Iran wants to stall for time...

[geni]

Oh, well it's okay then. Nevermind.

I suspect they are quite caperble of solveing it and if they don't think think people will ask too many questions about France and Britian nukeing Iran after Tel-Aviv goes up in a nuklear fireball.

However considering the amount of millitry aid Israel as recived from first france and britian and then the US it should be able to look after itself.

 

[Darat]

Sure; a couple hundred news articles over the past couple years showing their relentless pursuit of technology capable of building a bomb over the strongest objections of everyone involved.

I and others have started thread after thread on the subject.

Can you provide some links? (Not to the fact that in the distant past they have had tried to develop nuclear weapons since that is not your hypothesis but that the recent negotiated agreement not to continue their developments was being circumvented and they carried on research which is your hypothesis.)

 

[Cylinder]

For fear of U.N. sanctions...

Do you have an address to which I can send my cleaning bill?

 

[jj]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10803220/

Does anyone here actually believe that Iran is interested in negotiations for halting their nuclear program?

Not I.

 

[Mycroft]

Can you provide some links? (Not to the fact that in the distant past they have had tried to develop nuclear weapons since that is not your hypothesis but that the recent negotiated agreement not to continue their developments was being circumvented and they carried on research which is your hypothesis.)

For years they have claimed they needed to pursue nuclear technology for the energy, despite sitting on top of the worlds largest natural gas supply (which isn’t as profitable as oil because it’s harder to transport, but used for domestic use, that’s not a problem) yet they have consistently shut down or reneged on any agreement that doesn’t also allow them to develop the technology needed for weapons, including agreements where their nuclear fuel would have been provided by Europe or Russia.

In short, their actions don’t match their words. That’s a sure sign of lying.

 

[Darat]

For years they have claimed they needed to pursue nuclear technology for the energy, despite sitting on top of the worlds largest natural gas supply (which isn’t as profitable as oil because it’s harder to transport, but used for domestic use, that’s not a problem) yet they have consistently shut down or reneged on any agreement that doesn’t also allow them to develop the technology needed for weapons, including agreements where their nuclear fuel would have been provided by Europe or Russia.

In short, their actions don’t match their words. That’s a sure sign of lying.

Thanks for your opinion, however I did ask can you provide any evidence for the hypothesis you put forward and this doesn't supply any - merely expands on what you had posted in the first place.

 

[webfusion]

developing nukes, while "negotiations" continue

Darat requested any evidence that that the recent negotiated agreement not to continue their developments was being circumvented and they carried on research. That is what Mycroft claimed, and it would indeed be nice to see something which backs that.

Let's go to the videotape (2004, during the specific period in question):

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1306396/posts

• Iran's chief delegate to the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency said that Iran would press ahead with its nuclear program.

This is the part that clearly support Mycroft's contentions ("hypothesis" as Darat calls it) -----
One Western diplomat close to the IAEA said the deal between the EU's "big three'' and Iran actually permitted Tehran to convert an entire batch of 37 tonnes of yellowcake, with which it had been 'testing' its conversion facility at Isfahan.

When Iran announced its plans to test the Isfahan plant in September, nuclear experts said that 37 tonnes of yellowcake could yield enough uranium for up to five nuclear weapons, if it was later enriched to bomb grade purity.

Anyway, although I'm not an expert, this sure looks like Iran circumvented the negotiations process, and went ahead with their program.

And, more importantly, they are moving full speed ahead now, after breaking the seals of the enrichment facilities.

 

[Ed]

Darat, youknow, I think that it is reasonable to give the UK the benefit of the doubt, the Germans and Italians too, even those beer sodden blokes down under but to do that for a fundementalist islamic regeime strikes my as being naive.

 

[Mycroft]

Thanks for your opinion, however I did ask can you provide any evidence for the hypothesis you put forward and this doesn't supply any - merely expands on what you had posted in the first place.

One piece of evidence is Iran's insistence on producing their own nuclear fuel. That technology is the nuclear genie in the bottle, a nation that has that capability has the capability to produce weapons grade uranium. If they were honest about not wanting to pursue a weapons program, then accepting fuel made in the US, Europe or Russia would be perfectly acceptable.

Do you need links showing any of that? I don’t think any of it is in dispute.

