Update: Iran's Nuclear Program

[Gravitymaster 0]

A few months ago we had a pretty heated debate about Iran's nuclear program. Some of us said Iran was just stalling, pretending to be interested in talks with European negotiators while at the same time continuing to enrich uranium to be used for weapons.

Others on here said Iran was sincere and that they thought negotiations should continue, and of course as usual these days the entire thread became another Bush bash.

So given the information in these two recent stories, I'm wondering if they change anybodys opinion about Irans goals to secure nuclear weapons?

Quote

Iran Says It Will Never Scrap Nuke Program

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI

(AP) Iranian President Mohammad Khatami, center, talks with unidentified lawmakers, after proposing...

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran will never scrap its nuclear program, and talks with Europeans are intended to protect the country's nuclear achievements, not negotiate an end to them, an Iranian official said Wednesday.

The remarks by Ali Agha Mohammadi, spokesman of Iran's powerful Supreme National Security Council, are the latest in a hardening of his country's stance amid ongoing talks with European negotiators. They also reflect Tehran's possible frustration at the lack of progress.

Europe is pressing Iran for concessions on its nuclear program, which the United States claims is aimed at producing atomic weapons. In exchange for nuclear guarantees, the Europeans are offering Iran technological and financial support and talks on a trade deal.

"We have the power to negotiate because we keep our (nuclear) achievements in our hands and we are negotiating to protect them," Mohammadi said Wednesday. "It's definite that we will protect our scientific achievements as a basic pillar, whether talks make progress or not."


Mohammadi's comments came a day after Iran's vice president, Gholamreza Aghazadeh, called on the Europeans to speed up the talks, amid reports that negotiations are deadlocked.

Aghazadeh, who also serves as head of Iran's atomic energy organization, suggested Iran was not happy with the progress of the talks, telling reporters: "We have to take the negotiations seriously and accelerate them."

European officials acknowledged the complexity of the negotiations, but said talks were going at a good pace and a diplomatic solution remained on track.

The talks have been carried out against a backdrop of U.S. warnings. In January, President Bush reaffirmed his support for a diplomatic settlement, but said he would not take any option off the table, including a possible military strike.

A summary of the negotiations that was leaked last week showed Europe had made little progress in convincing Iran to make permanent its temporary suspension of uranium enrichment activities, although negotiators said the atmosphere at the talks has improved recently.

Uranium enriched to low grades is used for fuel in nuclear reactors, but further enrichment makes it suitable for atomic bombs. The United States and other countries fear Iran seeks to enrich uranium not to the low level needed to generate power, as it claims, but to a weapons-grade that could become the core for a nuclear warhead.

While not prohibited from enrichment under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Iran suspended uranium enrichment and all related activities in November to build trust, reduce international suspicions and avoid U.N. Security Council sanctions. Tehran has said it will decide within three months whether to continue its suspension, which is monitored by U.N. nuclear inspectors.


***Iran and China linked to Ukraine missiles
By Tom Warner in Kiev
Published: February 2 2005 22:01 | Last updated: February 2 2005 22:01

An investigation by the Ukrainian secret police has found that Iran and China bought long-range missiles designed to carry nuclear warheads from Ukraine, one of the country's politicians said on Wednesday.


Grigory Omelchenko, an ally of the country's new leadership and a former head of the anti-mafia committee in the Ukrainian parliament, claimed on Wednesday that Ukraine's SBU secret police had found that 12 Kh-55s were illegally exported in 1999-2001. He said six of the air-to-ground cruise missiles were sold to Iran, and six to China.

The Kh-55 - which the US calls the AS-15 - has a highly accurate guidance system and a range of up to 3,000km, which would put Israel in striking distance of Iran. The missile was part of the Soviet bomber fleet weaponry left behind in Ukraine.

The allegations, made in Ukraine's parliament yesterday, bolster claims by the US and other governments that Iran is seeking to develop the ability to produce nuclear weapons. They also raise concerns about Iran and China's efforts to improve long-range missile technology.

Mr Omelchenko, a one-time SBU officer, said that last year the SBU prevented an attempt to export 14 Kh-55s and arrested a former SBU officer, who is being tried in Kiev's Regional Appeals Court.

He accused high-ranking officials linked to Leonid Kuchma, the former president, of covering up the SBU's findings about the sale to protect a "highly placed person from the circle of President Kuchma, who was involved in the illegal arms sales".

