OMG! Iran is enriching fuel!

[The Jacobin]

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=newsOne&storyID=2006-09-01T001721Z_01_L29427617_RTRUKOC_0_US-NUCLEAR-IRAN.xml&WTmodLoc=Home-C2-TopNews-newsOne-3

Reuters reports Iran is still not doing what shrub wants. The article starts out implying Iran is making nuclear weapons:

Tehran has failed to dispel international doubts it wants nuclear bombs, the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency reported on Thursday, clearing the way for the Security Council to consider sanctions on Tehran.

But you have to go seven paragraphs until you get to the truth dug up by the inspectors:

But an IAEA report said Iran just last week resumed making low-enriched uranium, suitable for power plant fuel, with a cascade of 164 centrifuges at its pilot enrichment plant.

Bombs my ass.

[partylessinOhio]

1. Bush lies! He is the anti-christ! Do not be misled!

[Phx_Dem]

2. why isn't Iran upfront about what they are doing?

"It also said a lack of Iranian cooperation had crippled three-year-old IAEA probes into the program. "Iran has not suspended its enrichment related activities," the IAEA said. "Iran has not addressed the long outstanding verification issues or provided the necessary transparency to remove uncertainties associated with some of its activities."

[The Jacobin]

3. Because they're quick learners.

They looked at all the compliance Iraq provided and saw that they got railroaded and invaded anyway.

Since shrub will just look for an excuse if he actually does want to attack, Iran is just avoiding all the hastle.

[Matilda]

5. They can also see that North Korea isn't about to be attacked.

n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

4. Why should they be?

Are we transparent about we are up to?

[PresidentWar]

6. Doesn't Iran have a right to develope its own defense?

Doesn't Iran have a right to develope its own energy technology?

Fairminded, freedom loving people say yes. My question is, why do you insist that Iran be grilled on all of this while most of the rest of the world is not? Why do you advocate Iran be treated like some suspiciously dangerous state when they haven't invaded or even attacked their neighbors (unlike some other MidEast power I can name, and one North American one)?

[rsr1771]

7. Iran hasn't attacked neighbors?

When did people on this board start viewing Iran with rose colored glasses? The people of Iraq would disagree with you about whether Iran is a friendly neighbor. Iran has used proxys to commit various acts of terror in the Middle East. And Iran's constant threats to wipe Israel off the map are, to say the least, disturbing. Just because Bush sees them as an enemy does not mean they are not.

[The Jacobin]

8. That's not the point

This is just Iraq part II. These are the same lies used to push the war in Iraq. Remember: The smoking gun shouldn't be a mushroom cloud?

The same lies are being set up for an attack on Iran. How many more young soldiers will be sacrificed for another lie? Iran isn't Canada, but they aren't North Korea, either.

[Ms. Clio]

11. It was Iraq that attacked Iran

And you are just repeating the usual neocon propaganda about "proxys" (sic) and "terrorism." But speaking of terrorist proxies, try googling "Mujahideen-e-Khalq" aka "MKO."

And "Iran" never threatened to "wipe Israel off the map."

My that must be some tasty KoolAid.

[FearofFutility]

27. Ahmadinejad has advocated for the destruction of Israel

"Our dear Imam ordered that the occupying regime in Al-Qods be wiped off the face of the earth. This was a very wise statement. The issue of Palestine is not one on which we could make a piecemeal compromise… This would mean our defeat. Anyone who would recognize this state has put his signature under the defeat of the Islamic world.

In his struggle against the World Arrogance, our dear Imam targeted the central and command base of the enemy, namely the occupying regime in Al-Qods. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in dear Palestine and which we witness today all over the Islamic world will soon wipe this scourge of shame from the Islamic world. This can be done."

"I am hopeful that just as the Palestinian nation continued its struggle for the past ten years, it will continue to maintain its awareness and vigilance. This phase is going to be short-lived. If we put it behind us successfully, God willing, it will pave the way for the annihilation of the Zionist regime and it will be a downhill route."

www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=4164

Please don't accuse me of drinking the kool-aid. I'm simply providing text from a speech from Ahmadinejad.

[Ravenseye]

29. It's a kool aid translation

He never said "wife off the face of the earth" in farsi. In fact he was quoting Khomenei. The actual translation reads closer to "erase from the pages of time", which has a different connotation than 'wipe out'. He was quoting Khomenei, a nutball in and of himself, as saying basically, to palestinians, to keep it up, and not give up, to not think that the continued existance of Israel was inevitable.

But that's a complicated translation, and it's so much easier to just say "wipe off the face of the earth."

[FearofFutility]

33. Annihilation is another word he chose, not quoting Khomeini.

Was that mistranslated too? Bottom line, he seems to be advocating for the destruction of Israel whether he said "erase from the pages of time" or "wipe out". I do have a very open mind, though. How do these two phrases, "erase from the pages of time" or "wipe out" differ?

