Iran

Its been a while since much of real interest has happened with Iran. Just a lot of postulating back and forth. But today we may have something of real import. The UN has given the Iranians 30 days to get back to the negotiating table or suffer the consequences:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4859540.stm

More postulating, but more serious postulating.

"TEHRAN, Iran - Iran intends to move toward large-scale uranium enrichment involving 54,000 centrifuges, the country's deputy nuclear chief said Wednesday, signaling its resolve to expand a program the international community has insisted it halt.

Iran's president announced Tuesday the country had succeeded in enriching uranium on a small scale for the first time, using 164 centrifuges. The U.N. Security Council has demanded that Iran stop all enrichment activity because of suspicions the program's aim is to make nuclear weapons.

"We will expand uranium enrichment to industrial scale at Natanz," Deputy Nuclear Chief Mohammad Saeedi told state-run television Wednesday.

He said Iran has informed the International Atomic Energy Agency that it plans to install 3,000 centrifuges at Natanz by late 2006, then expand to 54,000 centrifuges, though he did not say when.

He said using 54,000 centrifuges will be able to produce enough enriched uranium to provide fuel for a 1,000-megawat nuclear power plant like the one Russia is currently putting the finishing touches on in southern Iran.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced the enrichment success Tuesday in a nationally televised ceremony, saying the country's nuclear ambitions are peaceful and warning the West that trying to force Iran to abandon enrichment would "cause an everlasting hatred in the hearts of Iranians."

But the announcement quickly raised condemnations from the United States, who said the claims "show that Iran is moving in the wrong direction." Russia also criticized the announcement Wednesday, with Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin saying, "We believe that this step is wrong. It runs counter to decisions of the IAEA and resolutions of the U.N. Security Council."


Now this is getting odd, and I'm finding myself mentally fighting for both sides of the argument.

"Maybe Iran is just looking to build nuclear power plants, which is clever, and I'm cool with that", says half my brain, while the other half is screaming "Ahhh! They're going to blow us all to hell!"

April 28th is shaping up to be a very important day. When Russia agrees with the US, you know something is up.

And Iran says that if they are able to focus more on nuclear power, it will free up more oil and resources for export. So they'll be a richer country. With more influence. And nuclear capabilities. Just what the world needs.

There's nothing good about this. I don't trust that "little fucker" as someone here called him, but also don't trust Bush's ability to strategize. And Bush doesn't trust the American people to hear the truth about his plans.

As Maureen Dowd summed it up in the NY Times this morning:


But we do have a problem here. And I don't believe that taking him out isn't going to solve much of anything.

endymion said:

Now this is getting odd, and I'm finding myself mentally fighting for both sides of the argument.

"Maybe Iran is just looking to build nuclear power plants, which is clever, and I'm cool with that", says half my brain, while the other half is screaming "Ahhh! They're going to blow us all to hell!"

Click to expand...

endy,

I have to agree with you here. When you think about it, it only makes sense for Iran (in most respects) to use nuclear power (I don't think they have much, if any, coal). People keep saying that, "Oh, they have all that oil", which is true. But, if you were the head of Iran, or any other similar country, would you really want to burn up your largest export and profit maker to make electricity? So it seems that there needs to be some room for accomodation here.

April 28th is shaping up to be a very important day. When Russia agrees with the US, you know something is up.

Click to expand...

I'm beginning to think the Russian plan (which would create the Uranium Iran needs in Russia) was probably the best option. But, from what I understand, Iran nixed that idea.

And Preferred,

There's nothing good about this. I don't trust that "little fucker" as someone here called him, but also don't trust Bush's ability to strategize. And Bush doesn't trust the American people to hear the truth about his plans.

Click to expand...

It seems that no one around the world trusts the guy. But I think he's probably a bit smarter than we give him credit for. The reason? I think he's baiting Bush and wants to take Bush right to the edge. He knows Bush has no credibility remaining in the world so he's seeing how far he can push him. And as an additional benefit (for Iran) he's keeping oil prices way beyond where they should be.

Min - My main wory with someone baiting Bush is that he's not a guy who doesn't bite. His growl turns to big scary teeth really quickly, and I think it's a dangerous game for the "little fucker" to play. It's like a midget slapping Andre the Giant across the face.

And this is something I didn't really need to know right now...

