DONATE

Showing posts with label Nuclear Program. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nuclear Program. Show all posts

Friday, November 27, 2009

ElBaradei: Cannot Confirm Iran’s Peaceful Nuke Claim



John R. Houk
© November 27, 2009


Outgoing head of the International Atom Energy Agency (IAEA) Mohammed ElBaradei has proffered news that most intelligent people already knew. The information is that the IAEA cannot verify that Iran nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes. ElBaradei did fail to make the next logical assumption: If Iran is stonewalling the IAEA on the validity of a peaceful nuclear program then Iran is operating a nuclear program for purposes of weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

If you agree with the intelligent diagnosis then this statement from Glynn Davies should completely mystify you:

"The United States remains firmly committed to a peaceful resolution to international concerns over Iran's nuclear program," said Davies. "We also remain willing to engage Iran, to work toward a diplomatic solution to the nuclear dilemma it has created for itself, if only Iran would choose such a course, but our patience, and that of the international community, is limited." (VOA – 11/27/09)


This is an indication the Obama Administration is not one of the intelligent people. For one thing I find it doubtful that Russia and China as part of the international community will be on board for crippling U. N. Security Council sanctions that might actually work at this stage to force Iran at least into temporary compliance on a nuclear weapons program. Even if that international miracle would occur with Russia and China, the psycho-Shi’ite Twelver State of Iran may yet resist compliance from dar al-harb kuffar.

In which case that would leave to choices concerning a nuclear armed Iran:

    1. Passively allow Iran to acquire nukes hoping the psycho-mullahs will not make good on their threats to remove Israel from the global map. This would mean war that a reluctant Obama appeaser would be forced to join Iran or Israel militarily.

    2. Actively support an Israeli military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities as an independent free agent then backing America’s old friend which is the ONLY Western style representative democracy in the Middle East.


Intelligent people would realize the carnage would be lesser under choice two. Leftist appeasers such as are inherent in the Obama Administration probably would choose choice one because the carnage will appear to be lesser for the USA at first. The reality is that the carnage will be heavier under choice one. Choice one is the same path Neville Chamberlain chose in dealing with Adolf Hitler. Look how that turned out as far as carnage goes.

Check out an article originating from the NYT written by David E. Sanger and William J. Broad I found on The Wire blog of St Louis Today.

JRH 11/27/09
*******************************
IRAN NUCLEAR INQUIRY IS AT ‘DEAD END,’ U.N. INVESTIGATOR SAYS

By News Services
BY DAVID E. SANGER AND WILLIAM J. BROAD
New York Times
11.26.2009 8:31 pm
The Wire


The director of the U.N. nuclear watchdog declared in unusually blunt language on Thursday that Iran has stonewalled investigators about evidence that the country had worked on nuclear weapons design, and that his efforts to reveal the truth had “effectively reached a dead end.”

The comments by the official, Mohamed ElBaradei, came four days before he leaves office after 12 years at the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency. His remarks refocused attention on Iran’s alleged work on weapons design at the moment that the West is considering moving to harsher economic sanctions on Tehran, after it backed away from a commitment it made in early October to temporarily ship much of its nuclear fuel out of the country.

ElBaradei’s remarks also came as Iran approaches President Barack Obama’s end-of-year deadline to reassess whether the United States should move toward what Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has termed “crippling sanctions” on Iran. Israeli officials, meanwhile, have said they would not consider taking military action until Obama’s deadline runs out, leaving hanging the suggestion — maybe the bluff _ that it was preparing for that possibility in 2010.

ElBaradei’s statement marked a sharp departure in tone, and a tacit acknowledgment that his behind-the-scenes effort to broker a deal have collapsed. In the past, he has privately talked about Iran’s refusal to answer the agency’s questions about weapons work, but has stopped short of rebuking the country in public for fear of shutting off any chance of future cooperation.

Those questions, posed by the agency over a period of years, go to the heart of suspicions that Iran has worked on nuclear weapons designs. Among them are queries about drawings, computer simulations and other evidence of work that could not plausibly be involved in civilian nuclear power programs. That includes documents obtained by the agency _ some provided by Western intelligence services, who say they were slipped out of Iran by scientists _ that appear to show that Iran worked on how to shape uranium into the kind of hemispheres used for nuclear cores, on conventional explosions needed to detonate a nuclear chain reaction, and simulations of a warhead detonation at about 2,000 feet, about the height at which the bomb was set off over Hiroshima in 1945.

