Topic awaiting preservation: Iran admits it has uranium and will process it.

Stunned...what the hell is going on in the world? Iran admits that it has uranium, and that it will process it for 'peaceful' means...Full Story here.

There goes the neighborhood.

quote:

---

Iran acknowledged yesterday for the first time that it had uranium ore reserves and that it would reprocess the spent fuel. But it insisted the nuclear programme was designed solely for civilian use.
The Iranian president, Mohammad Khatami, made the surprise admission only days before the arrival of international inspectors and follows lobbying by European governments to reveal details of its nuclear power project.

"Iran has discovered reserves and extracted uranium... we are determined to use nuclear technology for civilian purposes," Mr Khatami said in a televised speech.

The reformist president said the uranium had been extracted in the Savand area, 125 miles from the central city of Yazd, and processing facilities had been set up in the central cities of Isfahan and Kashan.

The US has accused Iran of planning to develop nuclear weapons. But the timing of yesterday's announcement indicated Iran may be trying to come clean over its nuclear programme ahead of inspections from the International Atomic Energy Agency later this month.

--The Guardian

---

Uranium for peace in Iran????
I hope it's for peace but i don't trust anyone in that area...

"Freedom of speech is by no means freedom to insult others" from the Razorart goodbye letter.

Iran+Uranium=peace (read piece) the piece that goes boom in a bomb


To be honest i wonder people are so stunned so many countries are getting close to becoming nuclear powers.

It was just a matter of time, if they have the resources they would develop it in time.

I just love the fact of the US.

I'm surprised they haven't accused Australia of trying to develop nuclear weapons.

'Well...we've had a plant at Lucas Heights in Sydney for a few years now...all we've developed are some glowing children.'

Are you by any chance aware of Iran's history, skaarjj?



I don't think anyone is too concerned about Australia...Iran is a little different.

[waggery] History? Why would anyone want to know anything about that when it comes to dealing with the here and now? [/waggery]

. . : slicePuzzle

Bugs: Now stop that waggery you'll have someone's eye out.

I am disappointed everyone is so cynical - they say it will be used for civilian purposes (the purpose of nuking civilians possibly??).

Nuclear power is a messy and expensive way of producing energy and it would be great if we had more well developed environmentally friendly technologies which we could offer as a way for developing countries to bypass the messy art of their own Industrial/Atomic Revolution. It would also be a great way to call their bluff

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

I'm personally shocked by the...responses, to this topic. Did everyone (except DL) 'sleep' through this part of history?

Iran sponsers most of the major terrorist groups in the middle east. Money, weapons, rhetoric. Very similar to the old communist party line in Russia (and we all know what came out of that...remember the cold war?). They didn't really get dangerous, until they got the Bomb.

Would Iran give a terrorist group a Bomb? If one considers, everything else they have done, then it is reasonable to say, yes. I'll bet my last ten dollars, that Israel is very concerned about this developement. It really wouldn't surprise me, if Israel pre-emps Iran...

Research this country's history people...because quite soon, you'll be hearing more from them...they actually started the radical Islam faith...anyone remember the fall of the Shah? And they have very good reasons to hate the west...and were one of the first middle-east countries to throw off the yoke of America...and the west. For that, they were subjected to one of the most brutal, vicious conflicts the region has ever seen...the Iraq/Iran war. Research this war, you'll be shocked and surprised to find out exactly what happened...Iran paid a very bitter price to defend themselves...and Iraq did this, with American backing...

And don't expect them to suddenly 'change'...and become nice, peaceful 'american' lovers...




WebShaman

Um, don't be so shocked, WS. I was under the impression that everyone (with the exception of Skaarjj) was being rather tongue-in-cheek...

Or did I miss something?

Suho1004: No I think you were spot on - although on a serious note if we don't work out alternatives to oil and nuclear power then we are going to keep doing this dance again and again and again.

And could people refrain from using:

quote:

---

pre-emps

---

as I fear Dubya may drop a big one down my chimmney. I'd recommend the following:

pre-empt

preempt

-------------------
Sorry WS this is a serious issue but beyond sending in the AEIA (or AEIOU or whatever the overly vowelled acronym is) and using diplomatic channels I'm not sure what the west can do - this kind of thing will keep growing and spreading.

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

Emps, $1.2 billion earmarked for hydrogen fuel cell development by the guy in the oil company's pocket. Certainly that's a nice bit to be getting on with. (did I get my Brit lingo correct?)

WS, what do you want us to say? I don't understand especially considering how the other thread progressed regarding Iraq.

I believe the situation of Iraq, is very different from that in Iran...but that is MHO, of course.

quote:

---

Emps, $1.2 billion earmarked for hydrogen fuel cell development by the guy in the oil company's pocket

---

Mmm...I'll believe it when I see it though

Though I read that, too, I'll believe it when I see it. With that much money, one could go into production...because the tchnology already exists...so what is Mr. Bush waiting for?