 

[Mycroft]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...0.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/03/20/ixportal.html

Iran plans secret 'nuclear university' to train scientists
By Con Coughlin
(Filed: 20/03/2005)
The Iranian government has given approval for the establishment of a secret nuclear research centre to train its scientists in all aspects of atomic technology, The Telegraph can reveal.
Recent reports received by Western intelligence show that Teheran has recently approved the establishment of a faculty of applied nuclear engineering that will be attached to the Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran (AEOI).
Intelligence officials believe that the creation of the facility is yet further evidence that Iran is involved in a clandestine programme to build nuclear weapons.
The Iranian government has recently come under intense diplomatic pressure from Europe and the United States to provide a full account of its nuclear programme.
While the Iranians claim that their nuclear activities are entirely peaceful, nuclear experts working for the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations-sponsored nuclear watchdog, have found incontrovertible proof that Iran has been involved in the production of weapons-grade uranium.
The establishment of Iran's first post-graduate nuclear research faculty is seen as evidence that the Iranians are pressing ahead with their secret programme to become self-sufficient in the production of nuclear weapons.
"If the Iranians were really serious about only developing nuclear technology for peaceful means, there would be no need for a facility like this," said a senior Western security official. "It suggests that they do not want to share their nuclear expertise with the outside world."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/13/i...tml?ex=1137387600&en=fab1aa6117708127&ei=5070

Relying on Computer, U.S. Seeks to Prove Iran's Nuclear Aims

By WILLIAM J. BROAD and DAVID E. SANGER
Published: November 13, 2005
In mid-July, senior American intelligence officials called the leaders of the international atomic inspection agency to the top of a skyscraper overlooking the Danube in Vienna and unveiled the contents of what they said was a stolen Iranian laptop computer.

The Americans flashed on a screen and spread over a conference table selections from more than a thousand pages of Iranian computer simulations and accounts of experiments, saying they showed a long effort to design a nuclear warhead, according to a half-dozen European and American participants in the meeting.

The documents, the Americans acknowledged from the start, do not prove that Iran has an atomic bomb. They presented them as the strongest evidence yet that, despite Iran's insistence that its nuclear program is peaceful, the country is trying to develop a compact warhead to fit atop its Shahab missile, which can reach Israel and other countries in the Middle East.

The article is much longer.

 

[webfusion]

Iran has run out of time --

There is no alternative; Israel will act.

Targets -
Natanz. Isfahan.


Olmert is running for election & needs to prove his mettle.
He intends to fulfill the last request of Arik Sharon:
"Implement the Menahem Begin Doctrine"
www.usafa.af.mil/df/inss/OCP/ocp59.pdf

Nothing will stop it now.

 

[BS Investigator]

1) Iran is doing nothing but trying to stall for time with these bogus "negotiations."

2) Iran will stop at nothing and is working day and night to make nuclear weapons.

3) Iran will only be stopped by military intervention. Sanctions will not keep them from getting bombs.

 

[Darat]

Darat requested any evidence that that the recent negotiated agreement not to continue their developments was being circumvented and they carried on research. That is what Mycroft claimed, and it would indeed be nice to see something which backs that.

Let's go to the videotape (2004, during the specific period in question):

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1306396/posts

• Iran's chief delegate to the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency said that Iran would press ahead with its nuclear program.

This is the part that clearly support Mycroft's contentions ("hypothesis" as Darat calls it) -----
One Western diplomat close to the IAEA said the deal between the EU's "big three'' and Iran actually permitted Tehran to convert an entire batch of 37 tonnes of yellowcake, with which it had been 'testing' its conversion facility at Isfahan.

When Iran announced its plans to test the Isfahan plant in September, nuclear experts said that 37 tonnes of yellowcake could yield enough uranium for up to five nuclear weapons, if it was later enriched to bomb grade purity.

Anyway, although I'm not an expert, this sure looks like Iran circumvented the negotiations process, and went ahead with their program.

And, more importantly, they are moving full speed ahead now, after breaking the seals of the enrichment facilities.

Sorry I don't think that does support it - after all it clearly states in that article that "...Continuing the work that long ``would certainly violate the spirit of the agreement,'' a Western diplomat said. ``Iran has a legal basis for doing it, but it will not inspire much confidence in them,'' another diplomat said....

So what Iran was doing was within the negotiated agreements.

 

[Darat]

Darat, youknow, I think that it is reasonable to give the UK the benefit of the doubt, the Germans and Italians too, even those beer sodden blokes down under but to do that for a fundementalist islamic regeime strikes my as being naive.

I agree and I've never given the Iranians the benefit of the doubt as far as I can remember over such matters. It's just that they have been under very close scrutiny over the last few years and we (now) know that such scrutiny can be very effective; so if anything I am given the benefit of the doubt to the organisations verifying they haven't been furthering their research.

 

[Darat]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...0.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/03/20/ixportal.html


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/13/i...tml?ex=1137387600&en=fab1aa6117708127&ei=5070



The article is much longer.

Thanks - remember I wasn't expressing doubt that they are trying to build nuclear weapons or that is their goal but your hypothesis that "Another way would be to say that Iran pretending to participate in "negotiations" has allowed them to advance their program without military intervention.".

