Fresh off of yesterday’s assurances from Iranian President Hassan Rohani that he is determined to reach a nuclear deal, and Secretary of State John Kerry’s own threats to attack Iran seemingly for the heck of it, Kerry is now demanding Iran “prove” that its civilian nuclear program is civilian in nature, because apparently the adjective “civilian” doesn’t do that by itself.
Kerry went on to insist Iran has “the opportunity to prove” the program is peaceful in nature, and issued a slew of new demands above and beyond the conditions in the P5+1 nuclear deal.
Among Kerry’s demands was for Iran to immediate abandon plans to build a heavy water reactor at Arak. The reactor is set to replace the aging Tehran Research Reactor (TRR) as a source of medical isotopes.
The TRR runs on 20 percent enriched uranium, and amid Western demands Iran has agreed to stop enriching at those levels. The Arak reactor runs on unenriched uranium, seemingly to get around the griping about their enrichment, but Kerry’s comments make clear that at least in his view, that’s no good either.
Issuing so many new demands the same week the interim deal began to take effect is just bizarre, and while much of it was likely rhetoric for show at the Davos conference, it doesn’t inspire confidence that the US is negotiating seriously when they keep inventing new conditions and threatening war on a seemingly daily basis.
If I recall, the red herring on Arak was plutonium production (which reactors wouldn't generally avoid entirely…but the thorium cycle may)…which, of course, equates to gobooomboom.
The red herring on uranium enrichment was enriched uranium…which also means gobooomboom.
Natural Uranium in the HWR could alleviate the latter goboomboom but not necessarily the former… …yeah, I'm getting how they're sandwiching Iran.
Sorta remember an Iranian official (maybe Rohani himself) answering the plutonium gobooomboom 'concern' … It would probably have related to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_plutoniu… that weapons grade Pu is less than 7% Pu-240, which really oughta be harvested in-time rather than enriched down to that level–removed from the reactor in-time rather than spun for an eternity. That is, weapons Pu 'stockpiling' is pretty much not happening with Arak under IAEA surveillance.
If I recall, the red herring on Arak was plutonium production (which reactors wouldn't generally avoid entirely…but the thorium cycle may)…which, of course, equates to gobooomboom.
The red herring on uranium enrichment was enriched uranium…which also means gobooomboom.
Natural Uranium in the HWR could alleviate the latter goboomboom but not necessarily the former… …yeah, I'm getting how they're sandwiching Iran.
Sorta remember an Iranian official (maybe Rohani himself) answering the plutonium gobooomboom 'concern' … It would probably have related to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_plutoniu… that weapons grade Pu is less than 7% Pu-240, which really oughta be harvested in-time rather than enriched down to that level–removed from the reactor in-time rather than spun for an eternity. That is, weapons Pu 'stockpiling' is pretty much not happening with Arak under IAEA surveillance.
If I recall, the red herring on Arak was plutonium production (which reactors wouldn't generally avoid entirely…but the thorium cycle may)…which, of course, equates to gobooomboom.
The red herring on uranium enrichment was enriched uranium…which also means gobooomboom.
Natural Uranium in the HWR could alleviate the latter goboomboom but not necessarily the former… …yeah, I'm getting how they're sandwiching Iran.
Sorta remember an Iranian official (maybe Rohani himself) answering the plutonium gobooomboom 'concern' … It would probably have related to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_plutoniu… that weapons grade Pu is less than 7% Pu-240, which really oughta be harvested in-time rather than enriched down to that level–removed from the reactor in-time rather than spun for an eternity. That is, weapons Pu 'stockpiling' is pretty much not happening with Arak under IAEA surveillance.
No serious observer can make any sort of case that the US is "negotiating" in good faith. It's the classic case of a great power bullying and issuing ultimatums to a smaller nation. See Austria-Hungary, "negotiating" with Serbia, Summer, 1914.
Is Kerry saying that the IAEA monitoring and verification of Iran's nuclear facilities is going to be irrelevant….? Yeah, I think that's the general idea.
If you can prove that you are 25 years old and are not a fifth column working for the war criminal trying to force "world government" according to Oded Yinon on world, then you will understand in a minute that Iran DOES NOT HAVE A NCULEAR WEAPON PROGRAM as your 17 intelligence services said in 2007 and years after that. Only dumb and war criminals repeat these lies about Iran's nuclear program.
The utter hypocrisy of two nuclear armed states – US and Israel – demanding that Iran prove its nuclear program is peaceful – by abandoning it entirely – is clear to everyone outside the US and Israel.
It’s not bizarre for them to sabotage their own “deals” with Iran. It’s stated policy intended to make iran look stubborn to prepare people for the USA to attack iran. Obama has been doing this for years.
This guy is like Hillary with a penis.
"it doesn’t inspire confidence that the US is negotiating seriously when they keep inventing new conditions and threatening war on a seemingly daily basis"
USA is untrustworthy nation thanks rto politicians and their owners. Since Israel had stolen a stockpile of weapon-grade plutonium from USA without even bleep from officials or even pressure on Israel to officialy aknowledge their stockpile of ready nuclear warheads it is definitely visible that US is not as honest as it used to be.
This was clearly shown in the negotiations with Serbs in 1999 called Rambouillet Agreement. US and NATO made sure that Serbs could not sign the agreement so NATO (primarily US) could bomb Serbs and "liberate Kosovans" . I think another good example of US treachery was an UN resolution 1973 about "protecting" Lybian civils, which US and UK turned to a regime change resolution although this construct is clearly against cornerstone UN law of national sovereignty. Before that was treacherous war on Iraq. US has been clearly demonstrating since "the end of history" that it can not be trusted. .