"(Bloomberg) -- Iran, which is defying United Nations Security Council demands to cease its nuclear program, may be capable of making a nuclear bomb within 16 days if it goes ahead with plans to install thousands of centrifuges at its Natanz plant, a U.S. State Department official said.

``Natanz was constructed to house 50,000 centrifuges,'' Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, told reporters today in Moscow. ``Using those 50,000 centrifuges they could produce enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 16 days.'"

16 days. That's not a long time.

mindido said:

I think he's probably a bit smarter than we give him credit for. The reason? I think he's baiting Bush and wants to take Bush right to the edge. He knows Bush has no credibility remaining in the world so he's seeing how far he can push him. And as an additional benefit (for Iran) he's keeping oil prices way beyond where they should be.

Click to expand...

Min, I just can't decide how much he's playing poker, and how much he's just being a complete idiot. I do not doubt for a minute that he wants Israel gone. He's very sincere about that. That's what makes him so hard to figure. He's smart enought to bluff the way you suggest, but he's also a little bit nuts.

endymion said:

Min - My main wory with someone baiting Bush is that he's not a guy who doesn't bite. His growl turns to big scary teeth really quickly, and I think it's a dangerous game for the "little fucker" to play. It's like a midget slapping Andre the Giant across the face.

Click to expand...

Here's what appears to be going on. Iran's PM (I won't even try and spell his name) is not really elected. Iran's mullah's first figure out who they like for the office (who will keep the theocracy in power) and then that person (or persons) is allowed to run and win. This has a lot of Iranians ticked (of course) so a large movement has grown in the country for a representative democracy with closer ties to the west. The mullahs and PM recognize that they are basically standing on the head of a pin. They go too far one way or the other and they could end up just like the Shah.

The mullahs also recognize that certain western countries (the US especially) are not trusted in the Middle East so one way of solidifying their power is to defy them. So thats basically what Iran is doing. The only way the mullahs can continue to hold onto power is to concentrate the peoples eyes elsewhere, to an outside source (its an old tactic, the Republicans are doing the same with the help of their mouthpiece Faux News).

So we've got to be very careful and smart here (fat chance with this administration). The mullahs basically want a holy war with the west, as they're probably going down either way. They either go out in a blaze of glory (with a holy war) or with a wimper (being tossed out by their own people.) So the answer appears to be to somehow support the populace that wants to get rid of the mullahs and help them do it.

I think this is a better alternative than an all out war because a war with Iran would be no "cakewalk". Its hard to say exactly what would happen, but a best guess would indicate that we may find ourselves fighting on a whole bunch of fronts. Not just three or four.

And this is something I didn't really need to know right now...

"(Bloomberg) -- Iran, which is defying United Nations Security Council demands to cease its nuclear program, may be capable of making a nuclear bomb within 16 days if it goes ahead with plans to install thousands of centrifuges at its Natanz plant, a U.S. State Department official said.

``Natanz was constructed to house 50,000 centrifuges,'' Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, told reporters today in Moscow. ``Using those 50,000 centrifuges they could produce enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 16 days.'"

16 days. That's not a long time.

Click to expand...

This is the typical BS being put out by this administration and Faux News. The problem? Iran doesn't have anywhere near 50,000 centrifuges! They may have a hundred. Also, the quality of the enrichment that they've achieved is very low. The best estimates I've seen suggest that they've been able to enrich their uranium by about 3%, which is good enough to think about using in a commercial nuclear power station but a long ways from using in a bomb (somewhere above 90% enrichment is needed for that). So, pretty much everyone that I've seen lately suggests that it will take Iran at least 3 to 5 years before they have weapons grade uranium.

Min, I just can't decide how much he's playing poker, and how much he's just being a complete idiot. I do not doubt for a minute that he wants Israel gone. He's very sincere about that. That's what makes him so hard to figure. He's smart enought to bluff the way you suggest, but he's also a little bit nuts.

Click to expand...

Preferred,

As I mentioned earlier, the PM is really just a figurehead. The real power in Iran are the mullahs. We figure out a way to get rid of them and the PM will be gone.

I really think that these mullahs recognize their frail position and have decided to go out in a blaze of glory. Basically, they want a war with the west because thats about the only thing the average Iranian (and arab) will get behind. So, for the mullahs, its either Armageddon, or being thrown out by their own people (a disgrace). The real question is, how will WE accommodate them?

