• U.S. Defense Secretary Panetta admits Iran not developing nukes
    14 replies, posted
[release]U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta let slip on Sunday the big open secret that Washington war hawks don’t want widely known: Iran is not developing nuclear weapons.Appearing on CBS’s [I]Face the Nation[/I] on Sunday, Panetta admitted that despite all the rhetoric, Iran is not pursuing the ability to split atoms with weapons, saying it is instead pursuing “a nuclear capability.” That “capability” falls in line with what Iran has said for years: that it is developing nuclear energy facilities, not nuclear weapons.“I think the pressure of the sanctions, the diplomatic pressures from everywhere, Europe, the United States, elsewhere, it’s working to put pressure on them,” Panetta explained on Sunday. “To make them understand that they cannot continue to do what they’re doing. Are they trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No. But we know that they’re trying to develop a nuclear capability, and that’s what concerns us. And our red line to Iran is, do not develop a nuclear weapon. That’s a red line for us.” Republicans have been beating the drums of war in recent weeks as tensions in the Iranian gulf have soared. Iran has threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, a key oil transport hub crucial to global industry, if U.S. warships return to monitor their activities. Iran said it was planning to hold military exercises in the Strait of Hormuz in the coming weeks, and prior wargames saw the Iranians test missiles that are designed to sink warships. President Barack Obama recently agreed to fresh sanctions on Iran targeting the country’s central bank, in hopes of slowing down their nuclear program. The European Union was also considering fresh sanctions, and details were expected later in January. The U.N., as well, has sanctioned Iran repeatedly over its nuclear program. Iran said recently that it had created the country’s first ever nuclear fuel rod made from domestic uranium enriched at their own facilities. Nuclear fuel enrichment is much different from enrichment for weapons. Most commercial nuclear reactors use lightly enriched uranium, which is between 3-5 percent enriched. Weapons-grade uranium must be enriched to approximately 85 percent or more of a key radioactive isotope for it to be usable in an atomic bomb. Iran added on Monday that it had also[URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57354948/u.n-confirms-iran-uranium-enrichment-claim/"]enriched uranium up to 20 percent[/URL] in an underground facility, explaining that the isotopes were to be used to help cancer patients. The International Atomic Energy Agency [URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15643460"]said late last year[/URL] that Iran had carried out tests that suggested they may be taking the first steps toward building a nuclear weapon, but former agency insiders [URL="http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MK22Ak02.html"]disputed the claim as being misleading[/URL]. This video is from CBS News, broadcast [video=youtube;xdiGahJItOA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdiGahJItOA[/video][/release] [URL="http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/09/panetta-admits-iran-not-developing-nukes"]Source[/URL] Knew it. And so did Starpluck. [QUOTE=Starpluck;34129159]Article is an example sensationalized crap. AP titled this as "nuke work confirmed inside Iranian bunker" to try to give off the impression that Iran's nuclear weapons program has been confirmed when that's not the case. The "nuke work" they're referring to is the increase of enrichment to 20% in some Iran plant, like the several/majority of the nuclear plants already existing in Iran. This isn't something to be concerned about, weapons-grade uranium requires a 90% enrichment. [URL="http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,670402,00.html"]To produce Technetium-99 for cancer radiotherapy, Iran would need to enrich 19.75% uranium[/URL] which is essentially what they're doing and have been doing previously. tl;dr Iran is enriching uranium at safe levels, article is sensationalizing it. 90% is the danger zone.[/QUOTE]
He must be a terrorist for claiming such a thing, indefinite detention is the only cure for that!
