That's silly. They have a deal with Russia for building a nuclear power plant.
Russia, Venezuela sign deal on nuclear power plant construction (Update 1) | World | RIA Novosti
Iran planning to send ships to the Atlantic Coast
- Thread starter JTF-2
- Start date
Russia, Venezuela sign deal on nuclear power plant construction (Update 1) | World | RIA Novosti
Beatmaster
New Member
Yes true and thats exactly the whole thing, everyone knows that this has happened, but what i mean with provoking is the simple thing that Iran leadership made some serious comments that did ring a alarm trough out its direct neightbours and troughout the world, that was by far not a smart move.
Now i would be the last person to say if Iran is provoking or not but if you have to believe the news then Iran is being setup as a second saddam regime and sabre rattle continues till a armed conflict becomes unavoidable.
The risks and dangers involved in this region and the unstable regimes feed of eachother and everything is building to a climax.
On one hand you got the west who does secure its intrests and try to maintain peace in Iraq and afganistan, on the other hand you got all those regimes who are subject to a massive revolution, and then you got israel, syria, pakistan, and you got Iran and its intrests .....something has to give....because if everyone is sticking to their agenda and persue it then it will be set to a armed conflict.
And Iran by playing dirty harry is provoking the west, with its nucliare program, its arms sales and its supportive nature towards " rebel groups".
And i understand that both the west and iran are pointing fingers towards eachother and they both try to diplomaticly undermine eachother.
But imo it really does not matter who is right or wrong but someone has to give in or there will be a armed conflict, and after everything Iran has done to aid the US cause in Iraq i strongly believe that like pakistan Iran will not be the one who is willing to give in..or do is see this wrongly?
And this is something that the US will not allow, or will try to avoid, because after everything that happened the past 10 year its obviously that the US did make some very stupid desisions and giving Iran the option to play ball would automaticly mean that the US will lose prestige.
I find this personally very tricky to talk about as i struggle for the right words to explain what i mean and i know you are 100% right.
But Iran has being put on public trail on the media for its N-Program and it has been put on public trail for other actions.
And yes the US is having a real hard time to come to a agreement with Iran (Even if Iran is willing to) but the US want that agreement on their terms....and thats something Iran will probably not do.
And i personally do not see the US lowering those terms as it would sink US influence in the region and the US will have to play ball then.
By being on public trail themself.
I hope you understand what i try to say, and if i got it all wrong by all means correct me.
So what? That is a POWER plant, not an ENRICHMENT plant to refine natural uranium to make fuel for the power plant. They are not the same. It is like saying that you do not need an oil refinery because you just bought a new truck with a diesel engine.
A nuclear plant only works as long as you have got fuel, and the fuel assemblies will have to come from Russia. An enrichment plant would allow them to make their own fuel and (theoretically) assemblies for the reactor in the power plant, so they are independent from foreign sources.
The same technology used to refine uranium for fuel can be used to make fuel for a nuclear device (bomb). Just build a bigger plant with more stages, or running the product back through a few more times. That is what Iran is doing. :hul
Why do you think they want the technology in the first place? Also, does Venezuela have access to nuclear materials within their own borders?So what? That is a POWER plant, not an ENRICHMENT plant to refine natural uranium to make fuel for the power plant. They are not the same. It is like saying that you do not need an oil refinery because you just bought a new truck with a diesel engine.
A nuclear plant only works as long as you have got fuel, and the fuel assemblies will have to come from Russia. An enrichment plant would allow them to make their own fuel and (theoretically) assemblies for the reactor in the power plant, so they are independent from foreign sources.
The same technology used to refine uranium for fuel can be used to make fuel for a nuclear device (bomb). Just build a bigger plant with more stages, or running the product back through a few more times. That is what Iran is doing. :hul
Why does Iran? Must be some kind of prestige thing. Or possibly a cover for weapons development, which is also a prestige thing. Only fools could think that being able to create the ultimate toxic mess makes you respectable.
Uranium is one of the most wide spread elements, but the market is not as large as you think and has been dominated by a few high grade deposits. If you are willing to spend enough money most decent size countries can produce enough within their borders for a small industry or a few uranium bombs. Venezuela has several medium grade deposits that are not commercially viable, plus there are claims of a high grade deposit in a disputed border area between Venezuela and Ghana. There are unconfirmed rumors that Venezuela has paid for some of their purchases from Iran with yellow cake (uranium concentrate).