 

[Geckko]

I have read this thread because I tend to think a nuclear weapon in the hands of some of these people would be a tad dangerous.

But semantics seems to be overtaking the substantive issues here. Whhatever your views, the policy towards Iran has failed.

Buying time or whatever is a complete irrelevence as far as I can see it. this is an issue that is resolved or not.

Cearly, where we stand today, it has not.

 

[Ed]

Thanks - remember I wasn't expressing doubt that they are trying to build nuclear weapons or that is their goal but your hypothesis that "Another way would be to say that Iran pretending to participate in "negotiations" has allowed them to advance their program without military intervention.".

I subscribe to the hypothesis. I think that common sense dictates that if you have a person or regime hell bent on achieveing a particular end, and does not particularly acknowledge the authority of a countervailing force, that it is reasonable to assume that anything they do will be to achieve that end including negotiation --- particularly when those negotiations come a cropper.

I think that in dealing with most people/things this attitude might be unfair. The downside here is beyond contemplation and the fact that they seem so devil may care about how they are viewed just cements the aforementioned hypothesis in my mind.

 

[Darat]

I have read this thread because I tend to think a nuclear weapon in the hands of some of these people would be a tad dangerous.

But semantics seems to be overtaking the substantive issues here. Whhatever your views, the policy towards Iran has failed.

Buying time or whatever is a complete irrelevence as far as I can see it. this is an issue that is resolved or not.

Cearly, where we stand today, it has not.

If you mean failing in the sense it's stopped them developing nuclear weapons then I have to disagree since they don't have them at the moment despite obviously wanting them.

However as I've said a few times before - "we" are probably at the stage when we have to decide are we going to do nothing then cause them some delays (e.g. sanctions and so on) or are we going to take military action. I don't see other options.

Saying all that I still do think a likely reason for all this noie from Iran is down to ego and an attempt to create a "common enemy of Iran" to divert focus from Iran's myriad internal problems.

I found this interesting article when I was reading about the talks breaking down: http://www.qantara.de/webcom/show_article.php/_c-476/_nr-499/i.html

...One is forced to ask what compels the government leader to act so as to veritably provoke the dangers menacing his country. Is it stupidity, naiveté, tactics, or is he simply acting based on his convictions?

Ahmadinejad, ... In his worldview there is room only for friends or enemies...

....

He has practically no experience in shaping domestic or foreign policy. He can only shore up his power by spouting populist slogans in an effort to garner the support of the "have-nots and the slandered" whom he has promised to rescue.

He travels from city to city, holding fiery speeches, painting a vivid picture of "the enemy," generating fear, stirring up hatred. He accuses the previous administration of being corrupt. It supposedly gorged itself on the property of the people and led the country to ruin.

.....


But the protests from abroad have managed in one fell swoop to place Ahmadinejad in the spotlight. With his imminent downfall already written on the wall, he has had the privilege of feeling like a hero, at least among his followers.

He has dared to defy the superpower USA and the most powerful nation in the Middle East, Israel, in order to stand by the displaced Palestinians and wave the flag of Islam high.

The President no doubt hopes that this position will enable him to expand his power and to divert attention from his inability to govern and the chaos he has created. It's no wonder that he pays little attention to the criticism he inspires and continues to rant and rave unabated.

...snip...

 

[Mycroft]

Thanks - remember I wasn't expressing doubt that they are trying to build nuclear weapons or that is their goal but your hypothesis that "Another way would be to say that Iran pretending to participate in "negotiations" has allowed them to advance their program without military intervention.".

Iran wants diplomacy not threats in nuclear impasse

Of course they do. Threats lead to action. Diplomacy can be stalled forever.

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran said on Sunday that only diplomacy, not threats to refer it to the UN Security Council, could defuse a standoff over its nuclear work and warned that any Western push for sanctions could force up world oil prices.

The Security Council's five permanent members and Germany planned talks in London on Monday in search of a common strategy to tackle Iran's resumption of atomic fuel research and development after a two-year moratorium.

Iran says it aims only to make power for an energy-needy economy, not build atom bombs. But it hid nuclear work from the UN nuclear watchdog agency for almost 20 years before exiled dissidents exposed it in 2002. Last week Tehran scrapped its suspension of research, prompting a diplomatic scramble.

Iran's "red line" step in Western eyes was removing IAEA seals to reaccess equipment that purifies uranium, a key component in nuclear power or, if enriched to a higher level, in weaponry.

"Diplomacy is the only clear answer to the current situation," Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told a weekly news conference on Sunday.

Modus operandi is not conclusive proof, but you will agree it is evidence, Darat?

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=1508178

 

[Darat]

Yep and I thought your other post was also evidence - sorry if my reply wasn't clear on that point.