[Ravenseye]

34. well

Wipe Out has more of a complete annihilation aspect to it. "We'll wipe them out!" is a call for total destruction.

Erase from the pages of time isn't necessarily saying 'kill them all' and isn't implying a rewriting of history. It's a tough translation, which is probably why they just went with 'wipe them out' in addition to it being a bit more inflamatory. It's more just a pretty way of saying we'll get rid of israel, and actually the quote is from Khomeni speaking specificaly to the palestinians in Jerusalem. It's basically saying history isn't inevitable.

Keep in mind, i'm not saying Iran isn't dangerous, i'm just saying that there are interests in the world that want to provoke something and will either poke us or Iran with sticks in order to get something to happen. Mistranslations like this don't help anyone and just provide more fodder.

[FearofFutility]

37. I hear what you are saying

But I still don't see any difference. It's semantics. Whether he was quoting Khomeni, which he did only in part of the speech, or not, he's pretty clear about what he'd like to see happen to Israel.

[Ravenseye]

38. I don't think it is

There is one interpretation that 'wipe out' supports where Iran would like to see not just Palestine in place instead of Israel, but the utter annihilation and murder of every Israeli. Blood in the streets so to speak. The other interpretation is one, that calls for the existance of Palestine instead of Israel, but that isn't about murdering every Jew in sight, but for a replacing of Israel with what it sees as the rightfull government.

The 'destruction of israel' doesn't necessarily mean the death of every israeli, but to play it as such definately evokes more emotion. It's possible to not want the existance of the state of Israel, without being bloodthirsty for the deaths of all Israelis, or Jews for that matter.

I think it's a key difference.

[FearofFutility]

40. I understand what you're saying

Thanks for your patience.

[Ms. Clio]

42. Ahmadinejad does not have the powers of an American president

and what he says does not have nearly the terrifying power and force behind it of Bush's equally bellicose words -- which actually do lead to destruction of countries.

Edited to add a link to illustrate my point: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2029494

[Warren Stupidity]

13. You should do some actual research

and not rely on spoon fed talking points so much.

What was the last time Iran actually attacked another nation?

[Ravenseye]

28. Directly?

Mid seventh century when the Sassanid Empire invaded Roman Egypt and modern day Turkey.

Indirectly?

They've supported with men and materiel Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and for decades now have had an active hand in helping other terrorist organizations through their own Guard Corps and Intelligence operatives. They've been very good at keeping their actual hands cleans though, prefering for others to do the dirty work. Iran is a master of world public relations.

[Warren Stupidity]

41. Yes they support Hezbollah and other groups

none of which are an existential threat to anyone, even to Israel. They are a nuisance. What Iran is not is an aggressive nation with a history of direct belligerance towards its neighbors.

Actually Persia had some ambitions in the 1700's and early 1800s.

[killbotfactory]

16. They signed a non-proliferation treaty

Though there is nothing stopping them from opting out and developing nuclear weapons other than world opinion and possible sanctions from the Security Council.

[Toots]

31. Yes they did and they have been one of the few countries that signed that

treaty that have abided by it completely. The USA has not. In fact we are in the process of introducing the new "bunker bustin'" nuke that we can use at will.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

32. Not nuclear defence, no.

It explicitly does not have the right to nuclear weaponry, because it signed the NPT.

If what Iran were trying to develope were simply for energy technology then it would have a right to do so, but it clearly isn't.

The reason Iran needs to be grilled on this while most of the rest of the world isn't is that Iran is trying to develope a nuclear bomb in violation of the NPT and most other countries aren't.

The claim that Iran hasn't attacked its neighbours is kool-aid of the worst kind - while it hasn't done so directly or officially, it has sponsored, equipped, encouraged and made possible such attacks by others on both Iraq and Israel, many of said attacks targetting civilians.

[Phx_Dem]

36. Dude, I just asked a question...

that no one on this thread seems to be able to answer.

[Toots]

25. Are those Bush* Administration quotes?

I read where the IAEA had been given total access to all of Iran's nuclear facilities and had found nothing to indicate anything other than what they claimed to be doing. Iran is one of the only signatories to follow the rules exactly. The USA isn't nor is Israel.

[Imagevision]

9. geeeze I hope Iran and Argentina don't decide not to sell oil to the US.

in retaliation for sanctions?...

[Justice Is Comin]

14. 4th largest supplier in the world.

You think they won't? :rofl: Get yourself a skateboard, you're going to need it.

[SammyWinstonJack]

39. Miraculously there is still be plenty of fuel for AF1 though, while

the rest if us peons struggle to get around. I really really really hate bu$hco! :grr: For everything they've done, past present and future!

