An Update On Iran's Nuclear Program & The Stuxnet virus

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:08 am

Sekundarliterat wrote:

China and Russia have interests in Iran's great oil reserves, and they will not just happily leave it to the US.

It is a common misconception that the US has interests in Iran's oil. The US does not purchase any oil from Iran (Either does Russia). The US interests revolve around the surrounding countries like Saudi Arabia.

So does the US protect these other nations purely for their steady supply of Oil? Yes.. You bet.. Absolutely. And with out question.. I hope they continue. An note that the US only imports 15% of their needs from that region. It imports more from Canada than all of that region combined.

Irans quest for nukes is based squarely on their resolve to become the dominant power in the Middle East. They make no bones about it that they want to be in a position to better control the regions oil reserves and pricing. They hate the fact that the Saudis generally control the structure as it stands now.

btw... kind of off topic but... I read this morning that Iran is going to begin suspending crude exports to the British and French. China is expected to purchase any excess... at a 15% price reduction.

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:03 am

you prob won't win lotto wrote:

CrazyMcCool wrote:

I got no problem with their program, I do have a problem with their unstable radically run government that is not rational at all..

America, Isreal, Iran, India, Pakistan, UK, Egypt? I'm sorry, which one was stable? And not radical? Laughing

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2012 1:52 pm

i'm sorry, but do you actually have something to add to this discussion or are you just gonna quote what others say?

Fred-Bear wrote:

Irans quest for nukes is based squarely on their resolve to become the dominant power in the Middle East.

no doubt. they've managed so many times to state how they are gonna take out Israel it's stopped being funny. at first i thought Iran was being like North Korea: just looking for attention. but now it seems they're Hell bent on Middle Eastern domination. they've shown their support for Syria and Bahrain.

OT. note most Bahrainis even Shiites hate Ahmadinejad and his despicable gov't. they don't even treat their own citizens [majority Shiite] with any proper respect when they defy their gov't's actions. hangings, stonings, they have no shame when it comes to degrading them.

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:05 am

I'm glad to see that this thread is picking up steam and there have been some nice responses.

Fred-Bear wrote:

Sekundarliterat wrote:

China and Russia have interests in Iran's great oil reserves, and they will not just happily leave it to the US.

It is a common misconception that the US has interests in Iran's oil. The US does not purchase any oil from Iran (Either does Russia). The US interests revolve around the surrounding countries like Saudi Arabia.

Irans quest for nukes is based squarely on their resolve to become the dominant power in the Middle East. They make no bones about it that they want to be in a position to better control the regions oil reserves and pricing. They hate the fact that the Saudis generally control the structure as it stands now.

I agree with what you are saying here. This is all really about Iran trying to exert their influence and be come the dominant power in the region. They tried to take Iraq but after ten long years of war were unable to do so. Now they think that having nuclear weapons will give them power and prestige.

Sekundarliterat wrote:

What I mostly disagree with the US politics, is the way they treat Iran and other countrys in this concern. Instead of showing how to do it, by reducing their own arsenal, they just threat others with their massive force to resign to nuclear weapons. I say that Iran and all other country's should be able to have whatever the States have, so both power plants as nuke arsenal. Everything else is inconsequent and as I said, a childish arguing.

I think that Sekundarliterat was trying to frame this as a US vs Iran situation but that is simply not the case. Most of the world and Iran's neighbors in the region are opposed to their nuclear program. Also the Obama administration just announced a proposal to cut nuclear weapons.

US weighing options for future cuts in nuclear weapons, including 80% reduction
Lastly your argument that if the US has weapons then we shouldn't object to others having them is a weak one. I wish that the US had no nukes and hope that this new arms reduction proposal is successful.
I don't have any objection to Iran having nuclear power plants although I think there are better alternatives.

killa1986 wrote:

most Bahrainis even Shiites hate Ahmadinejad and his despicable gov't. they don't even treat their own citizens [majority Shiite] with any proper respect when they defy their gov't's actions. hangings, stonings, they have no shame when it comes to degrading them.

The Iranian people deserve better than this group of idiots that are in charge. Maybe soon they will rise up against the madness. The government is clearly fearful of this as they have recently cut off all the internets in the country. Unfortunately sanctions affect the citizens and create hardships for those who only wish to live in peace.

Ranchmoninov wrote:

Personally, I also think no country is stupid enough to fire a nuke on another .
But terrorists are, and that totally makes the West poop on his pants.

I agree that Iran's gov probably wouldn't push the button but what would happen if there was a coup and those weapons fell into the wrong hands. It is not hard to imagine such a scenario.

The other consequence is that this is sparking a middle eastern arms race. That is not good for anyone.

Anyway, here is some more news on recent developments:

AP Exclusive: Iran poised for big nuke jump

Quote:

Iran is poised to greatly expand uranium enrichment at a fortified underground bunker to a point that would boost how quickly it could make nuclear warheads, diplomats tell The Associated Press.

They said Tehran has put finishing touches for the installation of thousands of new-generation centrifuges at the cavernous facility -- machines that can produce enriched uranium much more quickly and efficiently than its present machines.

While saying that the electrical circuitry, piping and supporting equipment for the new centrifuges was now in place, the diplomats emphasized that Tehran had not started installing the new machines at its Fordo facility and could not say whether it was planning to.

Still, the senior diplomats -- who asked for anonymity because their information was privileged -- suggested that Tehran would have little reason to prepare the ground for the better centrifuges unless it planned to operate them. They spoke in recent interviews -- the last one Saturday.

