Is Iran trying to build a nuclear bomb?

[lovuian]

http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2004/09/02/55800.html


According to CNN, U.S. State Department official said the Bush administration still intends to work toward referring the matter to the U.N. Security Council for possible punitive action.
A report by the International Atomic Energy Agency accepts that Iran may not have produced HEU (highly enriched uranium), a key ingredient needed to produce nuclear weapons. HEU contamination had been found at the Kalaye Electric Company and at the Natanz sites in Iran.
"It appears plausible that the HEU contamination found at those locations may not have resulted from enrichment of uranium by Iran," the report said.
Iran has maintained that the source of the contamination was not domestically produced HEU but rather imported equipment -- specifically centrifuge equipment it said it purchased from Pakistan in the 1990s.
A UN report has failed to confirm US charges that Tehran is secretly developing nuclear weapons, but a top US official said Iran should still be brought before the UN Security Council as an atomic threat.
The United States expressed great concern over a confidential report by the UN nuclear watchdog in Vienna, which said Iran will resume large-scale production of material to enrich uranium, a process that can lead to nuclear weapons.
"We view with great concern the IAEA report that Iran is about to convert 37 tons of 'yellowcake' uranium into uranium hexafluoride gas, as well as Iran's recent announcement that it intends to test its gas centrifuges," John Bolton, undersecretary of state for arms control and international security said in Washington, informs the Australian.
more....

tick tock tick tock....:nuke:

[Radius]

1. Fuel Shortage

I'm sure that an oil deprived country like Iran really needs highly enriched nuclear fuel to generate power cheaply.

/sarc

ME arms race here we come.

[Paradise]

2. ask heaves

q. how does a country defend itself against a 'policy-of-preemption-superpower'?

a. go nuclear!

[porkrind]

23. I thought the same thing.

I'd be thinking to myself "Jeebus, that Bush doomsday cult is f*cking crazy. We're next unless we get the bomb! Hurry UP!!!"

Hey *, thanks for making the world a dangerous nightmare.

:eyes:

[Yavin4]

3. Yes, They Are Building A Nuke Because They're Surrounded

by us in Afghanistan and Iraq, and they've been called evil by this administration. They're safeguarding themselves from an invasion by us. Yet even more proof that we are not safer under Bush.

[nonbelief]

4. If I was Iran....

If I was being constantly threatened with invasion by American neo-cons I'd build nukes too.

[Radius]

5. Don't worry

They are much more interested in vaporizing jews than us. You see Israel can't give them all permanent orange afros in under an hour.

edit:spelling

[Djinn]

18. Israel can send nukes THEIR way of course

and have been able to do so for a couple of decades now. Any nation being threatened with "pre-emptive" war by a nation with troops in the two countrys that border it that doesn't arm itself would be criminally insane.

[merh]

6. Who can blame Iran -- with the kooks we have behind the wheel?

They have to do something to prevent our nation from attacking them, willie nillie, when the mood hits. Who can blame them for wanting to develop something that might make us think twice before attacking them. Yeah, GWB is a brillant foreign policy president! NOT

[Radius]

7. I think

they have been up to this for a while, more than three years.

Even if they do develop it they would be using it in their country if we invaded, right?

This has more to do with Israel. New arms race.

[lovuian]

8. Just a small point US troops 140,000 are in Iraq which isn't far

So I think this is more than Israel

[Radius]

9. We

would get a minimum of 30 minute tipoff from sats. if they launch. It would be their last mistake. The response to a first strike from Iran would mean the death to every living thing in their country. They have much more to loose.

No one has discussed invading iran that I've heard.

I think they have been working on this for many years as a response to Israel. IMHO.

[daleo]

21. I wouldn't make assumptions about a massive retaliation

Not that I think any notion of humanitarianism would come into play, but I am old enough to remember phrases like "nuclear fallout", "nuclear winter", etc.

It seems like the rhetoric both here and in the news has forgotten these issues, but I don't know if strategists have eliminated them from their calculus. I don't mean to accuse you specifically, the phenomenon is quite general.

Even the idea that Israel would nuke Iran or Syria seems doubtful, unless it truly was a "Samson strategy". These places are just not that far apart. Ditto for Iran nuking Israel.

[merh]

13. Yes, several nations have been developing nuclear weapons. Having

the nukes serve as a protection of sorts - what nation will attack you if you are able to defend by deploying your nuclear missles?

But you can bet your bottom dollar that USofA's "pre-emptive doctrine" and the rumblings it has been making about attacking Iran have spurred Iran's drive to acquire nuclear weapons.

Guess what, nobody trust the U.S.of A. any more! We are not the envied, we are the hated and the distrusted!

[Zero Gravitas]

10. The Bush Doctrine

If a potential enemy potentially might develop weapons-related program activities sometime in the future, then a country has the right to arm its self and pre-emptively attack that potential enemy. Right?

IF it is only the Bush Administration that is claiming that Iran has nukes then I don't believe it, they have no credibility whatsoever.

[yardwork]

11. Probably.

I assume you are even more concerned about the existing nukes in North Korea, China, Pakistan, India, and Russia?

Right? Or are you just worried about the possibility of Iran building a nuke?

[Radius]

14. Iran and Pakistan

and their nuclear cold war is bad news. I'm pretty much against people who might actually use nukes having them.

Iran and Israel are moving to a cold war build-up. Iran does some nutty Theocratic stuff, start mixing fundie muslims, mullahs, israel, and nukes and the outcome can only be bad..

Russia is scary because their security is lacking and china, well who knows with china.

[mbperrin]

19. "against people who might actually use nukes having them."

There's only one country in the world which has used nukes in a war. The good ol' USA. So who do we turn over the nukes to?

[MrPrax]

12. Here we go again...

Jeez when was the last time Bush and his scumbag Admin had a 'difference' of opinion with the IAEA regarding a Middle East nation it didn't like...

The same stupid script and AMAZINGLY sells well to American liberals

Good take here on the re-newed effort to expand the ME war...

Fanning the Hysteria About Iran
NPR Leads the Charge to War

"...Listeners to National Public Radio are increasingly apt to criticize the "rightward shift" in the station's news coverage. The August 30 "Morning Edition" program, however, reached a new low for slanted journalism and for making the Bush Administration's case for war with Iran.

The commentary titled "US Presses UN Agency on Iran Nuclear Program" was a textbook example of propaganda dressed up to look like unbiased reporting."
http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney08312004.html

Even Pat Buchanan cynically figures in his new book that the Bushites will attack Iran if solely for the reason it will take the increasingly dense American public off the utter failure in Iraq...

[damntexdem]

15. Iran is crazy if they're NOT trying to develop a nuclear bomb.

Because the Bushistas have Iran right in their bombsights anyway. They'd better develop something to sting back with.

[Lost147]

16. Bush started a small arms race

we allow ourselves to be pushed around by nations that have nuclear weapons and leave those that do alone. We had North Korea screaming that it had Nukes while the US was concerned with the evil aluminum tubes that Saddam possessed that you could maybe build part of a missile out of which might carry WMD...

[number6]

17. the legacy of Bush

:nuke:

[ilovenicepeople]

20. I'll kick that!

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

[Matilda]

22. The stand-off between Iran and Israel is a worry,

but I'm far more concerned with the U.S. as long as it's Bush who
has his finger on the button.

[lapfog_1]

24. So... why bother to build one

when they are surrounded by countries that will sell them
one (Former Soviet states, Pakistan)?

Oh, that's right... plausible deniability plus the certain
knowledge that Iran IS a nuclear power (rather than have to
spend on "testing" somewhere).