[/I]
A writers thoughts on Iran -
In addition, Iran steadfastly remains focussed on any kind of duplicity to be engaged in by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia-Islamic Republic of Pakistan combine. For the Mullahs of Pakistan it is always about the triumph of Sunni-led Jihad and this is where they will be decisively defeated not just by Iran, but also by an alliance of convenience between the various Central Asian Republics, albeit prodded by the likes of Russia and India. For the US, I don’t see it retreating or disengaging admidst a strategic stalemate in Afghanistan, for if it were to do so, then an emboldened ‘coalition of the Sunnis’ will definitely to stage a 9/11 redux on US soil. If pragmatism prevails, as I believe it will, the US—just like what it did after 9/11—will acquiesce to an Iran willing to play a decisive role along with a coalition of the CARs, Russia, India and an Afghanistan-minus-Taliban, thereby ensuring a satisfactory if not perfect end-game inside Afghanistan.
The Iranian nuclear programme is not intended to provoke anyone but intended for regime survival period. On the other hand, if one were to rely solely on the establishment press, the same press that pushed the messge that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and Iraq was a danger to world peace, one would get the impression that the mullahs are just praying for the day when they can start launching ballistic missiles to wipe out the ''free' world. As I mentioned earlier in another thread, the nuke programme was started by the Shah, who publicly said he wanted a bomb. It was reluctanly revived by Khomeni after it became cllear that Saddam had a similiar programme in place and had resorted to chemical warfare. As to why the Iranians would want a bomb - bear in mind that there is a huge American military presence in the Middle East and America is in an alliance with the Sunni Arab states, which have had centuries of strife with the Shiite Iranians. And there is also a nuclear armed Israel, which ironicly, before the 1979 revolution, was Iran's main partner in the region, and during the Irans war with Iraq, provided Iran with badly needed weapons and spares.
A writers thoughts on Iran -
In addition, Iran steadfastly remains focussed on any kind of duplicity to be engaged in by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia-Islamic Republic of Pakistan combine. For the Mullahs of Pakistan it is always about the triumph of Sunni-led Jihad and this is where they will be decisively defeated not just by Iran, but also by an alliance of convenience between the various Central Asian Republics, albeit prodded by the likes of Russia and India. For the US, I don’t see it retreating or disengaging admidst a strategic stalemate in Afghanistan, for if it were to do so, then an emboldened ‘coalition of the Sunnis’ will definitely to stage a 9/11 redux on US soil. If pragmatism prevails, as I believe it will, the US—just like what it did after 9/11—will acquiesce to an Iran willing to play a decisive role along with a coalition of the CARs, Russia, India and an Afghanistan-minus-Taliban, thereby ensuring a satisfactory if not perfect end-game inside Afghanistan.
Iranian arms sales? The biggest proliferator of arms to the region is the U.S. and Europe. Iran supplies Hezbollah with arms because the Lebonan is an area of much importance for Iran, and because Iran sees itself as the protector for all shiites, irrespective of where they are from.
What about the ''supportive'' nature towards Iranian rebels by other countries, whom the Iranians call ''terrorists'' but whom in the West are referred to as ''dissidents''? What about the current ''cold war'' or ongoing ''fight'' waged by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, with U.S. backing, to limit the the influence of Iran. What about the presecution of shiites in Bahrain, which Saudi has a big hand in? How can the West seriously expect Iran not to meddle in Iraq when Iraq is in Iran's backyard and contains a majority shiite population? And after a long history of Western inteference in the Middle East and making major decisions, including drawing up artificial borders and carving up the areas into various spheres of interests, in which the locals had no say in and are still paying for, IMO accusing Iran of meddling in Iraq would be a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
By that logic, the U.S., Britain, France, Russia and the rest of the ''club'' would have given up their nuke capability a long time ago. Obviously, each have compelling reasons to continue stockpiling and maintaining nukes.
Last edited:
Iran needs nuclear power as a sign of prestige, as well as the technology. Weapons for them are the only way to guarantee that the west won't attempt regime change.
So the first thing they would do is start mining the uranium. That would be the first sign. The second sign would be that they are actively seeking centrifuge technology. We have neither at the moment.