The reported work at Fordo appeared to reflect Iran's determination to forge ahead with nuclear activity that could be used to make atomic arms despite rapidly escalating international sanctions and the latent threat of an Israeli military strike on its nuclear facilities.

If Iran does start using these new centrifuges then the timetable for stopping their nuclear ambitions is accelerated. Maybe the sanctions will not have time to work.

Here is some better news:

IAEA Visit May Be Iran’s Chance to Stem War Concerns Over Nuclear Program

Quote:

United Nations investigators begin two days of meetings in Iran today, offering Tehran’s government a chance to stem growing speculation the country’s nuclear program will spark a military conflict.

Officials from the International Atomic Energy Agency flew to the Iranian capital yesterday for their second round of talks in a month. The visit begins a week after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said his country will boost production of 20 percent enriched uranium at a deep underground facility in Fordo, near the holy city of Qom.
“This meeting is a crucial opportunity for everyone, including the Iranians, to get serious,” Arms Control Association Director Daryl Kimball said in a telephone interview from Vienna. “Getting serious means focusing on the near-term problem that 20 percent enriched uranium represents,” which drives the “hysterical war talk in some quarters.”

We can only hope that these talks will lead to inspections and a peaceful solution to this problem and that this is not just another stalling tactic.

Time will tell...

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:33 am

flatearthling wrote:

We can only hope that these talks will lead to inspections and a peaceful solution to this problem and that this is not just another stalling tactic.

Well, this is the same cat and mouse games that Iraq played. And as in that case, there came a point where diplomacy hits a brick wall. (And I know... no WMD's were found.. but deep down... I think most people don't really care.. the regime was full of pussies that was all talk)

Although the Bush administrations are commonly made out to be the village idiots by the left and the Obama administration, you can bet your life that they are secretly counting their blessings that the region currently has the following configuration where the stars indicate US or their allies military presence. And you can be assured the Iranian leaders wake up in the morning and see a map like this and say "WTF" !

Like I said in a previous post... if wannabe regimes want to play this game... they will learn the hard way.

Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 10:29 am

Well a lot has been happening lately. Some real tough talk coming from Obama and Netenyahu.

Israel's Netanyahu, in a risky strategy, presses U.S. on Iran

Quote:

At a much anticipated meeting Monday, Netanyahu expressed his appreciation for Obama's pledge to haltIran'ssuspected nuclear arms program. But Netanyahu's aides and supporters let it be known that they didn't think the White House was doing enough.

Some say Netanyahu's approach is working. With its threat of a military strike against Iran's nuclear program, Israel has focused U.S. attention on Iran like never before and drawn out the most explicit threat yet by Obama to use force against Iran if necessary.

President Obama had some pointed rhetoric for Iran.

Obama To Iran: I’m Not Bluffing

Quote:

President Barack Obama warned that he is not bluffing about attacking Iran if it builds a nuclear weapon, but in an interview published Friday, Obama also cautioned U.S. ally Israel that a premature attack on Iran would do more harm than good.

In his most expansive remarks on the issue thus far, Obama told The Atlantic magazine that Iran and Israel both understand that "a military component" is among a mix of many options for dealing with Iran, along with sanctions and diplomacy.

"I think that the Israeli government recognizes that, as president of the United States, I don't bluff," he said in the interview. "I also don't, as a matter of sound policy, go around advertising exactly what our intentions are. But (both) governments recognize that when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say."

[Netenyehu said this:]"As for Israel, like any sovereign country, we reserve the right to defend ourselves against a country, against a country that calls and works for our destruction,"

Those are very clear warnings and may be an indicator of what is to come.

Meanwhile, just when it looked like the negotiations for UN inspections had failed, Iran releases this statement:

Iran: U.N. can visit secret military complex

Quote:

(CBS/AP) TEHRAN, Iran - Iran says it will allow U.N. inspectors access to a secret military complex where the U.N. nuclear agency suspects secret atomic work has been carried out.The statement says the visit requires an agreement on guidelines for the inspection.

Encouraging, but it is only one facility and there are conditions to be agreed upon. Probably just another stall tactic.

In other off topic news North Korea has offered to halt their atomic testing program and allow inspections in return for what will probably be an enormous aid package. Well played by Korea as the US will be anxious to show how generous they can be if a country will shut down their nuclear weapons program.
North Korea’s Kim Game for 'Let’s Make a Deal'

Quote:

We have every reason to roll our eyes and scoff at Kim Jong Un’s first foray into diplomacy. In his debut, he pledges to halt nuclear tests and long-range missile launches. You can see by the muted reactions in Seoul and Tokyo that Asia is deeply skeptical, and it has every reason to be.

Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 3:45 pm

Fred-Bear wrote:

flatearthling wrote:

We can only hope that these talks will lead to inspections and a peaceful solution to this problem and that this is not just another stalling tactic.

Well, this is the same cat and mouse games that Iraq played. And as in that case, there came a point where diplomacy hits a brick wall

You are referring to the inspections in Iraq whose's results were flatly disbelieved by the "Coalition of the Willing" ?

And the Brick Wall of diplomacy, would that not be those same few countries that went in without even using or wanting to use Diplomacy ?

Yes, lets hope they have a better shot at Diplomacy this time round...

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:10 am

we all know Operation Iraqi Liberation did worse than planned, but the difference is Iraq never had it and Iran does. what that means is there is more of a threat of nuclear attack if we take the same road as Iraq. whether the attack hits the Middle East or further West is yet to be determined. Gosh i hope it won't come to that.