Last November, Colin Powell, former US Secretary of State, said he ha d seen intelligence that Iran was working to adapt missiles to deliver a nuclear weapon.

In September the US slapped sanctions on a private Ukrainian company for violating a US ban on proliferation to Iran, without specifying what it was suspected of selling.

[Gravitymaster 0]

My, my aren't we quiet on this issue today?

More......

Quote

Iran Tests Nuclear Trigger Mechanism - Opposition
Thu Feb 3, 2005 11:27 AM ET

By Kerstin Gehmlich
PARIS (Reuters) - Iran has conducted successful experiments on a crucial triggering mechanism for a nuclear weapon, an exiled opposition group said on Thursday.

President Bush on Wednesday renewed his accusation that Iran was seeking to develop atomic weapons and called it the "world's primary state sponsor of terror."

Tehran dismisses the accusations and says its atomic ambitions are limited to the peaceful generation of electricity.

The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), which wants to oust Iran's clerical rulers and has given accurate information on its nuclear sites in the past, said Iran was close to producing the 'neutron initiators' that spark the chain reaction in a bomb.

"Tehran has already succeeded in using beryllium in conjunction with polonium-210 for large scale laboratory testing purposes, and it is getting very close to the point of industrial production," Mohammad Mohaddessin of the NCRI told a news conference in Paris.

Diplomats have already said there is evidence that Iran has bought small quantities of beryllium and tried to buy much more, and that the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) is examining this as part of a two-year investigation of Tehran's nuclear program.

Beryllium also has many innocent uses, but Mohaddessin said Iran had not only secured significant quantities but also tried to conceal its purchases from the IAEA.

"Tehran currently has enough beryllium to produce initiators for a dozen nuclear bombs," he said.

He said the laboratory tests had been conducted at the Lavizan II site close to Tehran by experts from the Malek-Ashtar Industrial university, which is run by the Defense Ministry.

Germany, France and Britain, acting for the European Union, have been urging Iran to permanently scrap the uranium enrichment that could give it the potential to make nuclear explosives in return for political and economic incentives.

Washington takes a harder line and wants Iran to be reported to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions.

The NCRI is a coalition of exiled opposition groups. The State Department lists it and its armed wing, the People's Mujahideen, as terrorist organizations.

[Darius11 12]

Quote

The NCRI is a coalition of exiled opposition groups. The State Department lists it and its armed wing, the People's Mujahideen, as terrorist organizations.

Consider the source of the information.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Darius11 12]

The People's Mujahideen are the scum of the earth as far as i am concernd.
They actually fought and killed their own people during the Iran and Iraq war. I don’t care how much you hate the government why would you kill your own countrymen who are fighting to protect your country from invasion. That should tell you what the Mujahideen Khalgh(people) are all about.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

The People's Mujahideen are the scum of the earth as far as i am concernd.
They actually fought and killed their own people during the Iran and Iraq war. I don’t care how much you hate the government why would you kill your own countrymen who are fighting to protect your country from invasion. That should tell you what the Mujahideen Khalgh(people) are all about.

I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss them. They have a bit of history of being correct.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1350824;search_string=NCRI;#1350824

[kelpdiver 2]

Anyone that thinks Iran is not working as quickly as possible to develop weapons while talking out the side, is kidding themselves. It is absolutely in their interests to behave this way.

What you think of this is based entirely on your own interests in the matter.

[JohnRich 4]

From the news:

"Iran has conducted successful experiments on a crucial triggering mechanism for a nuclear weapon, an exiled opposition group said on Thursday..."

Full Story

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Since China bought those missiles as well and has nuclear capabilities, does that mean they should be invaded to?

[mikkey 0]

Quote

From the news:

"Iran has conducted successful experiments on a crucial triggering mechanism for a nuclear weapon, an exiled opposition group said on Thursday..."

Full Story

I would not take information from "exiled opposition groups" to be accurate. Look what happend with Iraq. The main reason for the intel fuck up in regard to WMD's was the reliance on Iraqi "exiled opposition groups" who fed the CIA BS for their own interest. The CIA's mistake was not to really question the information - it fit their political masters too well.

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[dorbie 0]

Quote

I would not take information from "exiled opposition groups" to be accurate. Look what happend with Iraq. The main reason for the intel fuck up in regard to WMD's was the reliance on Iraqi "exiled opposition groups" who fed the CIA BS for their own interest. The CIA's mistake was not to really question the information - it fit their political masters too well.