“It is now well over a year since the agency was last able to engage Iran in discussions about these outstanding issues,” ElBaradei said in remarks to the nuclear agency’s governors. “We have effectively reached a dead end, unless Iran engages fully with us.”

In the past, Iran has called the evidence “fabrications.” ElBaradei has complained that he has been prohibited by “member states,” including the United States and European nations, from letting the Iranians see the original evidence _ presumably for fear that it could reveal sources. On Thursday, he repeated his frustration on that point, telling the agency’s 35-member board that “it would help if we were able to share with Iran more of the material that is at the center of these concerns.”

It is unclear whether ElBaradei’s comments will help push Russia and China to vote in favor of a resolution condemning Iran for failing to tell the agency, until two months ago, about a uranium enrichment plant that it secretly built on a Iranian Revolutionary Guard base near the city of Qum. Iran later said that it kept the construction secret until recently because it feared that its known nuclear plants could be bombed.

But that delay violated its obligations to the United Nations, ElBaradei said, and his statements reinforced the sense that Iran has blocked inspectors from getting near what are known as “Project 110″ and “Project 111,” its suspected weapons-design work.

At Iran’s invitation, however, inspectors visited the underground plant at Qum last month, and confirmed it is in the final stages of construction, but not yet operational. It is supposed to house 3,000 centrifuges _ too small, experts say, to be useful for producing civilian nuclear fuel, but large enough to produce about two weapons’ worth of material each year.

American officials tried to use Iran’s concealment of that plant, and the possibility that there were related facilities built to produce nuclear material, to press Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and President Hu Jintao of China to join a new round of sanctions. Both have been reluctant, especially Hu, who said nothing about it during Obama’s trip to Beijing this month. Privately, American officials visiting China have told officials to weigh how a confrontation with Iran could interfere with China’s purchases of oil. China gets roughly 15 percent of its oil from Iran.
But the central issue through the Iran investigations has been the evidence suggesting that Iran conducted some level of research on weapons. An American intelligence estimate, published two years ago, contended that Iran ceased that work in 2003; intelligence agencies in Britain, France, Germany and Israel, examining the same evidence, have assessed that the work has resumed, or never stopped.

In October, parts of a confidential analysis written by senior staff members of the IAEA were leaked. The analysis concluded that Iran has acquired “sufficient information to be able to design and produce a workable” atom bomb. The report’s conclusions went beyond ElBaradei’s public positions, and even those taken by the United States and several governments.

The analysis drew a picture of a complex program, run by Iran’s Ministry of Defense, “aimed at the development of a nuclear payload to be delivered using the Shahab 3 missile system,” Iran’s medium-range missile, which can strike the Middle East and parts of southern Europe.

That analysis, and others like it, draw on years of clues and scraps of information gathered in Iran and from intelligence agencies around the world. For instance, atomic inspectors have found signs that Iran has done extensive research on high-voltage detonators, explosive lenses for bomb detonation, and re-entry vehicles for missiles that can cushion nuclear warheads as they streak earthward.

The inspectors also found evidence that a Russian scientist had helped Iran conduct complex experiments on how to detonate a nuclear weapon.

They believe he acted on his own as an adviser on experiments described in a lengthy document that the agency obtained. Officials have described the original, in Farsi, as a detailed narrative of experiments aimed at achieving the perfectly timed compression of nuclear fuel to order to squeeze it into supercritical mass, which initiates a nuclear blast.

In 2006, the agency released a report saying that Iran had obtained from the global black market a document “related to the fabrication of nuclear weapon components.” The previous year it told of the market offering to help Iran shape uranium metal into “hemispherical forms,” which Western nuclear experts say are needed to make nuclear bomb cores.

Also in 2005, European and American officials told of an Iranian laptop computer that held studies for crucial features of a nuclear warhead, including a telltale sphere of detonators to trigger an atomic explosion. The documents specified a blast roughly 2,000 feet above a target _ considered high enough for a nuclear detonation to maximize the damage below.