Quite a few countries have announced similar plans, doesn't mean it is a cover for developing a nuke capability. Iran, unlike Venezuela, has nore compelling reasons to acquire a nuke capability.
Like it had ''iron clad'' proof that Saddam had an active nuke programme and was planning to export it? If there was even a whiff of suspiscion that these ships were carrying such technology, all legalaties would be waved aside for the sake of national interests and these ship would be intercepted and boarded.
And what documented examples can you give that Iran is willing to sell weapons to anyone?? Iran is in the business of acquiring weapons or technology by any means and unlike North Korea is not hard up for cash.
Some excerpts from Dr. Khan's confession regarding Iran and the problems the Iranians faced. I would guess that due to infomation provided by dissidents and intel, the West has a pretty good idea as to what stage the Iranians have reached with their programme.
In 1989 or 1990 COAS, Gen. Aslam Beg, promised to give the Iranians a few weapons and technology in lieu of 10 years of our defence budget. The Iranian Army Chief, Shamkani, flew to Islamabad in his own plane to pick up the weapons and papers. Admiral Sirohey as Chairman JCSC had a hard time trying to get out of this commitment, in which he succeeded. Later there was a lot of pressure by the COAS on Gen. Imtiaz and P.M. Benazir Bhutto to honour his commitment. Under pressure, Gen. Imtiaz asked Dr. Hashmi (I was out of station) to give some centrifuge parts and drawings etc. to the Iranians. He (Hashmi) asked him to wait until my return. When I got back, Gen. Imtiaz advised me to get components of two old (P-1) discarded machines and pack them into boxes together with 2 sets of drawings prepared by the late Mr. Khokhar. These drawings on their own were not sufficiently detailed to enable mastery of this difficult technology. The components and drawings were handed over to the late Dr. M.Z. Niazi for further disposal.
It was some time in 1994 or 1995 that Dr. Niazi requested me to see a few Iranian scientists passing through Karachi from China on their way to Dubai and then on to Teheran. I met them in our guesthouse in Karachi for about half an hour. I did not know any of them and they didn’t give any names. They said that they could not make any progress with their programme and asked whether it would be possible for me to visit them or to send a team for a few weeks. I flatly told them that it was not possible to have that kind of contact. They then asked a few simple questions and I advised them to study the available scientific literature, which contained all the information they were asking for. They seemed to be ignorant of the basic knowledge available in publications.
The Iranians went on their own to buy, process or manufacture components and equipment. We did not hear from them for years. Some 10 odd years ago Tahir asked for some P-1 components from Farooq (KRL). I don’t remember the exact details. As you mentioned, some small components (200 sets) were collected from our old, discarded stock or a few may have been manufactured and sent by Farooq (KRL) to Tahir, who then probably passed them on to some Iranians. There were no casings, bases, feed systems, scoops etc. Without this system the machine is useless and hence the components were of little value in the overall project. Furthermore, the components were old, mostly rejected due to being out-of-tolerances. They could, at the most, be useful for assembling a few machines but it would not have been possible to make them run to the desired speed. You have to be extremely competent and expert to assemble, balance and run these machines to full speed (63,000 rpm). I allowed it as it was earlier sanctioned by Gen. Imtiaz and the Government and it would keep the Iranians happy and our friendship with them in tact. That the Iranians failed to achieve any progress in 15 years, shows the complexities and extreme technical expertise required to master this technology. It is most unfortunate that, having been betrayed by their own opposition nationals (Mujahideen Khalq Group) and having failed in their effort to achieve any progress, the Iranians have reportedly pointed their finger at us and are now putting us into trouble.
I think we can all agree that this so-called deployment or voyage to the North Atlantic by a small number of Iranian ships, with minimal combat capability is for political reasons and are not part of any plans to secretly smuggle nuke technology to anyone or to attack the U.S., as suggested by someone here
.
Last edited:
Ananda
The Bunker Group
You Know Sturm, talking with an Indonesian Nuclear agency official that have strong connection with IAEA show that the West actually very aware that Iran still a long way to achieve Nuclear weapon grade. The Russian know this, and they (the Russian) is the one that actually very concern with Nuclear armed Iran considering they the one that share border with Iran, and not UK, US, German, France, and the whole Western world Phobic with Iran.
With that in mind, you can wondered why the Russian is more tolerable with Iran Nuclear development than the West. One can simple put that Russian want the business. But I believe, it's simply because the Russian know how far Iran still are from achieving Nuclear armed capability (or if they ever will). But hey, Iran Phobia sell well for the Western elections. so why bother (west politician) open the truth of what Iran really capable of.
With that in mind, you can wondered why the Russian is more tolerable with Iran Nuclear development than the West. One can simple put that Russian want the business. But I believe, it's simply because the Russian know how far Iran still are from achieving Nuclear armed capability (or if they ever will). But hey, Iran Phobia sell well for the Western elections. so why bother (west politician) open the truth of what Iran really capable of.
Beatmaster
New Member
Might be so, on the otherhand who knows how far Iran really is, keep in mind there are enough smart people out there (either ex-russian) or either money hungry people that can and have the knowlegd to build a bomb.
Not saying that the blackmarket and the classic backdoor trades are the ultimate way as they are far from it.
But if your bag of money is big enough then everything is possible, and yes sturm said it right i was wrong in my view on iran, fact remains everyone believes to know what iran is capable of and everyone got their thing to say, however i wonder why the whole international community is fixed on Iran?
Obviously from a US pov it turned out that the whole Iraq story was ...well lets call it nice a VERY VERY bad display of intel and saddam its nucliare program and tools where virtually non exsistend.
However the news has showed various documents and such (Not to mention wikileaks which contributed huge in the info that came out)
And i cannot judge if the info is true or not but fact remains that there are many nations out there who would love to see the end of Irans nucliare program (Regardless if its for civilian uses or military)
Anyway as i said many nations are fixed upon Iran and one after another UN sanction is being put up against Iran, now call me crazy but to justify such sanctions you will have to have a damn good reason.
Now i would like to know, why everyone is making such a fuzz about Iran, as either Iran is the bad guy and needs to be put on its place, or either the western community is playing a dirty game....which in the end may result in another war, for the wrong reasons.
Afterall where smoke is there is fire.
And if the US (Or any nation) claims that Iran is using its program for a bomb then i would say let them proof it because the last time (Iraq) there where only rumors and so called hard evidence which turned out to be nothing more then just "guesses" and Who knows conclusions.
The reason i say this is because i do not know and i really don't, what to believe in the news, on hand says Iran is bad, the other hand says Iran is ok.
But now look it from a Irany pov....if this all turns out to be another "bad display of intel" and a failure of diplomatic's like we have seen before then i could understand that Iran might turn mad...afterall because they have been punished by UN resolutions and they have been put on public trail for the international community.
Iam not saying that the international community is telling lies or anything, but this same applies for Iran, for all who knows perhaps they are right and is the program pure civilian.....thats something the international community has to proof before they start sabre ratteling and putting sanctions up imo.
As i said i am really not an expert on this matter so by all means educate me on this.
Cheers
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
This is getting a bit far afield from Iran despatching naval vessels to the Atlantics, but some things do bear commenting on.
A couple of things. Centrifuges are not the only method for nuclear enrichment, there are others. Nor is enrichment the only activity which can lead to fissionable material.
Also, and this has to do with some of the concerns about Iran's nuclear program. IIRC part of the Russian contract to build a nuclear powerplant in Iran, was that Russia would provide Iran with the needed nuclear fuel for the reactor. Which means that Iran would have no need to conduct nuclear enrichment, since they would be receiving already processed fissionable material for the reactor. This means that Iran would not need to do any enrichment, unless they wanted to do something with the nuclear materials aside from use it in their nuclear powerplant.
Again IIRC, part of the latest argeement with Russia providing the nuclear materials, was that Russia would also then take the spent fuel back to Russia for disposal. That suggests to me that Russia does have concerns about Iran's nuclear programme, since spent fuel can be re-processed.
-Cheers
Seymour Hersh in his ''The Sampson Option'' wrote that Israel's Jericho's during the Cold War were also targetted at places like Uzbekistan and other southern regions of the Soviet Union.