[MazeRat7]

10. I believe thats the same IAEA report that says it will be 5-10 yrs before

they actually have a weapon (conservative estimate).

MZr7

[Swamp Rat]

12. We know what Bushler wants

[sandnsea]

15. Resolution 1696

You can disagree with it, but the UN resolution still says:

“2. Demands, in this context, that Iran shall suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, to be verified by the IAEA,

“3. Expresses the conviction that such suspension as well as full, verified Iranian compliance with the requirements set out by the IAEA Board of Governors, would contribute to a diplomatic, negotiated solution that guarantees Iran’s nuclear programme is for exclusively peaceful purposes, underlines the willingness of the international community to work positively for such a solution, encourages Iran, in conforming to the above provisions, to re-engage with the international community and with the IAEA, and stresses that such engagement will be beneficial to Iran,

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2006/sc8792.doc.htm

[jerry611]

17. Yet the IAEA seems rather convinced they want to build a bomb

And it really doesn't make much sense.

Iran is loaded with oil. They have enough oil for the next 100 years, maybe more. Much of the oil in the Caspian sea is untapped.

Why would they be dumping all this money into nuclear research for purposes of energy? It doesn't make sense. And if Iran is only developing nuclear fuel for energy purposes, why not let the IAEA watch? There is nothing to spy on because that technology is already out there all over the place.

I also dont like the rheteric coming out of Tehran over the past year.

[Ms. Clio]

18. Maybe they want to reserve their oil for sale, since it's so valuable

But of course, you're such an expert on Iran.

On edit: And please link to any source that supports your assertion that the "IAEA seems rather convinced that they want to build a bomb." The article actually states: But an IAEA report said Iran just last week resumed making low-enriched uranium, suitable for power plant fuel, with a cascade of 164 centrifuges at its pilot enrichment plant.

[jerry611]

19. Doesn't make sense

It isn't cost-effective to do that. That nation is spending millions and millions dollars doing this research that they could easily buy.

John Kerry offered the idea that we should offer Iran help with developing nuclear power plants. It would be interesting to find out what that nation would say to such an offer. If they reject, it really raises an eyebrow of what they are actually doing in their underground labs.

[Ms. Clio]

20. Your reply doesn't make sense

It isn't "research" they are spending millions on, it is the technology.

And it isn't in John Kerry's power to make those offers, so speculating about Iranian reactions tis fruitless.

[jerry611]

21. The technology is readily avaliable

And why are they doing it underground and in such a hurry? Why do they want to hind what they are doing from the rest of the world?

We don't trust Iran. The IAEA does not trust them. And the UN does not trust them.

And with all this research they are doing, I would think we should start to see a few nuclear reactors soon. I mean a nuclear power plant isn't exactly cutting-edge technology.

[Ms. Clio]

22. Where are you getting all that from? Not from the article linked to

Again, this is what the IAEA actually thinks: "an IAEA report said Iran just last week resumed making low-enriched uranium, suitable for power plant fuel, with a cascade of 164 centrifuges at its pilot enrichment plant.

"And what do you mean, 'we', white man?"

[MadHound]

26. With only 164 centrifuges spinning

It's going to take Iran awhile to get enough enriched uranium to fire up a nuclear plant. A year or two, minimum. Enriching enough for a bomb is at least ten years worth of work, and perhaps up to fifteen.

[sandnsea]

23. No, not exactly

The resolution passed by the UN Security Council calls for Iran to stop enriching uranium as a sort of good faith measure to be followed up with real IAEA oversight. I haven't read anything that indicates the IAEA believes Iran is actually developing nuclear weapons.

Presuming Iran is developing nuclear energy, the oil doesn't necessarily have anything to do with it. If nuclear energy is cheaper than fossil fuel energy, then the logical thing to do is use nuclear energy and sell the fossil fuel. Basic market principles. You'd think a bunch of free market Republicons would have picked up on that quicker.

I don't like the rhetoric coming out of Iran either, but that's no reason to let the Bushies take us off on another wild wmd hunt.

[hunter]

24. I wonder what they'd do if someone gave them a bomb?

Just one bomb, nothing fancy. Here Iran, have a bomb.

Which city would they smuggle it into, Washington D.C. or Tel Aviv? BOOM!

Or maybe nothing would happen. They'd hide it in some closet and say "We have a bomb!"

Oh bother.

[leftchick]

30. CBS this morning had O'Hanlon from the Brookings Inst. on

He agreed with Hanna Banana that the fuel was for a weapon and nothing else!! :grr:

[SidDithers]

35. 164 centrifuges! My god!...

From there, it's only a really long and complicated, expensive, and impossible to hide process for them to enrich uranium to weapons grade.

We should probably start panicking right now.

Sid

[Ms. Clio]

43. mushroom cloud in 45 minutes!!!111!!!!11

do some people EVER learn?