Iran's WMD - Still No Evidence?

[WorldCitizen]

We're merrily rolling onwards. Still no evidence of a nuclear weapons program going on in Iran, lies, more lies and indirection.

Even when the IAEA seems to be going out of its way to say "look, there's no evidence of a nuclear weapon's program", still noone listens.

In the last week, we've had Gordon Brown in Israel repeating the "Wipe Israel from the map" mantra, even though it had been widely shown the be a complete mistranslation.

Where should we concentrate our efforts for stability in the region? Iran? Peaceful nation, no weapons program? Israel? One of the most aggressive nations on Earth with a nuclear arsenal? Oh the irony.

Are there really people out there that believe Ahmadinejad would attack a nuclear armed, US backed Israel. If it wasn't so tradgic it would be hilarious.

World Citizen

[Officer of Engineers]

Are you dumb, deaf, and blind? We have proof that the Iranians bought a warhead blueprint from AQ Khan.

[WorldCitizen]

Are you dumb, deaf, and blind? We have proof that the Iranians bought a warhead blueprint from AQ Khan.

I'm sure you believe that.

Would you say the proof is more or less reliable than the infamous Niger Yellow Cake forgeries? Forgeries which were, of course, used by US/UK for justifying the invasion of Iraq.

[Shek]

WC,

Can you explain the construction of a second reactor near Arak that uses "heavy water" and lay out a case for it? Thanks.

Iran is Building a Second Nuclear Reactor - Newsweek articles on MSN UK News - news & weather

[Officer of Engineers]

I'm sure you believe that.

I don't have to believe it. We have the paper trail itself up to and including the forged papers signed by AQ Khan himself and the signed deliveries of the cascades themselves. But I am sure you are blind, deaf, and dumb for ignoring that evidence.

[Shek]

I'm sure you believe that.

Would you say the proof is more or less reliable than the infamous Niger Yellow Cake forgeries? Forgeries which were, of course, used by US/UK for justifying the invasion of Iraq.

Well, the Iranians admitted to it years ago, so what's their motivation to reveal the information?

Iranians admit receiving nuclear warhead blueprint from disgraced Pakistani expert | World news | The Guardian

[WorldCitizen]

Can you explain the construction of a second reactor near Arak that uses "heavy water" and lay out a case for it?

I don't know a huge amount about heavy water reactors. I thought people used them for electricity. Is that not the case?

[WorldCitizen]

I don't have to believe it. We have the paper trail itself up to and including the forged papers signed by AQ Khan himself and the signed deliveries of the cascades themselves. But I am sure you are blind, deaf, and dumb for ignoring that evidence.

I'm sure you're right. So, they ARE building nuclear weapons, right?

[Shek]

I don't know a huge amount about heavy water reactors. I thought people used them for electricity. Is that not the case?

So you're telling us that your not properly equipped to discuss the topic?

[Shek]

I'm sure you're right. So, they ARE building nuclear weapons, right?

Where there's smoke, there tends to be fire. A country that kept its "peaceful" program hidden for years (and admitted its program only after being exposed) and gained technological advances through trade with an illicit network that gave technology to other countries pursuing nuclear weapons, all the while violating what it signed up to do with the NPT places the burden of proof on them. It is up to them to comply, and to date, they have not been fully forthcoming.

[WorldCitizen]

So you're telling us that your not properly equipped to discuss the topic?

Are you saying people don't use them for electricity?

[WorldCitizen]

Where there's smoke, there tends to be fire. A country that kept its "peaceful" program hidden for years (and admitted its program only after being exposed) and gained technological advances through trade with an illicit network that gave technology to other countries pursuing nuclear weapons, all the while violating what it signed up to do with the NPT places the burden of proof on them. It is up to them to comply, and to date, they have not been fully forthcoming.

Their omission to report their Uranium enrichment program to the IAEA was wrong, but it wasn't illegal or illicit, and the IAEA hasn't ever referred to it as such. And they obtained the UF6 from China sisn't they? Another NPT signatory, right? And hasn't all of their UF6 been under IAEA containment and supervision since?

I'm just struggling to understand what it is we hate about Iran so much. There are far more dangerous nations in the region, with far more highly devleoped nuclear capabilities.

Is it because they *actually* signed up to the NPT, unlike, say...Israel for example?

[Oscar]

That reminds of the debate of the WMD in Iraq. We were provided with tons of evidence that Saddam had actually missiles pointed towards the West, that its army was a threat to the ME, that Saddam had stockpiles of...whatever. We had to endure this pathetic media circus and when someone expressed his doubt about this hoax, "smoking clouds" and "Munich" were the only answer...and the US finally attacked Iraq and discovered that there was...nothing. An impotent arab dictator with rusted tanks and a demoralised army, just an excuse of a threat.

IF and it's a big IF the US or Israel attack Iran they'd better check their info twice because no one will give them the benefits of the doubt.

[Shek]

Are you saying people don't use them for electricity?

What has Iran said? Does it make sense? What's the context?

I think Iran has a very good reason to pursue nuclear energy to provide electricity. However, they sure have passed up some deals that would ensure that this happens sooner rather than later and haven't taken the quickest path in that direction. This reactor is yet another that doesn't make sense.

[WorldCitizen]

Well, the Iranians admitted to it years ago, so what's their motivation to reveal the information?

What was their motivation indeed?

Are we talking about the same 15 page Uranium Metal Document that literally 'fell out' of an old dusty box of files the the IAEA was allowed to look through?

Are we talking about the same 15 page Uranium Metal Document that only outlined procedural requirements for casting uranium into hemispheres, not the technical specifications that would have been necessary to carry out the operation, as the IAEA report of Nov. 18, 2005, noted?

Are we talking about the same issue that the IAEA in its Nov. 15, 2007, report said the issue had been resolved to its satisfaction?

Didn't the report conclude:

"Based on interviews with available Iranian officials and members of the supply network, limited documentation provided by Iran, and procurement information collected through the Agency's independent investigation, the Agency has concluded that Iran's statements are consistent with other information available to the Agency concerning Iran's acquisition of declared P-1 centrifuge enrichment technology in 1987."

Not really the smoking gun of an illegally sought Warhead design you make it out to be, is it?