You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran nuclear plant 'resumes work'
2005-11-17
Iran has begun processing a new batch of uranium at its Isfahan nuclear plant, diplomats close to the United Nation’s nuclear watchdog have said. The news comes despite mounting pressure from the United States and European governments for Iran to halt all sensitive nuclear work. "The first drums of new uranium ore were fed into the process at the uranium conversion facility in Isfahan this morning," one unnamed diplomat, who is close to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told AFP in Vienna on Wednesday.

With uranium conversion resuming at the controversial plant, a statement from the European Union warned that Tehran was at a crucial juncture in its international relations. "The world is watching," said British Europe minister Douglas Alexander, representing the current British presidency of the EU at a debate on Iran at the European Parliament. "Iran must provide objective guarantees that its nuclear program is for solely peaceful purposes,” he said. He added that the EU was consulting with other countries including the US, Russia, China, India and South Africa "about the next steps".

On 24 November the board of the IAEA is scheduled to meet on calls to refer Tehran to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions over its nuclear programme. Iran had notified the IAEA in late October that it intended to process a new batch of uranium but no date was given.
Posted by:Fred

#14  Anyone have the skinny on how the Iranian's Uranium Hexafluoride gas has proven to be of bad quality (low purity and contaminants)? This cropped up in an article I read somewhere.

Most of all, will such contamination disable their centrifuges or lead to large batches of useless material? We can only hope.

Additionally, Frank's idea has a lot of merit. It's rather obvious that the mullahs do not lead anything approximating the austere and ascetic dogma they preach.

A relentless campaign of sabotage, financial interference and general mayhem with a tight focus on their elite circles might have a rather dissuasive effect. These hypocritical tyrants would get their turbans torqued if someone began to piss in their mint tea with alarming regularity.

As to the oil reserves issue. The solution is the same that should be offered to North Korea. Thorium reactor technology to generate all the electrical power they want without breeding up an atom of fissile material. Any other reactor technology should be bombed back to the stone age and have its rubble bounced once or thrice just to be sure.

Posted by: Zenster   2005-11-17 20:50  

#13  But they do know that Allan is one their side and they are doing his work.
Posted by: Spaling Clomble8854   2005-11-17 18:43  

#12  The leadership of Iran must be head cases. Clearly they don't fully understand the risks of joining the nuclear club and saber rattling.
Posted by: John Q. Citizen   2005-11-17 18:18  

#11  on the economics question - the Iranians have not only oil, but natural gas in large quantities. Natural Gas is difficult and costly to transport, and if they foresee an energy crisis at home they should be focusing on using NG. Perhaps you can still make a cost benefit case for nuclear power, but its hard to see that its worth the turmoil they have created if all they want is a power source - especially since they could avoid most of the turmoil by not insisting on conversion.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2005-11-17 16:38  

#10  AP says even the Russians are pissed this time, though they wont go on record. The Iranians made this announcement days after the Russkies promised the Euros that Iran was cooperating, making the Russkies look pretty foolish. Hints that the Russkies might support a UNSC referral.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2005-11-17 16:34  

#9  "The world is watching," said British Europe minister Douglas Alexander, representing the current British presidency of the EU at a debate on Iran at the European Parliament.

"Watching" doesn't mean diddly squat without any promise of swift and severe retribution in the event that a clandestine weapons program is uncovered.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2005-11-17 11:49  

#8  Iran Nuclear Plan 'Resumes Work'

Yeah, and I'm sure we'll be (or Israel) resuming "work" too soon, eh?
Posted by: BA   2005-11-17 11:46  

#7  Iran has huge oil reserves. They have plenty of gas to generate electricity. They put no funding into their infrastructure, witness the Bam Slam during an earthquake. Now they are into nukes. Their priorities are screwed up, and they have made threats of annhilation against the US and Israel. The MMs are actively involved in terrorism in Iraq and they are enabling Syrian dirty business. They need to be shut down or forced to pay the price for their mayhem.
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2005-11-17 11:42  

#6  "...one unnamed diplomat..."

Proof Positive
Posted by: DepotGuy   2005-11-17 10:19  

#5  No wacking. Their position is a joke.

My point is that, since our side has to debate credulous morons within our democracy in order to sell our aggressive policy, it's best to use strong arguements.

If Switzerland had as much oil and population growth as Iran, nobody would question them pursuing nuke generating capacity. The Norks badly need nuke power and have no oil yet we still justly seek to interfere with their program because they are also nuts.
Posted by: JAB   2005-11-17 10:08  

#4  Um, not relevant? Heh. That they have the incredible oil reserves and current capacity for retrieval and refining, at the price differential between market and cost of retrieval, etc, is what allows the mooks to shop for nuke tech and missile delivery components. That they are in such a hurry, given the reserves, makes a mockery of the entire Mullah position, as well, as I pointed out. So, um, yeah, I'm thinking it's relevant. Can't a guy have a little fun at the expense of such obvious asstards without getting whacked? Sheesh, lol.
Posted by: .com   2005-11-17 09:35  

#3  I'm no fan of Iran's nuke program but we've got to stop relying on the argument that they have oil so don't need nuclear generating capacity. There is still a potential business case for a nuke plant when you have a growing industrializing country and you can sell the oil for $60 a barrel. If they had lots of coal this argument would make some sense and surely they should be using natural gas more.

The mullahs should not have nukes because they're crazy. That they have oil is not really relevant. Krazy Kimmie should not have nuke capacity either and his country is devoid of energy resources.
Posted by: JAB   2005-11-17 07:55  

#2  I'd like to see a covert destruction of the very substantial assets the MM's have built up (Allan be praised for his generosity), including all their homes, owned companies, vehicles, concubines, etc. The targets are so plenty, and they can't defend them all. Start a reign of terror among the terror-spreaders.
Posted by: Frank G   2005-11-17 00:28  

#1  You kwazy Mullahs! Of course we believe you only want nuclear technology for peaceful purposes - particularly for electrical generation. But why are youze guyz in such a hurry? You have, by several estimates, more than 50 years worth of proven petroleum reserves - and another 50 or more in potential reserves. One would think you'd indulge your peaceful nature and stop to smell the flowers while this international brouhaha thingy wears itself out.

There's no hurry, friends. Sit back, kick your curly-toed slippers off, loosen your turbans, and take a deep breath. Life is short, y'know? You'll see Allan soon enough. Peace, my brothers.
Posted by: .com   2005-11-17 00:19  

00:00