How to deal with Iran

[calm2chaos]

What I have read is that Iran is still shopping for the dual use technology. It's not that they just have the plans. They are actively looking to aquire this technology. It's definetly not something we need to close our eyes to. I can't think of anything good that can come out of Iran being a nuclear power.

My feeling is that you haven't quite got it.

The old heavy water reactors (and I mean old) would fail if you replaced a significant number of rods, so the only way to produce significant quantities of fissionable material was to pack it round the core. Edit: out of date hacks think that's still the way it is done, and since commercial plants don't have space they assume that's why places like Iran want to build their own reactors.

Modern commercial reactors (which is exactly what would be supplied to Iran by an external company) do not have the same limitations, so production of fissionable material can be achieved simply by replacing fuel rods, albeit with a small drop in reactor efficiency.

Let's assume they go down the route "supposedly" preferred by the US government, and buy nuclear power capability from outside. Everyone should be happy. The following week, they could kick out the suppliers and upgrade the plant to dual use (takes a few weeks at most). What stops that?

The answer probably lies with the operating software, my guess is that it stops working. And if it stops working in one situation, what's to say it won't stop working in other situations - do things our way or your power goes off. I think I said it earlier, the supplier has you by the balls.

Dual use is not the issue, that's a smokescreen thrown up to hide the real sticking point. The real issue is about control. Quite frankly, recent behaviour has shown that it is questionable whether the US is worthy, or even capable, of being the one to wield that sort of control in international situations, particularly under the current administration.

Edit 2: just something to make you think - AFAIK India and Pakistan only have commercially supplied reactors, so where did their fissionable material come from?

Who do you propose to be the supplier with balls?

[manker]

It's not all about them having nukes - Altho' if they did have nukes then, from their point of view, it would certainly be a good thing as it would deter anyone from invading them.

How about the Iranian people having access to a clean, renewable and cheap energy source. That would be a good thing to come out of them having nuclear technology.

You can't ride roughshod all over soverign nations and tell them what they can and cannot do with regard to its citizens well being - no matter how much you'd like to.

Having nuclear power and having nuclear weapons are completely seperate issues. If you actually trust Iran enough to thinkthey want it for deterent reasons then I think your dreaming. I don't want to find out of the world is wrong, the cost is just to high.

I opened with "It's not all about them having nukes" and you reply with "having nuclear power and having nuclear weapons are completely separate issues".

You quoted me but who the hell are you talking to.

What I like to do is read the post to which I'm replying, it makes for a better conversation. However, if you wish otherwise, there are plenty of folk here who will indulge you and do likewise.

[Busyman™]

Having nuclear power and having nuclear weapons are completely seperate issues. If you actually trust Iran enough to thinkthey want it for deterent reasons then I think your dreaming. I don't want to find out of the world is wrong, the cost is just to high.

I opened with "It's not all about them having nukes" and you reply with "having nuclear power and having nuclear weapons are completely separate issues".

You quoted me but who the hell are you talking to.

What I like to do is read the post to which I'm replying, it makes for a better conversation. However, if you wish otherwise, there are plenty of folk here who will indulge you and do likewise.

You make no sense. Why don't you try reading the posts before replying?

[manker]

I opened with "It's not all about them having nukes" and you reply with "having nuclear power and having nuclear weapons are completely separate issues".

You quoted me but who the hell are you talking to.

What I like to do is read the post to which I'm replying, it makes for a better conversation. However, if you wish otherwise, there are plenty of folk here who will indulge you and do likewise.

You make no sense. Why don't you try reading the posts before replying?

That's for mere mortals.

If there's one thing I can do, it's multi-task.

[calm2chaos]

Having nuclear power and having nuclear weapons are completely seperate issues. If you actually trust Iran enough to thinkthey want it for deterent reasons then I think your dreaming. I don't want to find out of the world is wrong, the cost is just to high.

I opened with "It's not all about them having nukes" and you reply with "having nuclear power and having nuclear weapons are completely separate issues".

You quoted me but who the hell are you talking to.

What I like to do is read the post to which I'm replying, it makes for a better conversation. However, if you wish otherwise, there are plenty of folk here who will indulge you and do likewise.

How about the Iranian people having access to a clean, renewable and cheap energy source. That would be a good thing to come out of them having nuclear technology.


Then you made the above statement. Which it seemed to me you were trying to tie the two together. Thats why I said what I said. Having nukes has nothing to do with "clean, renewable and cheap energy source.". I have no problem with them aquiring nuclear technology for energy. I don't think I ever said anything of the sort actually. If I misunderstood you then thats my fault. If my posts are not up to your standards by all means don't reply.

[lynx]

I opened with "It's not all about them having nukes" and you reply with "having nuclear power and having nuclear weapons are completely separate issues".

You quoted me but who the hell are you talking to.

What I like to do is read the post to which I'm replying, it makes for a better conversation. However, if you wish otherwise, there are plenty of folk here who will indulge you and do likewise.

How about the Iranian people having access to a clean, renewable and cheap energy source. That would be a good thing to come out of them having nuclear technology.


Then you made the above statement. Which it seemed to me you were trying to tie the two together. Thats why I said what I said. Having nukes has nothing to do with "clean, renewable and cheap energy source.". I have no problem with them aquiring nuclear technology for energy. I don't think I ever said anything of the sort actually. If I misunderstood you then thats my fault. If my posts are not up to your standards by all means don't reply.

The problem is that you seem to support the Bush administration's distorted propoganda that trying to build their own nuclear plant automatically means that they are developing nuclear weapons.

The alternative to developing their own plant is to buy one from outside. Where would you suggest they get one? Western countries are obviously out of the question, for the reasons I've stated before. Russia? Oops, remember Chernobyl. I think that leaves China, but they've already got their hands full backing N. Korea.

When you stop to think about it...



















...you should start again.

[calm2chaos]

How about the Iranian people having access to a clean, renewable and cheap energy source. That would be a good thing to come out of them having nuclear technology.


Then you made the above statement. Which it seemed to me you were trying to tie the two together. Thats why I said what I said. Having nukes has nothing to do with "clean, renewable and cheap energy source.". I have no problem with them aquiring nuclear technology for energy. I don't think I ever said anything of the sort actually. If I misunderstood you then thats my fault. If my posts are not up to your standards by all means don't reply.

The problem is that you seem to support the Bush administration's distorted propoganda that trying to build their own nuclear plant automatically means that they are developing nuclear weapons.

The alternative to developing their own plant is to buy one from outside. Where would you suggest they get one? Western countries are obviously out of the question, for the reasons I've stated before. Russia? Oops, remember Chernobyl. I think that leaves China, but they've already got their hands full backing N. Korea.

When you stop to think about it...

...you should start again.

I think your confusing nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. And Irans ongoing attempts at aquring the technology for nuclear weapons i believe is hardly propaganda. And in recent months have there not been numerous offers to iran of a light water reactor along with support for the technology. There has been a lot of offers for reactors and energy distribution in the recent past to Iran western countries along with russia germany and others have been making these offers. I don't exactly know why you say they haven't. Britain, France and Germany (the so-called EU-3) as well as China, Russia and the United States are the countries making these offers

