| Submit your comments on this article | |||
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran | |||
| European Nations May Give Iran a Reactor | |||
| 2006-05-16 | |||
Key European nations are considering offering Iran a light-water nuclear reactor as part of incentives meant to persuade Tehran to give up its uranium enrichment program, a senior diplomat said Tuesday.
A senior diplomat familiar with international attempts to dissuade Iran from enrichment said the tentative plans still were being discussed among France, Britain and Germany as part of a possible package to be presented Friday to senior representatives of the five permanent U.N. Security Council members.
| |||
| Posted by:Steve |
| #8 They are beyond trusting, whatever deal we make they will break it and run a secret weapons program. |
| Posted by: Ebbavising Anganter2423 2006-05-16 16:04 |
| #7 Action does NOT seem likely. |
| Posted by: doc 2006-05-16 15:18 |
| #6 I wouldnÂ’t sweat it guys. The Iranian president is a freek he wont accept anything short unconditional surrender from the west with full recognition of Iranian dominance. This is nothing but a ploy we already know the answer from Iran. A reactor would take years to complete construction and in the mean time in the small print for Iran to accept they must stop all current enrichment. That wont happen Iran wont bite or accept this we know this. |
| Posted by: C-Low 2006-05-16 13:40 |
| #5 I vote for using "The Force" on them. Send in the Jedi |
| Posted by: SPoD 2006-05-16 13:29 |
| #4 I vote for being bloodthirsty imperialists storm troopers. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2006-05-16 13:22 |
| #3 I agree with LH. To me the key is a degree of transparancy to inspect other sites along with any deal. As long as the deal ends enrichment and allows for inspections it's a loss for the mullahs who have made a big deal about being full fuel cycle. Not sure why we'd oppose the plan given that Bush has more or less backed the Russian plan of a few months ago which was in the same spirit. |
| Posted by: JAB 2006-05-16 12:53 |
| #2 I vote for giving them centifuges to enrich to fuel grade - but made with specially doped alloys that embrittle at excessive radiation exposure. Ought to be engineerable to fracture and seriously mess up their lab (and techs, alas, casualties of war) if used beyond permitted application. |
| Posted by: glenmore 2006-05-16 12:43 |
| #1 Well giving a reactor aint giving them the bomb, you need to enrich for the bomb, and this is contingent on them not enriching. The real arg against is that this is just like the Clinton deal with NKor. And will have the same results. They will shut their open enrichment, take the gift, and then start up an alternative hidden enrichment process. But there are some other factors to consider. 1. Iran probably wont take the deal anyway, since to publicly climb down from enrichment embarrasses the regime domestically. In which case youve solidified the US-EU alliance, put more pressure on the Russia-Chinese to come around, and made clear to the Iranian people that this is NOT about denying them atomic energy - all for no cost 2. If they DO accept it, its still better than NKor. A. Iran is a more open society than NKor, and secret enrichment will be harder to keep quiet. B. WRT Nkor, the Clinton admin didnt have an alternate parallel strategy. WRT Iran we do - quiet support for internal regime change. C. Kicking the can down the road may be an advantage (assuming that the Iranian alternate enrichment plan is materially slower than their public enrichment process) i. We move towards improvement in Iraq, which frees up troops, for any alternative action ii. We continue to improve the CIA, spec ops, etc iii. We move to a new admin thats not burdened by the current admins unpopularity, and has a freer hand to act. IOW, time is on our side (the counter is that the longer we wait, the stronger China becomes - im not sure) |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2006-05-16 12:24 |