The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Out of their own mouths > Comments

Out of their own mouths : Comments

By Dave Kimble, published 22/2/2012

The official US line on the Iranian WMD threat and sanctions

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All
A great article by Australia's unofficial energy/environment national treasure, Dave Kimble.
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Wednesday, 22 February 2012 9:16:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The author is self-contradicting. He claims that the announcement means that the US KNOWS (his emphasis) that Iran is not planning to make a bomb, and yet this announcement states that Iran has 80Kg of 20% enriched uranium.

There is no discernible reason for Iran to enrich uranium to that level except to make bombs. Power station uranium only needs to be enriched to 3-4%,

As a result I find his suggestion that the US knows that Iran is NOT developing a bomb to be unconvincing, to say the least.
Posted by plerdsus, Wednesday, 22 February 2012 12:54:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
How about the publicly stated reason - for fuel rods for a research reactor for producing medical isotopes ?
Posted by Palloy, Wednesday, 22 February 2012 1:29:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This stuff in the hands of radicles is not a good idea. An election coming up and half the opposition is in jail. We know the result.
With what they have 80 kg; they could cause drastic problems for millions.
Radiation from Japan has been found 600 km's away.
Posted by 579, Wednesday, 22 February 2012 1:42:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is a poorly argued position. One has to wonder what the author's personal agenda might be.

He quotes the Director as saying:

"Iran nevertheless is expanding its uranium enrichment capabilities, which can be used for either civil or weapons purposes."

This would appear to be a fairly straightforward statement. The processes that the Iranians are presently undertaking can, according to the Director, be used to make weapons.

But in a breathtaking leap of logic, Mr Kimble ploughs on with:

>>As you can see, they "do not know if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons". This implies that Iran is not doing so now.<<

It does no such thing.

OK, so they probably haven't built any yet. But how does that prove that there is no intention to do so?

Despite the lack of any substance in his material, we still get the pompous assertion that:

>>...the US knows Iran does NOT have a nuclear weapons program<<

Absolute nonsense.

There is nothing, not a scrap of evidence anywhere in the article that even remotely suggests that Iran does not have a "nuclear weapons program". And everything to suggest that they do, indeed, have one under way.

And while I'm here...

The subheading to this article is "The official US line on the Iranian WMD threat and sanctions"

Just out of interest, what makes this particular individual report to a Senate Committee the "official US line"?
Posted by Pericles, Wednesday, 22 February 2012 2:06:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Back to the real world.

--Iran, a relatively poor country, has expended enormous resources on giving itself the capability to make nuclear weapons.

--It has also devoted considerable efforts to developing a nuclear-capable delivery system *.

--It is specious to compare mullah-ruled Iran to Japan blind Freddy can see that the differences go deeper than US likes and dislikes.

Only a fool would conclude that taking the final decision is anything more than a mere formality. Nothing is certain in life but the odds are overwhelming that once Iran has the capability it will take the final step.

Then we have the problem that if Iran goes nuclear so will Saudi Arabia** giving us two nuclear armed Muslim theocracies and that's not counting Pakistan.

I think it reasonable to infer that if Iran, Turkey's Shia neighbour, goes nuclear Turkey itself will start thinking along similar lines.

A nuclear Iran could, most likely will, trigger a nuclear arms race in one of the most unstable regions in the world.

Destroying Iran's nuclear facilities is not a good option. The fallout (pun intended) will be unpleasant.

But it may be the least worst option.

And maybe the least worst option is the best we can do.

Palloy

The idea that Iran would go to all this effort to produce medical isotopes that can be bought much more cheaply on world markets is a bit far fetched - and that's putting it kindly.

*IRAN TESTING MISSILES THAT COULD CARRY NUCLEAR WEAPON, UK'S HAGUE SAYS

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-06-29/world/iran.missiles.tests_1_nuclear-program-nuclear-activities-peaceful-nuclear-technology?_s=PM:WORLD

**HOW IRAN NUCLEAR STANDOFF LOOKS FROM SAUDI ARABIA: MUSTAFA ALANI

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-16/how-iran-nuclear-standoff-looks-from-saudi-arabia-mustafa-alani.html
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Wednesday, 22 February 2012 6:55:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy