Iran, six world powers clinch breakthrough nuclear deal

[rudeguy]

Well what? So far we have stories from a tabloid and an ultra right wing "news" site.

I'd be interested to hear about what is actually going on from a credible news source, unfortunately I haven't seen one yet.

yea...been a while since I've seen a credible news source as well


I'll be here all week folks! Don't forget to tip your waitress

 

[yllus]

When Americans talk about your nation or leader not getting respect, you sound like teenage dorks. Other nations don't care or base their decisions on how much they respect or even fear you. It's all about power, military or financial.

In this situation, nobody but Iran has much in the way of power. The only thing that would stop them from getting a bomb is a proper invasion, and nobody has the stomach for that. So quit your whining about your supposed respect level in the international community. You never had any.

 

[michal1980]

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13920911000972

 

[fskimospy]

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13920911000972

Right, but what does this have to do with the terms of the deal? From everything I've read they are light water reactors, which makes them unsuitable for making weapons. ie: exactly the sort of reactors that we want countries to be building.

 

[EagleKeeper]

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13920911000972

Was Iran stating over the past 5-10 years that they were only doing nuclear enrichment for internal power and medical research.

Seems like they did not have their stories straight

 

[rudeguy]

Well what? So far we have stories from a tabloid and an ultra right wing "news" site.

I'd be interested to hear about what is actually going on from a credible news source, unfortunately I haven't seen one yet.

Right, but what does this have to do with the terms of the deal? From everything I've read they are light water reactors, which makes them unsuitable for making weapons. ie: exactly the sort of reactors that we want countries to be building.

Keep on digging

 

[fskimospy]

Keep on digging

Huh?

Maybe it would be easier if you told me what you think these news stories are indicative of. The only thing I've seen is a tabloid piece that didn't know what it was talking about and the construction of a light water reactor, which isn't generally suitable for weapons production.

I get the feeling like you guys don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Pens1566]

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/R40094.pdf

You made the claim. You can either list the violations or fail in your claim. I'm not reading an entire document on some fishing expedition that will do nothing but waste my time.

 

[rudeguy]

Huh?

Maybe it would be easier if you told me what you think these news stories are indicative of. The only thing I've seen is a tabloid piece that didn't know what it was talking about and the construction of a light water reactor, which isn't generally suitable for weapons production.

I get the feeling like you guys don't know what you're talking about.

http://freebeacon.com/iran-white-house-lying-about-details-of-nuke-deal/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-deal-as-iran-protests-white-house-statement/
http://www.njnewsday.com/national/1...ing-is-agreed-until-everything-is-agreed.html
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/iran-nuclear-fact-lying/2013/11/26/id/538883


The deal:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/24/iran-nuclear-agreement-the-key-points

 

[fskimospy]

http://freebeacon.com/iran-white-house-lying-about-details-of-nuke-deal/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-deal-as-iran-protests-white-house-statement/
http://www.njnewsday.com/national/1...ing-is-agreed-until-everything-is-agreed.html
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/iran-nuclear-fact-lying/2013/11/26/id/538883


The deal:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/24/iran-nuclear-agreement-the-key-points

Okay? So what does a light water reactor have to do with that?

 

[EagleKeeper]

You made the claim. You can either list the violations or fail in your claim. I'm not reading an entire document on some fishing expedition that will do nothing but waste my time.

Whether Iran has violated the NPT is unclear. The treaty does not contain a mechanism for
determining that a state-party has violated its obligations. Moreover, there does not appear to be a
formal procedure for determining such violations. An NPT Review Conference would, however,
be one venue for NPT states-parties to make such a determination.
The U.N. Security Council has never declared Iran to be in violation of the NPT; neither the
council nor the U.N. General Assembly has a responsibility to adjudicate treaty violations.
However, the lack of a ruling by the council on Iran’s compliance with the NPT has apparently
had little practical effect because, as noted, the council has taken action in response to the IAEA
Board of Governors’ determination that Iran has violated its safeguards agreement.
Iran’s violations of its safeguards agreement appear to constitute violations of Article III, which
requires NPT non-nuclear-weapon states-parties to accept IAEA safeguards, in accordance with
the agency’s statue, “for the exclusive purpose of verification of the fulfillment of its obligations
assumed under this Treaty with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful
uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.”Tehran may also have violated provisions of Article II which state that non-nuclear-weapon
states-parties shall not “manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear
explosive devices” or “seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons or
other nuclear explosive devices.”
As noted, the IAEA is continuing to investigate evidence of what then-IAEA Director-General
Mohamed ElBaradei described in June 2008 as “possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear
programme.” Such activities may indicate that Tehran has violated both Article II provisions
described above. Moreover, a November 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) stated that
“until fall 2003, Iranian military entities were working under government direction to develop
nuclear weapons.”41 This past program could be a violation of Article II, although the estimate
does not provide any detail about the program. Nevertheless, the IAEA has never reported that
Iran has attempted to develop nuclear weapons.
Despite the lack of such an IAEA conclusion, a 2005 State Department report regarding states’
compliance with nonproliferation agreements argued that the country had violated Article II of
the NPT:
39 GOV/2013/27.
40 Portions of this section are based on interviews with U.N. and State Department officials.
41 Available at http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf. Subsequent U.S. official statements have
been consistent with the NIE.
Iran’s Nuclear Program: Tehran’s Compliance with International Obligations
Congressional Research Service 11
The breadth of Iran’s nuclear development efforts, the secrecy and deceptions with which
they have been conducted for nearly 20 years, its redundant and surreptitious procurement
channels, Iran’s persistent failure to comply with its obligations to report to the IAEA and to
apply safeguards to such activities, and the lack of a reasonable economic justification for
this program leads us to conclude that Iran is pursuing an effort to manufacture nuclear
weapons, and has sought and received assistance in this effort in violation of Article II of the
NPT.42
The report also stated that Iran’s “weapons program combines elements” of Tehran’s declared
nuclear activities, as well as suspected “undeclared fuel cycle and other activities that may exist,
including those that may be run solely be the military.”
The State Department’s reasoning appears to be based on an interpretation of the NPT which
holds that a wide scope of nuclear activities could constitute violations of Article II. The 2005
report states that assessments regarding Article II compliance “must look at the totality of the
facts, including judgments as to” a state-party’s “purpose in undertaking the nuclear activities in
question.” The report also includes a list of activities which could constitute such noncompliance.
43

Gist is, no one at the UN is "authorized" or has the responsibility to declare if a country is in violation

 

[Jhhnn]

Gist is, no one at the UN is "authorized" or has the responsibility to declare if a country is in violation

The gist is that there has been a lot of speculation & fear mongering about supposed, suspected, alleged it-could-have-happened "nuclear weapons related activities", none of which mean jack shit if the Iranians never produce weapons grade material. There is no credible evidence that they have. It's a total red herring. The IAEA has said the opposite, that there has been no weapons grade production or diversion detected at their monitored enrichment facilities. IAEA credibility wrt the technical aspects of their job remains unquestioned.

The whole point of an agreement is to expand the IAEA's ability to monitor nuclear materials wrt Iran's planned reactors so that they can deter & detect any military diversions should they occur. The US & the rest of the world really have no legitimate interests beyond that & safe reactor operation.

 

[AViking]

The fear mongering and propaganda in this thread is astounding. Get your heads checked and stop linking to garbage sources like foxnews and dailymail.

 

[EagleKeeper]

The gist is that there has been a lot of speculation & fear mongering about supposed, suspected, alleged it-could-have-happened "nuclear weapons related activities", none of which mean jack shit if the Iranians never produce weapons grade material. There is no credible evidence that they have. It's a total red herring. The IAEA has said the opposite, that there has been no weapons grade production or diversion detected at their monitored enrichment facilities. IAEA credibility wrt the technical aspects of their job remains unquestioned.

The whole point of an agreement is to expand the IAEA's ability to monitor nuclear materials wrt Iran's planned reactors so that they can deter & detect any military diversions should they occur. The US & the rest of the world really have no legitimate interests beyond that & safe reactor operation.

And Iran has not allowed anyone to completely verify what they are doing; hence the original sanctions. All those spinners that Iran had and were attempting to obtain more; well over what was needed for research.
And they do not have a light reactor operational but were working on a heavy reactor.
Then the amount of 20%+ enrichment; it was more than enough for their declared needs.

Quite a few loose threads dangling around that on their own might be harmless; but when taken together paints a different picture.

 

[Jhhnn]

And Iran has not allowed anyone to completely verify what they are doing; hence the original sanctions. All those spinners that Iran had and were attempting to obtain more; well over what was needed for research.
And they do not have a light reactor operational but were working on a heavy reactor.
Then the amount of 20%+ enrichment; it was more than enough for their declared needs.

Quite a few loose threads dangling around that on their own might be harmless; but when taken together paints a different picture.

Iran has not agreed to anything beyond the original version of the NPT, which they accepted wrt production of LEU.

All of the other so-called "issues" are completely peripheral, distractions. If Iran never produces weapons grade materials, they'll never make weapons. Any agreement will be geared to making that reality.

It doesn't matter how much 20% LEU we think the Iranians should produce. It's still LEU, and it's entirely within bounds for them to do so under IAEA supervision. In producing & stockpiling it at their hardened Fordow facility, they called the bluff of the US & Israel, forced us to get real & reasonable. It'd be not too difficult to further refine that to weapons grade provided with reason to do so, like attacking them.

Therefore, attack is out of the question. They made it that way on purpose. It was entirely rational that they should do so. Their willingness to reduce those stockpiles is an indication that they believe they won't need them once negotiations are complete.