We really need to keep our wits about us with this one.

if israel can have nuclear weapons ,why can`t iran have it too????

Please hold out your face so every democrat, republican, and anyone in between can slap you with an empty white glove sir.

alk11 said:

if israel can have nuclear weapons ,why can`t iran have it too????

Click to expand...

Ummmm....because Iran says one of their neighbors should be wiped off the face of the earth?

iran didn`t attack their neighbors!!!!
iran was victim of chemical weapons but they didn`t used it back!!!!!

let`s see who gave iraq all thet weapons !!!
do you wanna guess???

Has iran took territories of his neighbors???

ps
thank God i live in "good old Europe"

Sorry Alk. You wanted to know what made Iran so different from Israel. None of your ctyptic answers addressed the fact that Iran wants to wipe one of it's neighbors off the map. Israel has made no such claim that I'm aware of. Its a big difference and you didn't address it.

but they hold territories of their neighbors, not iran!!

and they have nuclear weapon !!!!!!!!!
why UN don`t send somebody to Inspect them?

ps
please do not get me wrong, i do not have anything against Jews !

alk11 said:

but they hold territories of their neighbors, not iran!!

Click to expand...

They took terrritories in 67 when Egypt and....who was it Syria?....were getting ready to invade them. They have since given some of it back, despite the fact that our friends at Hamas and several other of their neighbors want them anihilated. I just can't put that on the same plane with Iran wanting Israel wiped out because of nothing more then their religious fundamentalist hatred. It's not the same.

alk11 said:

and they have nuclear weapon !!!!!!!!!
why UN don`t send somebody to Inspect them?

Click to expand...

Why would anyone inspect them? We all know they have the bomb. They don't deny it.

alk11 said:

but they hold territories of their neighbors, not iran!!

Click to expand...

I'm not sure which territories your referring to here. The Sinai was returned to Egypt some years ago so you must be referring to the West Bank, which Israel won from Syria during the last Arab/Israeli conflict back in the 60's. That is a real tough nut to crack as its such a strategically important piece of land. Israel has made offers to return it (how seriously? I don't know) but, for one reason or another, the land is still in Israels hands. What I am sure of is that they won't give it up until they have significant assurances that they won't be attacked again from the West Bank. And I really can't blame them for that.

and they have nuclear weapon !!!!!!!!!

Click to expand...

I'm not actually sure that its been proven 100% that Israel has nukes. For a long time there was a real cloud around that question and I'm still not sure if thats been answered beyond a shadow of a doubt. Everyone "assumes" they have nukes (which I'd be surprised if they don't) but thats not saying that they absolutely do.

why UN don`t send somebody to Inspect them?

Click to expand...

Good question. I'd like to know the answer to that.

please do not get me wrong, i do not have anything against Jews !

Click to expand...

alk11, welcome to the misty, corrupt and controversial world of the middle east. More often than not, what you think you know, you really don't.

mindido said:

I'm not actually sure that its been proven 100% that Israel has nukes. For a long time there was a real cloud around that question and I'm still not sure if thats been answered beyond a shadow of a doubt. Everyone "assumes" they have nukes (which I'd be surprised if they don't) but thats not saying that they absolutely do.

Click to expand...

Min I had to Google that one. You're right. There is some ambiguity there though most Nuclear experts believe they're "in the club." And they are not particularly forthcoming about their nuclear program or capabilities.

Still, I just can't put their nuclear threat on the same level as Iran's. It's run by a fundamentalist nut case. The US might have actually been better off with Saddam in power. This guy scares me.

which territories???

let see what CIA has to say about territories:

http://geography.about.com/library/cia/blcisrael.htm

ps
thanks for your opinion & time !!!

Preferred User said:

This guy scares me.

Click to expand...

more then Bush???

alk11, simmer down son. Your little post and run tactics will not work against the great left and right minds of this thread.

Your tactis are kinda like showing up for a gun fight only with a knife.

alk11 said:

more then Bush???

Click to expand...

Yea, he really does....though Bush is scary. But he scares me way more than Israel, and that was your comparison when you started.

Texan said:

alk11, simmer down son.

Click to expand...

Tex doesn't mind a little disagreement if you have some facts and listen a bit. When he says things like "simmer down", he's usually reach'n for that ban ammo he keeps nearby.....