________________________

ElBaradei: Cannot Confirm Iran’s Peaceful Nuke Claim
John R. Houk
© November 27, 2009
_______________________________
IRAN NUCLEAR INQUIRY IS AT ‘DEAD END,’ U.N. INVESTIGATOR SAYS
About The Wire: STLtoday.com receives wire stories from around the country and around the world. Here you will find stories that we couldn't fit into the Post-Dispatch, but thought you, the readers of St. Louis, would find interesting.

Thursday, October 22, 2009

Do You Trust Iran and Russia?



John R. Houk
© October 22, 2009


A negotiating team from Iran has agreed in principle to ship nuclear fuel to Russia for enrichment. The reasoning is if the nuclear fuel is in Russia then Iran would not have enough nuclear fuel to enrich to a weapons grade nuclear warhead of some sort.

The Iranian negotiating to could not give formal approval of the deal because it has to hear from the divine Shi’ite Ayatollah, I mean the leadership of the Iranian government.

Here is the thing. Iran has been rattling sabers with a ‘hands off’ attitude about their nuclear program to concerned governments (primarily Israel followed by the USA with some lesser concerns from appeasers like the UK, France and Germany). At every moment Iran needed to stall for time to reach a nuclear goal, the Mullah dominated government would express an interest at negotiation. Each negotiation was a smoke screen for all negotiation with Iran NEVER amounted to any substance.

Here is the other thing. Russia would be the guarantor of how much enriched nuclear fuel would be sent back to Iran for peaceful energy purposes. Does anyone see a snag in this logic?

Russia has been sending assassinators to the West to kill people of interest to the Russian image.

One example is the Litvinenko radiation poisoning murder carried out on British soil.

Viktor Yushchenko was poisoned by Dioxin. Yushchenko believes there is a Russian connection to the poisoning that occurred during a Ukrainian Presidential campaign he eventually won.

Russia has been belligerent to its neighbors, former members of the Soviet empire and Western governments.

Russia invades its neighbor and former Soviet Republic Georgia and steals land and continues to this day to make Georgia’s life miserable. Georgia was an American ally as part of the coalition of the willing.

Russia has been provoking British air space with military flyers. Not only once but several times.

The so-called new Russia has even been testing the USA ala Cold War style. The Russian excuse is American involvement in nations formerly controlled by the old Soviet Empire. Russia is actually in the beginnings of beginning global hegemonic rivalries that was supposed to have been resolved with the fall of Soviet Communism and the rise of democratic experiments in Eastern Europe. Naturally many of these nations formerly under the domination of the old Bear Claw would be drawn to the successful institutions that have brought prosperity to America. Nationalist egotism is again beginning to threaten global peace with Russia and emerging power China showing a desire for regional hegemony.

President Barack Hussein Obama’s handling of foreign policy is playing directly into the nationalistic fervor of Russian dreams of empire. BHO more than likely feels his election mandate was to handle foreign policy less assertively than the Republican Administrations of Reagan, Bush I and Bush II. It appears BHO believes that weakening American hegemony by taking the blame for all that riles our allies and rivals alike is the path to offsetting emerging Russian nationalism.

What are nations like Russia, China and Iran to think after BHO’s first whirlwind European tour of apologizing for American intrusions that benefitted American interests while policing Western government fears. It sounds a bit like hubris but who have the Europeans turned to in the 20th century for self-preservation during devastating wars and threats of Communist despotism? That nation is the USA. Two World Wars and the existence of NATO to counter the potential aggression of Soviet Imperialist days is the evidence. American might allowed Western economies to grow and actually become competitive to the American economy as a result of American global policing.

BHO’s appeasement policy could actually provoke another global conflict with such acts as scraping Europe’s Missile Defense Shield program at Russia’s command, the policy of no pre-conditions in Iranian negotiations and forcing a threat to Israel’s existence by producing an independent Palestinian State who’s only goal is the annihilation of non-Muslim Israel.

So Iran’s nuclear negotiating team secures a plan to send nuclear fuel to Russia for enrichment. There is no doubt this will add to the myth of Messiahood to BHO’s persona. Keeping in mind the Iranian government has not actually said, “We got a deal.” Does anyone really believe Iran will stop cruising down the path of becoming a nuclear power?

JRH 10/22/09