You mean it wasn't Bush & Rice manipulating the data? Whew I guess they're off the hook then.

[crozby 0]

Quote

You mean it wasn't Bush & Rice manipulating the data? Whew I guess they're off the hook then.

Oh come on. Its blindingly obvious that Bush and Blair picked the bits of data that suited their agenda and spun them into something much bigger and much more concrete than was acually there.

Analysts from within the intelligence agencies on both sides of the Atlantic have confirmed that is what took place. What makes you think you know better?

[AggieDave 6]

Do me a favor...

When posting stuff of this nature, please pronounce things correctly.

nUcler is how its said, not Nuclear...




(I like W. but I still find how he says nuclear very funny. Seems random, but everytime I see this thread title I think of it, so I had to share).

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[livendive 8]

Quote

Anyone that thinks Iran is not working as quickly as possible to develop weapons while talking out the side, is kidding themselves. It is absolutely in their interests to behave this way.

What you think of this is based entirely on your own interests in the matter.

What I think of this is that I don't know. I think it's funny when people sitting over here with no knowledge of the subject claim to *know* one way or the other on just about any subject.

I suspect Iran is making at least some minimal effort toward nuclear weapon technologies, and it might not be so minimal. I don't know whether they have any expectation of success. It wouldn't surprize me if they were simply putting on airs to try and get some sort of favorable treatment in exchange for their abandoning such activities.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Do me a favor...

When posting stuff of this nature, please pronounce things correctly.

nUcler is how its said, not Nuclear...




(I like W. but I still find how he says nuclear very funny. Seems random, but everytime I see this thread title I think of it, so I had to share).

I think it's New-cue-ler. I think he says it intentionally wrong although I don't know the reasons why. His dad used to mispronounce Sad-dam Hoosane incorrectly as a show of disrespect.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I suspect Iran is making at least some minimal effort toward nuclear weapon technologies, and it might not be so minimal. I don't know whether they have any expectation of success. It wouldn't surprize me if they were simply putting on airs to try and get some sort of favorable treatment in exchange for their abandoning such activities.

Until they have a viable nuclear option, Iran will always have to be concerned when Bush threatens military action against "Axis of Evil" nations. No concessions are worth that peace of mind, so unless they're truly hitting a brick wall in development, I don't see them stopping.

[crozby 0]

Quote

Until they have a viable nuclear option, Iran will always have to be concerned when Bush threatens military action against "Axis of Evil" nations. No concessions are worth that peace of mind, so unless they're truly hitting a brick wall in development, I don't see them stopping.

Thats what i think too. So does that make US military action against Iran a 'when' rather than an 'if'?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Thats what i think too. So does that make US military action against Iran a 'when' rather than an 'if'?

Depends on how far behind North Korea they are.

[rhys 0]

I have just read an interview from the ambassador of Iran to a news paper here in Tanzania, so not tainted by the US media!

In the interview he mentions that European and US companies were invited to invest in their nuclear research (that was for the use of energy and not weapons), but no one wanted to. It was also mentioned that before the revolution the western countries supported their endeavors to support their heavily populated country by investing in nuclear energy.

It was said that it was because of the religious stand of the country more than the threat of weapons, that their country has such a strong opposition.

O.k. They have not had the best track record but in recent years their literacy level above the age of 6 years old is in the 80-85%region, more than 50% of university students are women and more and more women are in government and executive positions.

From what i have read the country has moved in leaps and bounds.

How is the US in a position to question the ethics of another country?

The past is the past but also the present is the present.

people should sort their own shit out before judging others!

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[Gawain 0]

Here's my question in this mess: I've seen time, and time again that Uranium enriched to low grades is all that is needed for nuclear power plants. Is there any nuclear power specific benefit to further enrichment of uranium? Does it generate steam faster or something?

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[kallend 2,112]

Quote

Here's my question in this mess: I've seen time, and time again that Uranium enriched to low grades is all that is needed for nuclear power plants. Is there any nuclear power specific benefit to further enrichment of uranium? Does it generate steam faster or something?

Ask the US Navy why it uses highly enriched uranium in its submarine reactors. (As does the Russian navy).

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

Here's my question in this mess: I've seen time, and time again that Uranium enriched to low grades is all that is needed for nuclear power plants. Is there any nuclear power specific benefit to further enrichment of uranium? Does it generate steam faster or something?

