January 02, 2006
Iran Has Uranium Separation Machinery
(Tehran, Iran) This isn't good news.
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
From DailyTimes.com:
Iran said on Sunday it had developed machinery to separate uranium from its ore, part of the Islamic state's ongoing drive to become self-sufficient in nuclear technology.Although the Iranians deny it, they have been accused of developing a nuclear weapons program. Their frequent belligerent words, coupled with the threat of having a nuclear weapon and a missile delivery system, are not going unnoticed. I wonder how much longer the international community is going to just watch. My guess? Not much longer.The mixer-settler machinery was developed by Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation (IAEO), state television said.
"Unfortunately, because of the problems that exist, it was not possible for us to buy this machine from abroad and we had to build it domestically. Fortunately, we succeeded," an unidentified IAEO official said.
Companion post at Interested-Participant.
Posted by: Mike Pechar at
10:22 PM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 145 words, total size 1 kb.
1
The scary thing to me is that it doesn't look like they've got a plan; or if they do, everyone clearly isn't on board. Diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggy!" while you reach for your stick. Calling for all dogs to be wiped from the face of the Earth is unwise until you have that stick firmly in hand.
Posted by: ShannonKW at January 02, 2006 11:05 PM (dT1MB)
2
I think the best way to win this nuclear war for the United States and the world is not to send one of the US allies such as Turkey or Saudi Arabia to knock Iran's nuclear facility, but to topple the regime from within. If the Allies strike, then Iran will respond with a "smashing" blow to Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Israel. And they would strike back, and then Iran's allies would step in to secure their interest : Russia and China. This is surely the predicted scene of WW3. Now the solution is to support the people of Iran to elect a more educated and democratic regime that would responsibly halt its nuclear process with economic rewards from the US. The majority of the Iranian people are sick of this government and are ready for the long awaited democracy. The current fundamental regime is not up for any reasonable talks and they will hug their bombs with all their life. The answer only lies from within, but they need our support.
Posted by: Jimi Olhardy at January 03, 2006 12:05 AM (5eONW)
3
The problem with your scenario Jimi, is that toppling the regime from within takes time - and time is rapidly running out. The two arms which give Iran its foreign reach are its proxy armies and soon, it's nuclear strike capability. The latter is the far bigger threat and thus it's essential that an end be put to it. Diplomacy has been tried repeatedly and failed miserably. Almost all of the blame for that can be placed on the US - EU3 group. If their facilities get attacked, Iran will lash out first and foremost at Israel, but it will be a conventional or bio-chem strike, something the Israelis can handle. I don't foresee Russia and China risking a nuclear confrontation over Iran, since the only links are economic and not ideologic. The Iranian people are tired of the oppression and deserve the chance at freedom. Asssistance can be given there, but right now the priority must be given to taking out those nuclear facilities. If another nuclear power were to get word that Iranian missiles or terrorists armed with nukes were on their way to the capital, the same disgruntled Iranaians who want change will not find themselves receiving help to topple their government, but rather a nuclear counterstrike.
Posted by: Graeme at January 03, 2006 05:29 AM (cumGr)
4
Agent Smith says Jihadidad is trying to secure his grip within Iran by saying such stupid stuff and that his whole nuclear game is a bluff.
Posted by: Agent Smith at January 03, 2006 06:25 AM (0kwVT)
5
And when we lend support and aid to those within and it doesn't turn out right? We will be further maligned and hated as we are now for trying to help others. Or as in the past when things turned out badly. It's been a monumental task in Iraq even with our massive presence there. The Iranians looking for democracy need a lot more than clandestine aid and support. These people have been oppressed so badly for so long, and the ruling party has such tight reigns on them, they won't be able to overturn the Mullahs anymore than the Iraqis were able to get rid of Saddam on their own. Jimi Olhardy's scenario of toppling them from within is ideal but not even remotely likely.
Personally, I think the ONLY chance is for someone to take out their nuclear facilities. And soon.
Personally, I think the ONLY chance is for someone to take out their nuclear facilities. And soon.
Posted by: Oyster at January 03, 2006 07:25 AM (YudAC)
6
Weird huh - I agree - with - Smith - but - we could be wrong - shit happens.