To create the conditions for negotiation, the six powers promised to:
- "reaffirm Iran's right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes in conformity with its NPT (nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) obligations, and in this context reaffirm their support for the development by Iran of a civil nuclear energy programme
- "commit to actively support the building of new light water reactors in Iran through international joint projects ...
Iran, for its part, promised to:
- "commit to addressing all the outstanding concerns of the IAEA through full cooperation with the IAEA
- "suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities ...
- "resume implementation of the Additional Protocol" (for wider IAEA inspections)
A section on "areas of future cooperation" includes the aims:
- "reaffirm Iran's inalienable right to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of the NPT, and cooperate with Iran in the development by Iran of a civil nuclear power programme
- "negotiate and implement a Euratom/Iran nuclear cooperation agreement.
- "actively support the building of new light water power reactors in Iran through international joint projects," including by providing technology to make its power reactors safe against earthquakes.
- "provide cooperation with the management of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste through appropriate arrangements
The world powers would also give legally binding, fuel assurances to Iran, based on:
- "participation as a partner in an international facility in Russia to provide enrichment services for a reliable supply of fuel to Iran's nuclear reactors. Subject to negotiations, such a facility could enrich all the UF6 produced in Iran.
- "establishment on commercial terms of a buffer stock to hold a reserve of up to five years supply of nuclear fuel dedicated to Iran, with participation and under supervision of the IAEA."
"The long-term agreement would, with regard to common efforts to build international confidence, include a clause for review of the agreement in all its aspects, to follow:
- confirmation by the IAEA that all outstanding issues and concerns reported by the IAEA, including those activities which could have a military nuclear dimension, have been resolved, and;
- "confirmation that there are no undeclared nuclear activities or materials in Iran and that international confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's civil nuclear programme has been restored."
Political and economic benefits if the package is agreed:
- "support for a new conference to promote dialogue and cooperation on regional security issues.
- "improving Iran's access to the international economy, markets and capital, through practical support for full integration into international structures, including the WTO (World Trade Organization), and to create the framework for increased direct investment in Iran and trade with Iran (including a Trade and Economic Cooperation Agreement with EU)
- "civil aviation cooperation, including the possible removal of restrictions on US and European manufacturers, from exporting civil aircraft to Iran, thereby widening the prospect of Iran renewing its fleet of civil airliners
- "establishment of a long-term energy partnership between Iran and the EU, and other willing partners, with concrete and practical applications
- "support for the modernisation of Iran's telecommunications infrastructure and advanced internet provision, including by possible removal of relevant US and other export restrictions
"support for agricultural development in Iran, including possible access to US and European agricultural products, technology and

[lynx]

I think your confusing nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. And Irans ongoing attempts at aquring the technology for nuclear weapons i believe is hardly propaganda. And in recent months have there not been numerous offers to iran of a light water reactor along with support for the technology. There has been a lot of offers for reactors and energy distribution in the recent past to Iran western countries along with russia germany and others have been making these offers. I don't exactly know why you say they haven't. Britain, France and Germany (the so-called EU-3) as well as China, Russia and the United States are the countries making these offers

To create the conditions for negotiation, the six powers promised to:
- "reaffirm Iran's right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes in conformity with its NPT (nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) obligations, and in this context reaffirm their support for the development by Iran of a civil nuclear energy programme
- "commit to actively support the building of new light water reactors in Iran through international joint projects ...
Iran, for its part, promised to:
- "commit to addressing all the outstanding concerns of the IAEA through full cooperation with the IAEA
- "suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities ...
- "resume implementation of the Additional Protocol" (for wider IAEA inspections)
A section on "areas of future cooperation" includes the aims:
- "reaffirm Iran's inalienable right to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of the NPT, and cooperate with Iran in the development by Iran of a civil nuclear power programme
- "negotiate and implement a Euratom/Iran nuclear cooperation agreement.
- "actively support the building of new light water power reactors in Iran through international joint projects," including by providing technology to make its power reactors safe against earthquakes.
- "provide cooperation with the management of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste through appropriate arrangements
The world powers would also give legally binding, fuel assurances to Iran, based on:
- "participation as a partner in an international facility in Russia to provide enrichment services for a reliable supply of fuel to Iran's nuclear reactors. Subject to negotiations, such a facility could enrich all the UF6 produced in Iran.
- "establishment on commercial terms of a buffer stock to hold a reserve of up to five years supply of nuclear fuel dedicated to Iran, with participation and under supervision of the IAEA."
"The long-term agreement would, with regard to common efforts to build international confidence, include a clause for review of the agreement in all its aspects, to follow:
- confirmation by the IAEA that all outstanding issues and concerns reported by the IAEA, including those activities which could have a military nuclear dimension, have been resolved, and;
- "confirmation that there are no undeclared nuclear activities or materials in Iran and that international confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's civil nuclear programme has been restored."
Political and economic benefits if the package is agreed:
- "support for a new conference to promote dialogue and cooperation on regional security issues.
- "improving Iran's access to the international economy, markets and capital, through practical support for full integration into international structures, including the WTO (World Trade Organization), and to create the framework for increased direct investment in Iran and trade with Iran (including a Trade and Economic Cooperation Agreement with EU)
- "civil aviation cooperation, including the possible removal of restrictions on US and European manufacturers, from exporting civil aircraft to Iran, thereby widening the prospect of Iran renewing its fleet of civil airliners
- "establishment of a long-term energy partnership between Iran and the EU, and other willing partners, with concrete and practical applications
- "support for the modernisation of Iran's telecommunications infrastructure and advanced internet provision, including by possible removal of relevant US and other export restrictions
"support for agricultural development in Iran, including possible access to US and European agricultural products, technology and

