PDA

View Full Version : Iran increases stockpile of uranium


Preacher
11-20-2008, 04:06 PM
Iran increases stockpile of uranium

By Daniel Dombey in Washington and James Blitz in London
Published: November 19 2008 18:01 | Last updated: November 19 2008 23:00

Iran is forging ahead with its nuclear programme, the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog reported on Wednesday, deepening the dilemma facing US president-elect Barack Obama over his campaign promise to engage with Tehran.
The latest report by the International Atomic Energy Agency reveals that Iran is rapidly increasing its stockpile of enriched uranium, which could be rendered into weapons-grade material should Tehran decide to develop a nuclear device.



The agency says that, as of this month, Tehran had amassed 630kg of low enriched uranium hexafluoride, up from 480kg in late August. Analysts say Iran is enriching uranium at such a pace that, by early next year, it could reach break-out capacity – one step away from producing enough fissile material for a crude nuclear bomb.
“They are moving forward, they are not making diplomatic overtures, they are accumulating low enriched uranium,” said Cliff Kupchan, an analyst at the Eurasia Group, a risk consultancy in Washington. “These guys are committed to their nuclear programme: if we didn’t know that, they just told us again.”
The IAEA report also says there has been a breakdown of communication between the agency and Iran over alleged research on an atomic weapon. “The Iranians are making good progress on enrichment but there is absolute stone-walling on past military activities,” said Mark Fitzpatrick of the International institute for Strategic Studies. “It’s very disappointing.”
The progress chalked up by Iran increases the difficulties for Mr Obama, who campaigned on promises of talking to America’s enemies, although during the election he scaled down his initial vow to meet Iran’s leaders to a more general commitment to consider doing so if it advanced US interests.
“Obama faces a real dilemma,” said the Eurasia Group’s Mr Kupchan. “He must decide whether to pursue diplomacy quickly in light of rapid Iranian progress or whether to wait in the hope of a more moderate Iranian leadership after Iran’s June presidential election.”
European diplomats have responded favourably to Mr Obama’s suggestion of US engagement with Iran, although they are keen to avoid unilateral US actions that would rip up the approach fashioned by the permanent five members of the UN Security Council and Germany.
IAEA officials said relations between the organisation and Iran had deteriorated so much there had been no contact between them for over two months, UN officials said on Wednesday.
”We had gridlock before but then at least we were talking to each other. Now it’s worse. There is no communication whatsoever, no progress regarding possible military dimensions in their programme,” a senior UN official said.
Ahead of Wednesday’s report, Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad, the Iranian president, signalled that his country would press ahead with its nuclear program.
In a speech broadcast on TV, he said the US and its major allies wanted to deprive Iran of “honor and independence” by pressuring the country into halting its uranium enrichment work.
“Now the great powers are disappointed, as they have not the least bit of hope to break the Iranian people down,” he said. “If great powers seek to take over Iran’s rights, Iranian people will slap them so hard that they won’t find their way back home.”


Copyright (http://www.ft.com/servicestools/help/copyright) The Financial Times Limited 2008


All politics aside. This is one SCARY situation.

President Bush and President-elect Obama both have my prayers in dealing with this situation.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4eeacd78-b663-11dd-89dd-0000779fd18c.html

cubanstogie
11-20-2008, 04:10 PM
Obama has already invited Achmadinijad over for tea and crumpets in January, I'm sure they will work this out diplomatically.

NJarhead
11-20-2008, 05:04 PM
If we're so good at black op conspiracies (that some sects believe in so much) then why don't we provoke a war between them and North Korea then sit back and watch?

fansince'76
11-20-2008, 05:08 PM
“Obama faces a real dilemma,” said the Eurasia Group’s Mr Kupchan. “He must decide whether to pursue diplomacy quickly in light of rapid Iranian progress or whether to wait in the hope of a more moderate Iranian leadership after Iran’s June presidential election.”

What is this guy smoking? There won't be a "more moderate Iranian leadership" as it is the mullahs that actually hold the power in that country (and they ain't going anywhere). Ahmadinejad is simply a puppet and a mouthpiece - it's the Iranian "mullah-ocracy" that calls the shots.

IAEA officials said relations between the organisation and Iran had deteriorated so much there had been no contact between them for over two months, UN officials said on Wednesday.

”We had gridlock before but then at least we were talking to each other. Now it’s worse. There is no communication whatsoever, no progress regarding possible military dimensions in their programme,” a senior UN official said.

