Ahmadinejad Announces Iran's Conditions for Future N. Talks

Iran's Nuclear Program - Toward the end of 2003 Iran's nuclear program came under the scrutiny of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Work on a nuclear reactor to be built by Siemens at Bushehr had begun in the time of the Shah, and was nearing completion in 1979, when the revolution occurred. The Ayatolah Khomeini pronounced the project "unislamic." The Iraqis bombed damaged the Bushehr site during the Iran-Iraq war. However, Iran decided subsequently to renew the program. Nuclear power has fallen out of favor in most countries since the reactor mishap at 3 Mile Island in 1979, and more especially after the Chernobyl disaster in the former Soviet Union. However, Iranians claim that they want to develop nuclear power as an alternative to fossil fuels, citing pollution concerns as well as eventual depletion. Indeed, Teheran is very polluted primarily because of vehicle and refinery emissions. This is partly due to subsidies of oil prices by the Iranian government. Though it has over 9% of the world's oil reserves and over 16% of the world's gas, Iran has neglected its fossil fuel substrate because foreign companies would not provide spare parts and know-how following the revolution. Wells may have become unusable due to neglect. Iran still has more than enough gas and oil to meet its increasing energy needs though for many years to come.

Iran contracted with Russia to install a reactor to replace the Siemens reactor destroyed by the Iraqis. This project was under IAEA supervision in accord with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty of which Iran is a signatory. However, through reports of informants, it was discovered that Iran had additional nuclear projects that were concealed from the IAEA and the world. Iran was manufacturing and installing a large number of gas centrifuges. These can be used to purify low grade uranium ore, such as that which Iran possesses in relative abundance, into reactor fuel grade uranium They can also be used to produce weapons grade U-235 isotope. To date, Iran has about 1000 KG of low enriched uranium (LEU) enough to make a bomb with further refinement.

source

enriched uranium is not solely used to produce weapon-grade U-235!

ironically, it seems apparent that in the oil-addiction clouded minds of American leaders, it does not seem likely that oil and gas reserves would be ignored in favor of something less damaging to our Mother Earth and to ourselves and our animal friends.

air quality is a big issue and one that validates the idea of Iran peacefully seeking energy alternatives. the cost of disease and illnesses caused by polluted air is another detrimental side effect of fossil fuel consumption.

......................

this is not a new thing, at all, in many ways.

Iran has been developing nuclear power plants since the days of the Shah, originally planning to construct 20 reactors for energy production. this was all put on hold in 1979 due to the revolution and then the Iran/Iraq war. Iran signed the NPT in 1970. from 1992 to 2003, IAEA was given free access for inspections and until 2003, the IAEA reported no infractions of the NPT.

source

why 2003?

hmmm...
read this: source

this article might pass for an up-to-the-minute report were it not for the mention of our President, Mr. GW Bush, and the dateline, which is 2003.

same old story....

it ends with the following:

The revelations come at a particularly bad time for Washington, which is locked in a battle to gain U.N. approval for an attack on Iraq and to build consensus among its allies for a multilateral approach to the crisis in North Korea. Critics of the Administration say Bush's hard public line against the so-called "Axis of Evil," combined with the threatened war with Iraq, have acted as a spur to both Iran and North Korea to accelerate their nuclear programs. "If those countries didn't have much incentive or motivation before, they certainly did after the Axis of Evil statement," says one western diplomat familiar with the Iranian and North Korean programs. The Administration counters that both programs have been underway for many years.

so 2003 is when things seem to have gone slightly awry with Iran's nuclear program inspections...the same year in which Bush campaigned for the war in Iraq, labeling Iran, Iraq, and N. Korea as the "Axis of Evil."

go figure!



after what had happened to Iran during the Iran/Iraq war, that, in itself, is insulting and demonstrates great ignorance and prejudice!

America/UK/Israel are the aggressors.
Be honest about this, when we went into Iraq, Iran was always a rumour in the air, and over the past 7 years its done nothing but become the forefront of news.

Is IRAN producing nuclear weapons? More than bloody likely. But so' is half the industrialised world in my opinion. Nukes are a defence against resource hungry corporate governments. IE USA.

Iran deserves the right to develop nukes, the same way USA, Russia, England, France and ISRAEL do.

With great power comes great responsibility, and if Iran ever use them, or attak someone then they will be annihilated.

People then cry, that if Iran had them they'd use them. BS to that.
People then cry, that Iran fund and assist terrorists.... what, and the USA, ENGLAND, CHINA, FRANCE and ISRAEL do not ? do you see any of those countries slipping their clandestine groups nukes?

No.. you don’t..

If America/Israel attack Iran, they deserve to have their living daylights smashed out of them, because it would be nothing but an Israeli pushed corporate land grab.

and anyone who says Iran is a threat is a damn fool or a liar.

Israel, UK and USA are backing them into a dangerous corner. They saw what happened to Iraq and they know better than anyone what Iraqs about... IF Pre-emptive strikes are OK For the USA and ISAREL in the face of oncoming aggression, then its ok for Iran.

And if you dont agree with that, you dont even realise youve been brainwashed by the zionest machine.

[edit on 28-6-2010 by Agit8dChop]

[edit on 28-6-2010 by Agit8dChop]

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
America/UK/Israel are the aggressors.
Be honest about this, when we went into Iraq, Iran was always a rumour in the air, and over the past 7 years its done nothing but become the forefront of news.

i think i misunderstood your earlier posts!

i apologize.



thank you for replying again, because you've clarified your opinions and i understand, far better, where you are coming from.

much i agree with!

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by queenannie38

 

No I agree.........

But they have lied about it, first off they blatantly said they werent doing ANYTHING with nuclear technology and that any rumors were B.S , come to find out they were,

Then they didnt have ANY secret nuclear research plants......come to find out they were lying about that too.......

The next course of action is.........what are they hiding now? See what i mean?

yes, actually i do.

in a reply between yours and this one, i posted some information about some of the reasoning, perhaps, behind the untruths told by Iran...a lie is never right but i do see maybe how it came to be.

but then again, how can i fault another country's leadership for lying when my own tells untruths to the point where it seems to be S.O.P.???

which brings me back to hypocrisy - the lying on both sides now levels the playing field again and it still doesn't prove anything, either way.

i always try to put myself in the other person's shoes and i have done this, as well, in thinking about this situation from the other side.

how would i feel if i were the President of Iran, considering all that has happened and what is happening now?

i must admit i might not do things very much different at all, all things considered.

but then again, i really couldn't know because pretending to wear his shoes is all i can do but yet it isn't the same as actually wearing them!