No, I'm not confusing nuclear energy with nuclear weapons, nor am I trying to tie the two together. It seems it is the Bush administration which is trying to do that, and you seem to have swallowed their line.

These so-called negotiations have been going on for years, and nothing has ever come of it. Guess what, Iran is tired of waiting for some movement in that area.

They gave fair warning, and a deadline, that if there wasn't some action then they would resume their own enrichment program, a necessity for nuclear power as highlighted in brown above. The US, initially, then followed by the EU, came out with the tired old argument that Iran was trying to make nuclear weapons, and consequently the negotiations were suspended - as if that made any difference.

The deadline passed, Iran resumed its enrichment program. Certainly there were some inflamatory comments about pushing Israel into the sea, but that is how internal politics works in Iran. The western powers are well aware that's the case, but it suits their nuclear weapons argument very well.

Until the West stops hiding behind meaningless "negotiations" and actually follows up on its words, I can't see any reason why Iran should take any notice.

[Biggles]

What Iran is doing at the moment is not illegal. They are perfectly entitled under non-proliferation to enrich fuel for power stations.

The argument is, of course, that as they have uranium deposits coupled with their nuclear power stations, then enrichment faciilities will give them the complete cycle and should they wish to they could then go and enrich fuel to a much higher percentage which could then be used for weapons.

The difficulty is, where do you draw the line? Can we say that steel mills are unacceptable in case they build tanks?

I do agree however, that Iran is probably not blind to the fact that N Korea has far more bargaining power because of few warheads than without and that such weapons would almost certainly preclude and attack on their soil. Given that their two bordering contries were invaded this, then, might therefore seem an attractive route to take. (although the fall of Saddam and the Taliban were hardly a cause for tears in Iran)

Whether security guarantees can be given as part of a reprocessing package is not clear. However, I doubt if the current US administration would be willing to give such an undertaking. Consequently, this dispute will continue to run. I doubt though that sanctions will approved over a legal activity. Proof of illegal activity would have to be presented. Enrichment in itself is not enough. The most likely outcome may be civilian enrichment under IAEA supervision.

[calm2chaos]

I think your confusing nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. And Irans ongoing attempts at aquring the technology for nuclear weapons i believe is hardly propaganda. And in recent months have there not been numerous offers to iran of a light water reactor along with support for the technology. There has been a lot of offers for reactors and energy distribution in the recent past to Iran western countries along with russia germany and others have been making these offers. I don't exactly know why you say they haven't. Britain, France and Germany (the so-called EU-3) as well as China, Russia and the United States are the countries making these offers