Once again, both the IAEA and UN show their absolute impotence in actually solving REAL problems. Time for another "strongly-worded resolution" issued by the UN against Iran, I suppose, while they become the newest member of the nuclear club. :coffee:

Good luck, Mr. Obama - you're gonna need it.

Cape Cod Steel Head
11-20-2008, 05:37 PM
Quick lets invade!

GBMelBlount
11-20-2008, 05:48 PM
Quick lets invade!

:stupid:

GBMelBlount
11-20-2008, 05:50 PM
Obama has already invited Achmadinijad over for tea and crumpets in January, I'm sure they will work this out diplomatically.

Thankfully Obama will get us through this diplomatically. I mean how could he not? He is a uniter and he speaks so eloquently.....oh, and he's for change...:thumbsup:

fansince'76
11-20-2008, 05:51 PM
Quick lets invade!

Nah, let's agree to give them a few light-water reactors in exchange for their crossing-their-hearts-and-hoping-to-die promise that they won't pursue the development of nuclear weapons. I mean it worked great with North Korea! :thumbsup:

revefsreleets
11-20-2008, 06:09 PM
I'd let Israel deal with it why we still can.

Obama ain't much of a fan of Israel, by the way. That's not real good news, by the by...

Hammer Of The GODS
11-20-2008, 06:42 PM
Well folks this is where the rubber meets the road!

The freedom we have today and the society we enjoy are direct results of our military sqaushing aggresion. If obama tries to talk his way into peace with the worlds aggressors, this country WILL pay a price! This world is far more dangerous now then when this country WAS the tip of the sword against all aggressors. Now obama wants us to be the what? He wants to bring a microphone to a gunfight !?! I know hes not right for this country but I do hope he proves me wrong! That is if he wakes up to the real world eventually!


People don't want to admit it but........................TO ENSURE PEACE , YOU MUST PREPARE FOR WAR!

stlrtruck
11-21-2008, 01:52 AM
Look's like Obama is going to be tested sooner than he thinks. It looks like Iran is going to be his 9/11. How he handles this situation could very quickly and easily be his namesake.

To be honest, I'd hate to be him right now.

SCSTILLER
11-21-2008, 01:46 PM
I'd let Israel deal with it why we still can.

Obama ain't much of a fan of Israel, by the way. That's not real good news, by the by...

I am surprised that Israel hasn't done something already! Hopefully they are planning something soon.

Vis
11-21-2008, 02:02 PM
I'd let Israel deal with it why we still can.

Obama ain't much of a fan of Israel, by the way. That's not real good news, by the by...

Right. Have you looked at Obama's Chief of Staff lately?

NJarhead
11-21-2008, 02:07 PM
I am surprised that Israel hasn't done something already! Hopefully they are planning something soon.

I don't think there can be any doubt. Either they act now, or they wait for the unthinkable and act then.

Preacher
11-21-2008, 03:39 PM
I don't think there can be any doubt. Either they act now, or they wait for the unthinkable and act then.


And I do NOT want to be around when THAT happens.

Because that will turn into a FULL BLOWN Nuclear war. Israel will strike Iran. Syria will get involved. ISrael will put a nuke into Syria, stating that they are allied and as allies, Syria has attacked with WMD.

Jordan and Saudi Arabia would be caught in the middle, in a VERY precarious sitation that only the U.S. would be able to help with, and then at great diplomatic sacrifice on our part.

I guarantee you, Israel has nukes, and enough of them to protect themselves against two or three mideast nations.

This is a very scary time. If President-elect Obama can walk that tight-rope and disarm that situation (without simply pushing it in the future like Clinton did with N. Korea) I will be VERY impressed.

NJarhead
11-21-2008, 03:55 PM
And I do NOT want to be around when THAT happens.

Because that will turn into a FULL BLOWN Nuclear war. Israel will strike Iran. Syria will get involved. ISrael will put a nuke into Syria, stating that they are allied and as allies, Syria has attacked with WMD.

Jordan and Saudi Arabia would be caught in the middle, in a VERY precarious sitation that only the U.S. would be able to help with, and then at great diplomatic sacrifice on our part.

I guarantee you, Israel has nukes, and enough of them to protect themselves against two or three mideast nations.

This is a very scary time. If President-elect Obama can walk that tight-rope and disarm that situation (without simply pushing it in the future like Clinton did with N. Korea) I will be VERY impressed.


Indeed scary. Some may say inevitible. I hope not.

I don't actually blame Clinton for North Korea. I blame only North Korea. Carter actually did a good job in 1994 of difusing that situation. There's only so much you can do with a lunatic. IMO.

MACH1
11-21-2008, 04:03 PM
And I do NOT want to be around when THAT happens.

Because that will turn into a FULL BLOWN Nuclear war. Israel will strike Iran. Syria will get involved. ISrael will put a nuke into Syria, stating that they are allied and as allies, Syria has attacked with WMD.

Jordan and Saudi Arabia would be caught in the middle, in a VERY precarious sitation that only the U.S. would be able to help with, and then at great diplomatic sacrifice on our part.

I guarantee you, Israel has nukes, and enough of them to protect themselves against two or three mideast nations.

This is a very scary time. If President-elect Obama can walk that tight-rope and disarm that situation (without simply pushing it in the future like Clinton did with N. Korea) I will be VERY impressed.

Don't forget about Russia. They'll get involved on the side of Iran.

Preacher
11-21-2008, 04:11 PM
Indeed scary. Some may say inevitible. I hope not.

I don't actually blame Clinton for North Korea. I blame only North Korea. Carter actually did a good job in 1994 of difusing that situation. There's only so much you can do with a lunatic. IMO.

The last part of that line is very true. There is something to say about projecting back into the past what you know about someone now, however the hardliners then were saying to not trust him.

Either way, a much bigger, and scarier situation sits before us with Iran, they are untrustworthy, support terrorists, and are at war with us already in Iraq.

MACH1 is right, with Russia playing their games as well. I just don't like what I am seeing.

steelwall
11-22-2008, 12:17 AM
And I do NOT want to be around when THAT happens.

Because that will turn into a FULL BLOWN Nuclear war. Israel will strike Iran. Syria will get involved. ISrael will put a nuke into Syria, stating that they are allied and as allies, Syria has attacked with WMD.

Jordan and Saudi Arabia would be caught in the middle, in a VERY precarious sitation that only the U.S. would be able to help with, and then at great diplomatic sacrifice on our part.

I guarantee you, Israel has nukes, and enough of them to protect themselves against two or three mideast nations.

This is a very scary time. If President-elect Obama can walk that tight-rope and disarm that situation (without simply pushing it in the future like Clinton did with N. Korea) I will be VERY impressed.

Yes if Israel takes the lead in this it will be a calling to all Muslims in the region thats a fact. However bringing up Israel, in itself is a whole nother discussion. One which many do not want to discuss.

And yes Israel has nukes, and has had them for some time now.

Makaveli
11-22-2008, 12:37 AM
Quick lets invade!

Before anyone "knows what hit em". And then,.....well we'll,.....just,...uuuuh,...stick around,...and make sure,...that,....uuuuuh,....nobody else has anything to say about it." LOL

Makaveli
11-22-2008, 12:45 AM
Really people,......global Nuclear war is not what ANY civilized nation on this planet advocates.(NO matter what the "hype" may be)

For if the entire world be destroyed,...what would there be left to rule ? And for the extremists of any "religion" whom are suicidal because they have no sense of awareness or self worth,....they are far too pitiful within the eyes of the gods to actually ever gain enough power to actually ignite such a conflict. (Global Thermo nuclear war)

Preacher
11-22-2008, 03:51 AM
Yes if Israel takes the lead in this it will be a calling to all Muslims in the region thats a fact. However bringing up Israel, in itself is a whole nother discussion. One which many do not want to discuss.

And yes Israel has nukes, and has had them for some time now.


I am not even talking about them taking the lead, but rather, israel being attacked by Iran.

LIke I said, they will retaliate.. and it will get REAL ugly.

steelwall
11-22-2008, 07:13 AM
I am not even talking about them taking the lead, but rather, israel being attacked by Iran.

LIke I said, they will retaliate.. and it will get REAL ugly.

I'm agreeing.

Preacher
11-22-2008, 03:20 PM
I'm agreeing.

:thumbsup: oops. sorry.



Once again, let's pray none of this comes about!

SCSTILLER
11-24-2008, 07:59 AM
Yes if Israel takes the lead in this it will be a calling to all Muslims in the region thats a fact. However bringing up Israel, in itself is a whole nother discussion. One which many do not want to discuss.

And yes Israel has nukes, and has had them for some time now.

Agree completely, and they will do everything in their power (or arsenal) to prevent themselves from being wiped off the map.

revefsreleets
11-24-2008, 12:10 PM
I want Israel to contain Iran conventionally. In the same fashion they have in the past when their unstable neighbors dabbled in nukes. Let them get close to completion, and bomb all the facilities into oblivion. It eats up time and resources to do it that way...have Iran spend the maximum money energy and time and THEN bomb their nuke program back 5 years at the 11th hour.