Hey, guess whose been saying this all along. This guy. and Starpluck. It just wouldn't make sense for them to develop weapons, and the evidence simply hasn't been there. I mean, it makes sense now, as a deterrent or a defensive measure, considering the danger they're in now, but if anything, it was our fear-mongering and war-mongering that would lead to any sort of weapon developments. Iran worked with the IAEA for a long while before eventually telling them to fuck off when the IAEA pulled the final straw for them and tried to place sanctions on them for a nuclear facility they were building but hadn't announced. As it ends up, the facility didn't need to be announced to the IAEA for another 4 or so months, as all facilities needed to be announced 6 months in advance of completion. Iran was perfectly in their right. They cooperated until pushed too far, and then they gave them the middle finger. Along with the hypocritical Turkey-Brazil enrichment deal (we proposed the deal first, Iran said no, then they did the exact same deal later on, and the US opposed it and pushed for sanctions), and the false IAEA report claiming there was evidence for a nuclear weapons program (they never showed the evidence, and as far as I know the report was dismissed by the UN). With all of this, it wouldn't make sense that they would go through all the trouble of appeasing the west and the UN/IAEA only to start making weapons, especially when they know the US will blast them into the stoneage if they did- and if anything, that's what will drive them to do it is US aggression. The threat of being attacked for having nukes is what will drive them to obtain nukes, which they will be attacked for, and may then use. All of this nonsense is what's causing the problem, not preventing it.
Fucking love Panetta. Guy's a true bro.
Probably isn't going to make a difference. When the government gets their tunnel vision on, nothing, not even the truth will stand in the way of United Steamroller of America.
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];34139802']Hey, guess whose been saying this all along. This guy. and Starpluck. It just wouldn't make sense for them to develop weapons, and the evidence simply hasn't been there. I mean, it makes sense now, as a deterrent or a defensive measure, considering the danger they're in now, but if anything, it was our fear-mongering and war-mongering that would lead to any sort of weapon developments. Iran worked with the IAEA for a long while before eventually telling them to fuck off when the IAEA pulled the final straw for them and tried to place sanctions on them for a nuclear facility they were building but hadn't announced. As it ends up, the facility didn't need to be announced to the IAEA for another 4 or so months, as all facilities needed to be announced 6 months in advance of completion. Iran was perfectly in their right. They cooperated until pushed too far, and then they gave them the middle finger. Along with the hypocritical Turkey-Brazil enrichment deal (we proposed the deal first, Iran said no, then they did the exact same deal later on, and the US opposed it and pushed for sanctions), and the false IAEA report claiming there was evidence for a nuclear weapons program (they never showed the evidence, and as far as I know the report was dismissed by the UN). With all of this, it wouldn't make sense that they would go through all the trouble of appeasing the west and the UN/IAEA only to start making weapons, especially when they know the US will blast them into the stoneage if they did- and if anything, that's what will drive them to do it is US aggression. The threat of being attacked for having nukes is what will drive them to obtain nukes, which they will be attacked for, and may then use. All of this nonsense is what's causing the problem, not preventing it.[/QUOTE] I think a lot of us was pretty sure Iran wasn't trying to make nukes.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;34139970]I think a lot of us was pretty sure Iran wasn't trying to make nukes.[/QUOTE] The 6+ pages of argument and debate per Iran-nuclear-thread in 2010 and mid 2011 showed there was alot of people who did as well. Primarily from some of our more conservative members.
You get plutonium 239 from LWR reactors right another step in the road to nuclear weapons seems like too much effort to try and enrich uranium to those levels, especially considering the kind of scrutiny they're under
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];34140014']The 6+ pages of argument and debate per Iran-nuclear-thread in 2010 and mid 2011 showed there was alot of people who did as well. Primarily from some of our more conservative members.[/QUOTE] I must have missed them both somehow, or forgotten. If they were in the GD, I wouldn't have read them, I don't go in that section.
[QUOTE=Contag;34140034]You get plutonium 239 from LWR reactors right another step in the road to nuclear weapons seems like too much effort to try and enrich uranium to those levels, especially considering the kind of scrutiny they're under[/QUOTE] Of course you'd need additional facilities to separate out the 239pu, but it makes sense to have a view to the future while they develop their power generation and missile capabilities
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;34140044]I must have missed them both somehow, or forgotten. If they were in the GD, I wouldn't have read them, I don't go in that section.[/QUOTE] All SH, but most of it was in 2010. I know you were in on a couple, if I recall. Anyhow that's beside the point.
So he's saying Iran is developing the ability to develop?
I saw it coming though there was the tiniest amount of doubt tucked in the back of my mind that was telling me "You know that government is fucking crazy right?"
Come on, go make war anyways. Sound reason, logic and clear thinking has never stopped the US in missing any opportunity to destroy humans.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.