Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Iranian Nuclear site explosion?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Iranian Nuclear site explosion?

    DUBAI (Reuters) - Iran has denied media reports of a major explosion at one of its most sensitive uranium enrichment sites, describing them as Western propaganda designed to influence upcoming nuclear negotiations.

    Reuters has been unable to verify reports since Friday of an explosion early last week at the underground Fordow bunker, near the religious city of Qom, that some Israeli and Western media have said caused significant damage.

    "The false news of an explosion at Fordow is Western propaganda ahead of nuclear negotiations to influence their process and outcome," state news agency IRNA quoted the deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, Saeed Shamseddin Bar Broudi, as saying late on Sunday.

    Iran's ISNA news agency quoted military commander Massoud Jazayeri as saying: "I deny an explosion at the Fordow site."

    In late 2011 the plant at Fordow began producing uranium enriched to 20 percent fissile purity, compared with the 3.5 percent level needed for nuclear energy plants. Several U.N. Security Council resolutions have ordered Iran to suspend all uranium enrichment.

    Speculation of an explosion at Fordow followed an Iranian news agency report that global powers and Tehran could resume talks on Iran's disputed nuclear program on Monday and Tuesday. The European Union, the lead negotiator on the nuclear talks, said there was no such agreement.

    Diplomats in Vienna, where the United Nations' nuclear agency is based, said on Monday they had no knowledge of any incident at Fordow but were looking into the reports. One Western diplomat said he did not believe them to be correct.

    The U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which regularly inspects Iranian nuclear sites including Fordow, had no immediate comment.

    Iran has accused Israel and the United States of trying to sabotage its nuclear program, which the West suspects hides an attempt to develop atom bomb capability. The Islamic republic says its atomic program is entirely peaceful.

    "BEHAVING LIKE CHILDREN"

    Tehran has accused Israel and the United States of being behind cyber attacks on its nuclear program and the assassination of its nuclear scientists.

    Washington has denied any role in the killings, while Israel has declined to comment. No government has taken responsibility for the Stuxnet computer virus that destroyed centrifuges at Iran's Natanz uranium enrichment facility in 2010, but it has been widely reported to have been a U.S.-Israeli project.

    Israel, believed to be the Middle East's only nuclear-armed state, has hinted at possible military action against Iran if sanctions and diplomacy fail to resolve the decade-old dispute.

    Israeli Civil Defence Minister Avi Dichter told Israel's Army Radio he could not say anything about the reported Fordow blast "beyond what I heard in the media."

    He added: "Any explosion in Iran which does not harm people but, rather, harms assets, is a blessing."

    Western governments say the higher-grade enrichment at Fordow is a significant step towards weapons-grade material, even though it is below the 90 percent level required for nuclear bombs.

    The Islamic state says it is producing 20 percent uranium to make fuel for a research reactor in Tehran that produces medical isotopes.

    Wrangling over dates and location have delayed resumption of talks between global powers and Iran, but Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Monday both sides should "stop behaving like little children" and start work.

    Three rounds of talks last year between Iran and the six powers - Russia, the United States, China, Britain, France and Germany - produced no breakthrough, increasing speculation Israel could attack Iranian nuclear installations.

    (Additional reporting by Fredrik Dahl in Vienna and Dan Williams in Jerusalem; Editing by Jon Boyle)


    Israel? US? Incompetence? Propoganda?
    "I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration." - Hillary Clinton, 2003

  • #2
    Probably a hoax. It was reported by a guy who has reported things like this in the past which have been found false. The informant is a former CIA operative in Iran who left in the 70s or 80s or something.
    If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
    ){ :|:& };:

    Comment


    • #3
      Any significant explosion would be detectable by regional seismographs, and location and focus could be determined with enough accuracy to give credibility.
      When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."

      Comment


      • #4
        It's strange how Iran and North Korea are so interested in carrying out costly and provocative nuclear research, just so that they can provide their people with clean nuclear power and medical isotopes. I'd think putting food on the table would be a priority, but that must be why I'm not in charge of any pariah states.
        John Brown did nothing wrong.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
          Probably a hoax. It was reported by a guy who has reported things like this in the past which have been found false. The informant is a former CIA operative in Iran who left in the 70s or 80s or something.
          Was it the same former operative who found proof of the weapon's of mass distruction in Iraq? Fortunately, your current president and veep aren't retarded warmongers.
          There's nothing wrong with the dream, my friend, the problem lies with the dreamer.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Felch View Post
            It's strange how Iran and North Korea are so interested in carrying out costly and provocative nuclear research, just so that they can provide their people with clean nuclear power and medical isotopes. I'd think putting food on the table would be a priority, but that must be why I'm not in charge of any pariah states.
            They need outside issues to distract from their domestic incompetence.
            When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Felch View Post
              It's strange how Iran and North Korea are so interested in carrying out costly and provocative nuclear research, just so that they can provide their people with clean nuclear power and medical isotopes. I'd think putting food on the table would be a priority, but that must be why I'm not in charge of any pariah states.
              North Korea, sure. Iran isn't exactly a starving country, though; they're actually reasonably prosperous.