There is no reason to believe that the IAEA can't devise an effective oversight protocol wrt the Iranians' nearly completed heavy water reactor. They already do so at several other locations around the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_reactors

We don't need the fear mongering around it in the slightest. What we need is a safe & sane agreement that allows verifiable non-weaponized nuclear development for Iran. Nobody's going to stop them, so we need to make the best of it.

 

[cabri]

Iran Throws Monkey Wrench Into Nuclear Deal
http://news.yahoo.com/iran-throws-monkey-wrench-nuclear-deal-003225591.html

Iran has thrown up new roadblocks to reaching a deal with the P5+1 world powers over its illicit nuclear program ended Friday in arguments and confrontations when the Iranian team presented their country’s new “red lines,” diminishing any hope by the Obama administration to claim victory in its approach to Iran’s nuclear ambitions, according to reports from Iran.

The red lines that the Iranian delegation presented, as stated by Shariatmadari, are:
• The expansion of Iranian nuclear research and development.
• The acceptance of Iran’s need for enrichment on a level that feeds the need of the country (the country has over 19,000 centrifuges, far more than is needed for peaceful nuclear purposes, and would like to expand).
• The preservation of the Arak heavy-water plant (the plant once operational could produce plutonium and serve the ruling clerics with a second path to nuclear weapons).
• No interference or limitation to the country’s military and defensive measures (the Islamic regime is under U.N. sanctions for developing ballistic missiles and it currently holds the largest missile stockpile in the Middle East with ranges capable of reaching as far as Europe).
• The removal of all sanctions at once as opposed to step-by-step relief (the U.N. resolutions and sanctions in place are the results of efforts by several U.S. administrations and over a decade of negotiations).

According to a source within the regime’s intelligence community, the leadership will not give up its nuclear ambitions, and the Revolutionary Guards see themselves as the dominating power in the Middle East and beyond. They believe that the Obama administration will not engage militarily and that the regime needs to weather the sanctions regime, which has already cracked due to the initial Geneva agreement.

We don't need the fear mongering around it in the slightest. What we need is a safe & sane agreement that allows verifiable non-weaponized nuclear development for Iran. Nobody's going to stop them, so we need to make the best of it.

So was Iran was playing the West?
Get concessions, draw the line and expect more concessions from Obama/West to ensure that politically, everyone looks like something has been accomplished.

 

[soccerballtux]

yikes 20k centrifuges. only need 8-12k set up in cascade configuration to refine enough u238.

we're willing to sell them 20% refined uranium all day, in fact to any country...why isn't this good enough for them if they really want it for power generation? oh, other kind of power generation...

how about we teach them about thorium reactors?

they sure have lost a lot of face with this deal

 

[Jhhnn]

Iran Throws Monkey Wrench Into Nuclear Deal
http://news.yahoo.com/iran-throws-monkey-wrench-nuclear-deal-003225591.html






So was Iran was playing the West?
Get concessions, draw the line and expect more concessions from Obama/West to ensure that politically, everyone looks like something has been accomplished.

The Daily Squaller? Really? Speculating, exaggerating & spreading FUD as far as possible, of course.

That's not a source- that's a rag.

 

[DCal430]

If a known terrorist state like Israel has nukes, then why not Iran or even North Korea.

 

[michal1980]

Just as predicate: Iran lies.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/report-iran-secretly-continuing-nuclear-weapons-work/

Once again liberals brain defect cant see reality.

 

[fskimospy]

Just as predicate: Iran lies.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/report-iran-secretly-continuing-nuclear-weapons-work/

Once again liberals brain defect cant see reality.

Do you know who the international committee in search of justice is? They are not exactly an impartial source.

Once again, you take whatever information fits what you want to believe. Brain defect, indeed.

 

[michal1980]

Do you know who the international committee in search of justice is? They are not exactly an impartial source.

Once again, you take whatever information fits what you want to believe. Brain defect, indeed.

Do you just refuse to listen to anything that doesn't fit your beliefs? The response you gave is a canned lib response, dont like the message attack the messenger.

 

[fskimospy]

Do you just refuse to listen to anything that doesn't fit your beliefs? The response you gave is a canned lib response, dont like the message attack the messenger.

No, I look at all the available information and I look at where it came from with a critical eye.

Someday hopefully you're able to do the same. I'm sure you didn't spend even one second looking into the source of that report because it told you what you wanted to hear.

 

[K1052]

Just as predicate: Iran lies.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/report-iran-secretly-continuing-nuclear-weapons-work/

Once again liberals brain defect cant see reality.

None of this is new information to people who've been paying the slightest bit of attention. As a condition to a final deal Iran has to cease and disclose all these activities...one of the major points of negotiation. The US knows they have them, the Iranians know we know. The question is what Iran gets in trade for it.

You're just feeding off of people who have political interests against a deal coming to fruition to reinforce your own beliefs.

 

[michal1980]

No, I look at all the available information and I look at where it came from with a critical eye.

Someday hopefully you're able to do the same. I'm sure you didn't spend even one second looking into the source of that report because it told you what you wanted to hear.

LOL. right...

Your critical liberal filter.