Posted by: hondo at January 03, 2006 09:34 AM (3aakz)
7
I hate to say this, but the Agent may be right in this case. I think Iran is posturing, and does not have the bomb.
Bombing their nuclear facilities should be ruled out for the moment. I say wait for a little while longer.
Bombing their nuclear facilities should be ruled out for the moment. I say wait for a little while longer.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 03, 2006 10:06 AM (rUyw4)
8
Okay - maybe I'm being rash. They're not exactly known for being truthful, are they?
Posted by: Oyster at January 03, 2006 10:26 AM (osKlJ)
9
I don't agree with the argument that it may all be a bluff, but anything's possible. A good indicator of whether they do plan to aquire nuclear weapons would be simultaneous development of delivery systems. The Shahab missile series is now at Shahab 5 and 6 which may have a range of as much as 6000 km. No one spends all that money to then slap a conventional HE warhead on a long range missile.
Posted by: Graeme at January 03, 2006 11:51 AM (cumGr)
10
Graeme:
Also they resist all attempts to replace weapon grade enrichment facilities with ones that are more suited to civilian Nuclear power generation (like the offer to swap their hard water facility, for light.)
This coupled with the fact they put their civilian program under control of the military (Revolutionary Guard) and are attempting to make purchases from North Korea of missile technology (Rodong missile) and they're seeking high-tech air defense systems.
I don't believe Iran is playing p-oker, and I believe they might be even further a long that we expect, I heard the CIA said in the late 90's there was high probability that Iran purchased a bomb from one of the Balkan break away states (maybe for reverse-engineering.)
The world cannot let Iran get Nuclear weapons, not only because of their radical leaders, but because of the high probability of Iran prolificating weapons through the Islamic world.
Also they resist all attempts to replace weapon grade enrichment facilities with ones that are more suited to civilian Nuclear power generation (like the offer to swap their hard water facility, for light.)
This coupled with the fact they put their civilian program under control of the military (Revolutionary Guard) and are attempting to make purchases from North Korea of missile technology (Rodong missile) and they're seeking high-tech air defense systems.
I don't believe Iran is playing p-oker, and I believe they might be even further a long that we expect, I heard the CIA said in the late 90's there was high probability that Iran purchased a bomb from one of the Balkan break away states (maybe for reverse-engineering.)
The world cannot let Iran get Nuclear weapons, not only because of their radical leaders, but because of the high probability of Iran prolificating weapons through the Islamic world.
Posted by: dave at January 03, 2006 01:17 PM (CcXvt)
11
Additionally Dave, is the massive expense of concealling the facilities. In other countries with civilian programs, the research and generation structures are on or near the surface. The Iranians have buried their systems as deep as they can and that doesn't come cheap, nor does it lend itself to easily establishing a nationwide generation system. In 2004 there was an article that mentioned a building that the IAEA had targeted for inspection. Before they could do so, the building was torn down and all the debris removed - even the first few inches of top soil. Something important and not above board had to have been going on there.
Posted by: Graeme at January 03, 2006 04:45 PM (cumGr)
12
Besides the nuke & Israel issues - Iran's president & mullahs have been giving tons of speeches of late internal to Iran reference "cultural problems and failings" and "addressing" them.
This is what I'm concerned about - and I believe this is what outside intel is watching. Everything else may well be directly related to this "internal game".
Iran's Islamic revolution is failing badly where it counts - the only things that have been propping it up has been oil revenues (increased prices and production) and controlled elections.
This is what I'm concerned about - and I believe this is what outside intel is watching. Everything else may well be directly related to this "internal game".
Iran's Islamic revolution is failing badly where it counts - the only things that have been propping it up has been oil revenues (increased prices and production) and controlled elections.
Posted by: hondo at January 04, 2006 01:10 PM (3aakz)
13
Time for an invasion, or a spread of tactical nukes. I'm good with either.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 04, 2006 01:25 PM (0yYS2)
14
I'm in favor of the latter rather than the former, Improb. Dead mullahs fling no bombs.
Posted by: MegaTroopX at February 01, 2006 12:56 AM (yT/Rw)
37kb generated in CPU 0.1947, elapsed 0.2425 seconds.
34 queries taking 0.2312 seconds, 169 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
34 queries taking 0.2312 seconds, 169 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