Ask the US Navy why it uses highly enriched uranium in its submarine reactors. (As does the Russian navy).

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:pvdcjP0DmFQJ:www.princeton.edu/~globsec/publications/pdf/von_Hippel_SGS_137-164_1.pdf+why+does+the+US+Navy+use+highly+enriched+uranium+in+submarines&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us
I found this article that opens with initiatives by the US, and then USSR to reduce HEU in reactors throughout the world. The main reason for this was counter-proliferation. I couldn't read anything about HEU being useful outside of some medical applications and research reactors. Even research reactors appear to be ready for conversion to LEU. Even the propulsion applications seem to be subject to some measure of conversion.

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:CSZ8y-H01G4J:www.nrpa.no/symposium/abstracts/Frank%2520von%2520Hippel%2520-%2520HEU%2520in%2520Critical%2520Assemblies,%2520Pulsed%2520Reactors%2520and%2520Propulsion%2520Systems.doc+why+does+the+US+Navy+use+highly+enriched+uranium+in+submarines&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us
According to his, in 1994, Congress asked the Navy if it could convert to LEU in its propulsion systems. The Navy concluded that it could not, as the cores were designed to last as long as the ships, 30+ years. France used LEU in its subs, but they have to be refueled every 10 years.

So, aside from longevity, is there any real value to Iran making HEU for power production? The rest of the world doesn't seem to need it? Iran is not reinvesting in its infrastructure. They have the plants, the LEU and everything necessary to get the job done.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[kallend 2,112]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Here's my question in this mess: I've seen time, and time again that Uranium enriched to low grades is all that is needed for nuclear power plants. Is there any nuclear power specific benefit to further enrichment of uranium? Does it generate steam faster or something?

Ask the US Navy why it uses highly enriched uranium in its submarine reactors. (As does the Russian navy).

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:pvdcjP0DmFQJ:www.princeton.edu/~globsec/publications/pdf/von_Hippel_SGS_137-164_1.pdf+why+does+the+US+Navy+use+highly+enriched+uranium+in+submarines&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us
I found this article that opens with initiatives by the US, and then USSR to reduce HEU in reactors throughout the world. The main reason for this was counter-proliferation. I couldn't read anything about HEU being useful outside of some medical applications and research reactors. Even research reactors appear to be ready for conversion to LEU. Even the propulsion applications seem to be subject to some measure of conversion.

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:CSZ8y-H01G4J:www.nrpa.no/symposium/abstracts/Frank%2520von%2520Hippel%2520-%2520HEU%2520in%2520Critical%2520Assemblies,%2520Pulsed%2520Reactors%2520and%2520Propulsion%2520Systems.doc+why+does+the+US+Navy+use+highly+enriched+uranium+in+submarines&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us
According to his, in 1994, Congress asked the Navy if it could convert to LEU in its propulsion systems. The Navy concluded that it could not, as the cores were designed to last as long as the ships, 30+ years. France used LEU in its subs, but they have to be refueled every 10 years.

So, aside from longevity, is there any real value to Iran making HEU for power production? The rest of the world doesn't seem to need it? Iran is not reinvesting in its infrastructure. They have the plants, the LEU and everything necessary to get the job done.

Well, the more highly enriched the fuel, the easier it is to design a working reactor. We know that "Iran ... does not have the technical expertise to produce high tech things like .50 caliber sniper rifles, electronic sights for rifles, and other military electronics (ground radars and other sensors)." (Source, markharju), so I guess Iran needs all the help it can get to make its reactors work.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gawain 0]

Dude you're not answering the question. With a few exceptions, just about every country with a nuclear reactor has "help". Iran has been receiving assistance from Russia in building their reactors. I am asking if there is a true value or application to using HEU in power production?

Iran has already built their facilities. It's not like they are just cutting the ribbon on a host of new reactors.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[billvon 3,080]

>I am asking if there is a true value or application to using HEU in power production?

If you're building standard PWR's or BWR's then no; low enrichment is all you need. Why the question? I haven't heard anything about HEU in Iran, other than the HEU they found there in 2005 (which turned out to be contamination on centrifuges bought from the former USSR and Pakistan.)

[Misternatural 0]

more interesting developments
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE5AS1R320091129
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsMaps/idUSTRE5AS22X20091129

Beware of the collateralizing and monetization of your desires.
D S #3.1415