To create the conditions for negotiation, the six powers promised to:
- "reaffirm Iran's right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes in conformity with its NPT (nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) obligations, and in this context reaffirm their support for the development by Iran of a civil nuclear energy programme
- "commit to actively support the building of new light water reactors in Iran through international joint projects ...
Iran, for its part, promised to:
- "commit to addressing all the outstanding concerns of the IAEA through full cooperation with the IAEA
- "suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities ...
- "resume implementation of the Additional Protocol" (for wider IAEA inspections)
A section on "areas of future cooperation" includes the aims:
- "reaffirm Iran's inalienable right to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of the NPT, and cooperate with Iran in the development by Iran of a civil nuclear power programme
- "negotiate and implement a Euratom/Iran nuclear cooperation agreement.
- "actively support the building of new light water power reactors in Iran through international joint projects," including by providing technology to make its power reactors safe against earthquakes.
- "provide cooperation with the management of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste through appropriate arrangements
The world powers would also give legally binding, fuel assurances to Iran, based on:
- "participation as a partner in an international facility in Russia to provide enrichment services for a reliable supply of fuel to Iran's nuclear reactors. Subject to negotiations, such a facility could enrich all the UF6 produced in Iran.
- "establishment on commercial terms of a buffer stock to hold a reserve of up to five years supply of nuclear fuel dedicated to Iran, with participation and under supervision of the IAEA."
"The long-term agreement would, with regard to common efforts to build international confidence, include a clause for review of the agreement in all its aspects, to follow:
- confirmation by the IAEA that all outstanding issues and concerns reported by the IAEA, including those activities which could have a military nuclear dimension, have been resolved, and;
- "confirmation that there are no undeclared nuclear activities or materials in Iran and that international confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's civil nuclear programme has been restored."
Political and economic benefits if the package is agreed:
- "support for a new conference to promote dialogue and cooperation on regional security issues.
- "improving Iran's access to the international economy, markets and capital, through practical support for full integration into international structures, including the WTO (World Trade Organization), and to create the framework for increased direct investment in Iran and trade with Iran (including a Trade and Economic Cooperation Agreement with EU)
- "civil aviation cooperation, including the possible removal of restrictions on US and European manufacturers, from exporting civil aircraft to Iran, thereby widening the prospect of Iran renewing its fleet of civil airliners
- "establishment of a long-term energy partnership between Iran and the EU, and other willing partners, with concrete and practical applications
- "support for the modernisation of Iran's telecommunications infrastructure and advanced internet provision, including by possible removal of relevant US and other export restrictions
"support for agricultural development in Iran, including possible access to US and European agricultural products, technology and

No, I'm not confusing nuclear energy with nuclear weapons, nor am I trying to tie the two together. It seems it is the Bush administration which is trying to do that, and you seem to have swallowed their line.

These so-called negotiations have been going on for years, and nothing has ever come of it. Guess what, Iran is tired of waiting for some movement in that area.

They gave fair warning, and a deadline, that if there wasn't some action then they would resume their own enrichment program, a necessity for nuclear power as highlighted in brown above. The US, initially, then followed by the EU, came out with the tired old argument that Iran was trying to make nuclear weapons, and consequently the negotiations were suspended - as if that made any difference.

The deadline passed, Iran resumed its enrichment program. Certainly there were some inflamatory comments about pushing Israel into the sea, but that is how internal politics works in Iran. The western powers are well aware that's the case, but it suits their nuclear weapons argument very well.

Until the West stops hiding behind meaningless "negotiations" and actually follows up on its words, I can't see any reason why Iran should take any notice.

Then they get what they get. unless there are some major assurances and major safe gaurds in place you will defintly see some missle strikes eliminating anything thought to be dangerous or of concern. I am not feeling all to bad about a terrorist state being hammered. Personally I think the entire west and all developed nations should pull out of the ME. That include militarily, politically and financially. Let them figure out there own problem and kill themselves. Have a couple 3-4 tridents sitting of the coast if anything leaves the ground headed in the wrong direction you end the ME. It's a no win situation, so the best thing possible may to be limit the destruction they cause