The ''big'' question we should ask is whether an Iran in possesion of a nuclear capability will actually make the world a more dangerous place, as Uncle Sam constantly reminds us, and whether it will make any difference to the overall situation? The message we constantly get is that a nuclear bomb in Iranian hands will lead to unstability and the possibility that the Iranians, led by a nutter of a President [which he is] and mullahs who place more importance in the afterlife, will use it on Israel. Either that or there is a danger that such weapons or technology will end up in the hands of terrorists. Yet nobody has the the million dollar question as to why Iran would do this if not attacked first? IMO, all this doomsday talk about the dangers of an Iranian bomb and the dangers of nuclear proliferation is a smokescreen to ensure that Israel, and only Israel has a nuke capability, as part of Uncle Sam's longstanding policy of ensuring that Israel maintains an edge over all of its neighbours.....
Well said Sturm,
I think the Iranian nuclear question is a lot of smoke and mirrors. So the question has to be asked. How gains the most out of the Iranian nuke weapons program being ratcheted up in the media? The US? Israel? Iran? After the Saddam WMD intel Foxtrot Oscar i tend to take any intel coming from pollies etc with a big grain of salt. So back to my question - who has the most to gain from this?
Really? Which version of Jericho, & when? Uzbekistan is 3000 km from Israel, & the Cold War definitely ended in 1991, having been petering out since Gorbachev became Soviet leader in 1985.
Look up the estimates of performance & date in service of the various Jericho missiles.
I suspect you're thinking of a different place, not Uzbekistan.
The Shah's main intention in getting nukes was for prestige, in line with his vision of Iran becoming a modern day version of the Persian empire, and fears that the Soviet Union would move south across to Zagros mountains and only stop when they reached the Gulf. After seeing what happened to Saddam, and more recently Gadaffi, the Iranians will be more convinced than ever that only nukes will guarantee that Western troops don't enter Tehran.
For Israel, confirmation that Iran has a nuke capability, will most certainly lead to increased cooperation with the U.S., additional military aid and the usual chorus of U.S. politicans affirming Israel's right to exist.
For the U.S., an Iranian bomb would provide it with another excuse to maintain troops in the Middle East, a move that would be backed whole heartedly by countries like Saudi, Kuwait, Bahrain, etc, The presence of Western troops in the Middle East continues to be very unpopular with the vast majority of Arabs and has been used as a rallying cry for extremist groups like AQ, to justify their actions and gain support. The next question to be asked, assuming that some sort of accomadation can be reached with Iran in the future, and that the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan becomes stable, is what reason will the West have to continue to maintain a military presence in the region?
Not really sure as to how accurate the info is, the time line and what version of the Jericho the writer was referring to, but it is definitely mentioned in the book that parts of the Soviet Union's southern flank was well within range and that the soviets were told this. You're probably right though, it could have been the Caucasus region rather than the Central Asian republics.
All I've heard of is the Caucasus, e.g. Baku. That's possible, but a missile that could reach Baku would still be a few hundred km short of the nearest part of Central Asia (which is not Uzbekistan) , & over 2000 km short of the furthest corner of Soviet Central Asia. The Central Asian republics cover about the same area as the Indian subcontinent.
I've never heard any suggestion that Israeli missiles had that sort of range during the Cold War.
I suspect that someone, at some point, has made a geographical error.
I've never heard any suggestion that Israeli missiles had that sort of range during the Cold War.
I suspect that someone, at some point, has made a geographical error.
The period we are talking about was at the height of the Cold War. I have to go through the book again which I have at home but if I'm not mistaken it was a warning to the Soviet Union due to fears that it could intervene in any war between Israel and say, Syria. As to why Uzbekistan or the Caucasus region, these would be the only parts of the Soviet Union that could possibly be within range of the Jericho.
P.S. Swerve is right, I meant the Caucasus region and not Uzbekistan.
Sampanviking
Banned Member
I would guess the target referred too would have been Azerbaijan not Uzbekistan.
There is sense in doing that, as I understand that the Caspian ports of Azerbaijan were regarded as easier for the disembarkation of the Red Army, transported by Sea, than by trying to cross the Caucuses by land.
Such forces would have been well poised to enter Turkey, Iran and push to meet up with regional allies and bases for a deep push into the middle east.
There is sense in doing that, as I understand that the Caspian ports of Azerbaijan were regarded as easier for the disembarkation of the Red Army, transported by Sea, than by trying to cross the Caucuses by land.
Such forces would have been well poised to enter Turkey, Iran and push to meet up with regional allies and bases for a deep push into the middle east.