              Frankly I'm not sure I'm entirely opposed to Iran having nuclear weapons. I don't think they're particularly unstable, and they're a fairly educated nation. Perhaps having one Islamic nuclear power (Pakistan doesn't count, they're not really interested in Israel) would help balance things out a bit and give a better chance at a lasting peace in the region.
              <Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
              I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by snoopy369 View Post
                Frankly I'm not sure I'm entirely opposed to Iran having nuclear weapons.
                I'm more concerned that Iranian nukes will trigger a Middle Eastern nuclear arms race than anything else connected to this issue.
                I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
                For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

                Comment


                • #9
                  How in ****'s name would a nuclear Iran contribute to peace? We're talking about the single largest state sponsor of terrorism, one that has aims of regional hegemony. A nuclear Iran would deeply upset the balance of power. That is emphatically not going to make the region more peaceful. As long as Israel is still in existence and the Arab nations persist in their genocidal ideology, there cannot be peace. And if peace means slaughtering or evicting 6 million Jews, I'm rather opposed to peace.
                  If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
                  ){ :|:& };:

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    DD, who would they race with? That's the nice thing about nukes, you don't need terribly many these days. 50 or so would be enough for Iran, and Israel already has plenty (plus the US).

                    HC, it would contribute to peace by ensuring both sides have nukes. Nukes are only a problem if one side has them, or if one side has incentive to use them. In general, MAD is one of the best places you can be diplomatically. Israel right now has a huge advantage over the Islamic Middle Eastern nations, leading to significant problems both because Israel has the ability to push the other states around some without fearing reprisal (there's now no chance of anyone invading Israel, after all), and the Islamic Middle Eastern states know they need to be very aggressive since they are in a position of weakness. Take that away, and the balance of power might actually allow for reasonable diplomacy, which has rather lacked in the last century.

                    A nuclear Iran couldn't use their nuclear weapons for terrorist acts, because if they did, the US, Russia, China, UK, France would remove them from the globe. That's actually one of the reasons I am not particularly opposed to them becoming nuclear - it might contribute to them becoming a more stable nation that sits at the diplomatic table rather than misbehaving. Diplomatically, one of the worst things you can have is a significant state feeling powerless - it will act in ways like Iran currently acts. Give it a seat at the table, treat it like another nation, and you actually can see significant differences in actions.

                    I'm also amused by 'deeply upset the balance of power'. There isn't currently a balance of power. Israel simply does whatever it wants, and no other state can really restrict it. If you want a peaceful resolution to the situation, _both_ sides need to feel secure - and right now only Israel is secure. I don't particularly want to get back into the debate over Israel causing its own problems by being aggressive, but this is not that different - Iran doesn't have a seat at the table, and that's a problem. Create a balance of power, where both sides have power and a reason to take a seat at the table, and perhaps the 'genocidal rage' or whatever goes away. (Also, evicting 6 million Jews is bad, sure; evicting Palestinians isn't though?)
                    Last edited by snoopy369; January 28, 2013, 13:58.
                    <Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
                    I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I'm pretty sure the Saudi's would have a large issue with a nuclear weaponized Iran. The Saudi's have the means and the will to become a nuclear state if Iran does. The Israeli reaction to a nuclear armed Iran cannot be categorized in any way as being "conducive to peace" imho. The very last thing that the world's most volitile region needs is a terrorist sponsoring state with nuclear weapons. It is not so much the use of these weapons that would be at issue...it is the deterence from retaliation that would free up an explosion in terrorist activity.

                      The balance of power in the ME is not simply Arab/Israeli. To think otherwise is looking at things very simplistically. There are major issues between the Saudis and the Iranians as well as a pretty big Sunni/****e rift.
                      "I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration." - Hillary Clinton, 2003

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Where exactly is Israel pushing other states around?

                        They have their nukes to say to the arab countries, "seriously, don't invade us simultaneously a fourth time". Aside from that, all they've done is assassinate the odd nuclear engineer/Palestinian mass murder in exile.
                        If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
                        ){ :|:& };:

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by PLATO View Post
                          It is not so much the use of these weapons that would be at issue...it is the deterence from retaliation that would free up an explosion in terrorist activity.
                          I think that's probably the biggest issue that would arise. That and the mass proliferation that would inevitably occur. Iran would probably be safe with them (in terms of not actually using them), same with the Saudis but what happens if the House of Saud faces a real emergence of Arab Spring? What do Egypt do in the face of an increasingly nuclear ME? Does Turkey remain content with NATO weapon sharing as its government becomes increasingly Islamist? All it takes is one **** up and a weapon falling into the wrong hands and the consequences become unthinkable. MAD only works as long as the participants aren't actually mad.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
                            Where exactly is Israel pushing other states around?

                            They have their nukes to say to the arab countries, "seriously, don't invade us simultaneously a fourth time". Aside from that, all they've done is assassinate the odd nuclear engineer/Palestinian mass murder in exile.
                            Erm, how about continuing to expand their settlements? Ignoring any serious attempt to peaceably resolve the Palestinian question unless the resolution is absurdly tilted in their favor? From a neutral point of view (and yes, a neutral POV exists, and if it sounds anti-Israeli, it's because the current situation is pretty pro-Israel right now), Israel is pushing their weight around without any significant recourse. There's no chance at a fourth invasion, and everyone knows it. Since that threat doesn't exist, they don't seem to care who they piss off...
                            <Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
                            I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              But... (there's multiple neutral POVs), that's because they understand the arab/Islamist political calculus. No matter what they do with the Palestinians - go back to the pre-1967 borders, cede all of Jerusalem if you want, allow the Palestinian state to be fully armed, whatever concessions you might want to dream up, that won't not piss off any of their arab neighbors. Their pissed-off neighbors don't care about the Palestinians. Israel (regardless of its policies) serves as the outside enemy that provides the excuse and distraction for every hostile regime's internal failings.

                              The Israelis continue to be obstinate bastards, but not only because there's no disincentive to do that, there's also nothing to be gained by any concession or offer.
                              When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X