Making the tech marketable still has a ways to go and it requires subsidy if you want to see it on the streets sooner.

And I'm content to wait to see if the money really gets applied.

WS,

Ok, I accept that you see Iran differently than Iraq. Fine.

Are you suggesting we take some sort of military action against them? Or do you think a different approach would work? But more to the point, what do you think our objective should be towards Iran? Do you want to see the theocracy toppled and replaced?

Maybe it would be more interesting to compare goals rather than tactics at this stage. What do you think?

From what I know right now, I would say I want to see us support and stimulate an internal revolution there that I believe is on the brink of happening anyway. Many of the Iranian youth are far more friendly to the West and its ideals and are fed up with the current dictatorship. I think given the right backing *and* the demonstration of our resolve in Iraq will be enough to push Iran into a new era without us having to take any military action.

Well, since Israel is using the US military airstrips in Turkey, I believe that something will be done against Iran soon...but we will see.

It also seems like a bit of a double standard if we are preparsing to rip up and throw away nearly all of the major anti-nuclear proliferation agreements, treaties, etc.:
www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,898528,00.html

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

I don't think it's a double standard at all. In order for it to be so, that would mean we are talking about equals. There is a complete difference between the US, UK, or France having these weapons and say North Korea having them. It's really as simple as that.

I have absolutely ZERO fear of being nuked by France or the UK but I am sitting here on the West Coast of the continental United States in range of being nuked by the DPRK!!! I am worried about them and for darn good reason. And I am not willing to allow Iran the chance of doing the same.

It would be lovely if every nation on this planet were a responsible member of the community of nations but they are not. They never have been and probably never will be and until such time as you can make that a reality, we have to be willing to protect nations from attack by others.

I know it sucks but we live in a world governed by the aggressive use of force. No amount of international law or treaty can change that while nations, including the US, are unwilling to be bound by such agreements. There is absolutely no alternative ultimate method at this point of making the DPRK, Iran, Iraq, etc. behave in accordance with anyone's higher ideals of human rights and mutual respect except by the threat of force.

So when are we going to stop wringing our hands about these realities and get busy finding ways of making this world safer and more productive for all peoples?

I am gushing and ranting and none of this is directed at anyone here personally. I am real hungry right now but I am not emotional. Please take the ideas I have just put forth and regard them and please don't read any flames into it if possible.

Well, then what about the actual use of such weapons? I know the Bush administration has threatened their use...what if they actually get used? What type of signal does that send?

If this doesn't scare you, then I don't know what will...esp. this

quote:

---

On Iranian - North Korean Relations

Al-Sharq Al-Awsat: "You said that you participated in teaching and training courses abroad. Where was this?"

Zakiri: "I went to North Korea twice, as our relations with it are special. Over the years, we sent a number of groups of Revolutionary Guards personnel and security [forces personnel] to North Korea. Among those who received combat training were Revolutionary Guards Commander Rahim Safavi and his deputy Dhu-Al-Qadr. Among the personnel of the [Revolutionary] Guards were units of pilots who received training in flying and parachuting operations, among them Brigadier-General Kalibaf (now military forces commander). Our group included intelligence officers. The first time I went for 40 days and participated in special courses on psychological warfare and counter-espionage, and the second time, I stayed in North Korea again for 40 days and participated in a special course for protecting nuclear and other secret installations."

Al-Sharq Al-Awsat: "What are the nuclear installations for? Are there really nuclear installations?"

Zakiri: "I don’t intend to talk about them. These are matters relating to the security of my country. I am against the [conservative] minority but I am not against Iran. Iran is a great country and there is no doubt that its defense needs demand a solution that will prevent external aggression against it.

Iranian-Al-Qa'ida Relations

Al-Sharq Al-Awsat: "You say that you were in important security centers. It is natural that people ask you whether there really is a connection between Iran and Al-Qa'ida. And what do you say about Sa'ad Osama bin Laden (Osama bin Laden's son) being in Iran?" (4)

Zakiri: "The subject of the connection of the intelligence of the [Revolutionary] Guards, not of the [Iranian] government, with the Al-Qa'ida organization and other fundamentalist groups such as the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad goes back to the 1980s. After the assassination of [Egyptian president] Anwar Sadat, a number of Egyptians who were responsible for the crime came to us, and the [Revolutionary] Guards intelligence established relations with them. Later, we went to Lebanon, where we got acquainted with many non-Shiite revolutionary activists."

--Memri

---

There you have it...the Al-Qaeda/North Korea link, through Iran (which also is developing nuclear weapons, if they don't already have them). Why are we in Iraq, when this is so much more dangerous?

Don´t worry.
Iraq today, the whole world tomorrow.