a-thons...but is there actually any proof that Iran's nuclear ambitions are anything other than peaceful. Obviously we'd be silly to trust them, but a truly peaceful nuclear program would look EXACTLY like what they are doing now...yet people are acting like they are conducting nuclear bomb testing at this very moment. Yes, I know, they are all terrible people who want to destroy America and all that, but the actual evidence seems in rather short supply.

They've fvcking said they're planning on making nuclear bombs. And, their fvcking president has said Israel and America will be destroyed.

If someone tells me 'I'm gonna hit you', I punch him first. I do not wait for his fist to come flying at my face.

They did, huh. I must have missed that. I've certainly heard the rhetoric about "destroying America and Israel", but words are cheap, especially in that part of the world. And as far as promising to make nuclear weapons, I don't think THAT has ever been said.

Edit: As for your "self-defense" strategy, that is, with all due respect, a damn stupid approach to life. Are you telling me you go around hitting everyone who has ever talked trash in your direction? Like I said, words are cheap, and while I'd have trouble remembering all the times someone got in my face, I can count on one hand the number of times that trash talking has escalated into an actual fight. You're approach assumes everyone is some sort of violent lunatic who will always back up their words with actions, even if you see no sign on them doing so. But what you're really doing is making sure that EVERY conflict escalates as far as possible...something that wouldn't happen under most circumstances, on either a personal or nation-state level.

A far better approach is to really be able to tell the point at which you've crossed the point of no return, and that violence is the only option. "Attack first, just to be sure" is the kind of stupid-ass bullshit that causes more problems than it solves.

I said "If someone tells me 'I'm gonna hit you', I punch him first. I do not wait for his fist to come flying at my face" specifically. I did not say I punch a guy for trash talking.. I can call you a dumb sh1t idiot all day without expecting you to hit me. You can call me whatever you want all day and I won't hit you... until you say you are going to cause me physical harm. "I'm gonna hit you." is a statement that threatens my very being. So, you'd get hit for it..

Feel free to respond with whatever you want. But your first tactic of raising my specific statement up a level to a blanket statement in order to argue with me makes me very uninterested in even bothering to argue with you. 'Do not argue with an idiot, lest you be an idiot.' -- Proverbs

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Maybe I'm just not watching enough Fox News scare-a-thons...but is there actually any proof that Iran's nuclear ambitions are anything other than peaceful. Obviously we'd be silly to trust them, but a truly peaceful nuclear program would look EXACTLY like what they are doing now...yet people are acting like they are conducting nuclear bomb testing at this very moment. Yes, I know, they are all terrible people who want to destroy America and all that, but the actual evidence seems in rather short supply.

What raises the major flag to many nations is that Iran is investing heavily in an ever expanding Uranium enrichment program while the nation does not have a single operational nuclear power reactor.

Uranium enrichment if of course the fastest way to a weapon since the relatively sophisticated implosion system is not required to achieve critical mass unlike Plutonium nor the reactors to produce said Plutonium.

Perhaps I'm not versed enough in nuclear physics to get the point, but it would seem like they would need to enrich Uranium BEFORE being able to produce a working nuclear power plant. As I understand what's been revealed to the public (which could always be wrong of course), their investment isn't so much about quantity as it is about quality. At this point they are simply trying to enrich it to the point where it could work in ANY kind of nuclear reaction, whether in a power plant or in a bomb. It's not like they are making vast quantities without using it in nuclear power plants. Like I said, while they may not be trustworthy, it seems like the path they are on would be the same regardless of their end goals of either making a bomb or nuclear power plants.

Reactor grade uranium is available form a number of sources, Russia most applicable here. Iran is finally coming close (by that I mean sometime in the next 5 years, maybe) to getting their only reactor online. They have been working on it for 30 years or so off and on. They have let no contracts to build other plants which typically takes 5 years or more once the contractors are told to start.

Normal reactor grade fuel is typically only in the single digit % of U235 content for light water reactors. Given the reported size of Iran's enrichment efforts concluding they are likely trying to build the bomb isn't much of a reach.

Well I'd suggest that maybe they want to be more energy independent, enriching their own rather than buying from Russia. I do realize that the percentage needed for reactors is less than that required for nuclear weapons, but last I heard, they weren't getting very close to reaching the purity needed for a nuclear weapon. In fact, they were barely into what I understand is the acceptable range for reactor fuel.

I'm not trying to be an apologist for the Iranians by any means, I'm just suggesting that the imminent doom forecasted by a lot of folks seems a little premature.