Iran proffers two-step plan to defuse Nuke crisis

GENEVA: The Iranian plan to resolve their nuclear crisis proposes a framework for talks but still needs a lot of work, a source close to the talks here told Breaking Defense.

Iran’s plan presented today to the United States and five other world powers was designed to show Iran’s good will and to lay the groundwork for a breakthrough. It outlines time frames for Iran to meet international demands that it guarantee it does not seek nuclear weapons. The first is what could take place within three to six months. This would include Iran giving up 20 percent enrichment of uranium, which is closer to weapon-grade than uranium enriched for normal power reactor fuel, the source said in exclusive comments to Breaking Defense.

Iran proffers two-step plan to defuse Nuke crisis

A lot of things appear to be changing with regards to the Iranian nuclear crisis, and not just the Iranian leadership. There is a ways to go still, and a lot of details to work out, but this is better than threats, and where things have been stalled for years.

Iran even insisted that the proposal be in English, not Farsi and translated, which some say is a sign that they're willing to work on the agreement, and that things could be worked out.

The do want to be guaranteed a civilian nuclear program, and the right to enrich fuel for that program, as well as ending UN resolutions against enrichment.

Hopefully this will work and they can talk an end to this solution, instead of blowing things up like they always seem to do.

reply to post by Zaphod58


I would like to see Iran put an end to all of this crap. With new leadership in "power" some say that is pretty possible and will be more reactive to the demands of the West.

But people forget. Only the true leader of Iran really calls that shots. Things only happen if Khamenei says so. Frankly I think the whole nuclear weapons program was Khamenei's idea. I really don't see it going anywhere soon...

-SAP-

Speaking of Iran...a point to mention here? I'm in World History and this is a college level course. 101..but still. It's not a cursory blow through. It's also an older instructor who has been doing this all her life. I actually agreed with her until today ..and it took all I had to bite my tongue and not have major words on the spot for the level of outright B.S. we got this morning.

While people believe Iran was related to 9/11? Heck, Obama is actually fighting the US public to work peace with Iran. It's nuts and it's stupid, but there it is.

What did she say by the way? Well... I've heard the 20% radical figure before for what is estimated to be fighting radical across the Middle East. That didn't bother me too much. When she said Sunni's were the good guys and the WHOLE 20% of Radicals were represented by the Shia and specifically Iran? Well.... That's hard to stay quiet with.

When..a couple minutes later....she walked over the where Shia and Sunni were written on the grease board, pointed to Shia and said 'these guys are who did 9/11' before moving on? Well... I think my tongue is a littlw swollen ..even now.

This....is...a...college...history and Poli-Sci instructor making such a profound and fundamental error ...while teaching the origins and basic structure of Islam and Muhammad, no less.

Now how do you deal with ignorance at that level? I asked her about Wahhabi sect members after class short of an argument..but enough to determine she truly believed what she was saying and it was by no means an intentional dis-info jab. Scary, huh?

reply to post by Zaphod58


It's been interesting to see recent developments - Iran seem to be playing it much smarter now... more charming and open seeming. I feel that this could ultimately cast their "traditional" opponents/critics (ie "The West" and Israel) in a poor light and/or change public opinion of them in these nations. I think that it's quite intentional and that they will also seek to highlight Israel's non-compliance re: it's nuclear assets. Hopefully my optimism is not proved unfounded.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Wow... I would say that she is either terribly misinformed or just is deliberately spewing bs all over the room. Either way it would be pretty difficult not to point out the facts, of course it is the "instructor's word" against anyone elses. Which, from my own experiences in that realm, comes with automatic arrogance. "Nope. You're wrong" type of mentality.

Congrats to both of you on your new ATS status as Moderators. I didn't see a thread for congrats to the new mods.

*thumbs up emoticon*

-SAP-

reply to post by Zaphod58

Nuke Crisis? What crisis? The only "crisis" is the one fabricated against Iran by the western media. Despite that conditioning word appearing four times in the OP, despite that Iran has no nukes and has never used nukes on others, despite that they only are generating power and all the spent fuel is to be accounted for by the Russians who supplied it, despite continuing claims that they will get nukes will use nukes and threaten the whole world with nukes... they haven't.

But I understand building the crisis to proportions that eventually require action. I also understand that action is to come anyway and it would be better for the conquerers to face a nation weakened by sanctions and stripped of any real defenseless capability by then (including the bomb).

Its none of our business, but we make it ours, donnn't we?

reply to post by intrptr


Very much agreed with - and i think that Iran's current approach is possibly a cute way to help the general public in The West see this. If they can keep this up i'm very interested to see how it plays out.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


That's why I'm glad I took "Classical Islamic History" in college, taught by an older Iranian that moved here when he was in high school when the Shah was kicked out of power. He still had some aunts and uncles that lived in Iran, but was an American citizen himself.

He brought in two guest speakers. . . A Jewish representative from the Israeli government, and the next week a Palestinian representative. It was fascinating to hear both sides of the story, told from actual intelligent people on either side.

Wrabbit2000
While people believe Iran was related to 9/11?

Yeah, actually most of the hijackers were from our "allies" (cough, Saudi Arabia, cough).
I was actually surprised when on 9/11, there were pro-America rallies in countries I normally would not expect - like Iran. Unlike the usual "paid" anti-American protests over there, these were improv'd and their own government seemed surprised by the scale of it.

reply to post by MystikMushroom

I had a similar experience in High School. My history prof, was an ex-Green Beret. He made sure we knew about things that were glossed-over in the interest of Political Correctness in the text-books. Like the (acknowledged) CIA over-throws of various democratic governments in the region.

When the Brits pulled-out of various countries, that left oil interests dealing with new governments that in many cases (cough, Iran, cough) "nationalized" their oil business. The oil companies went to the Brits to get military or other intervention to get their profits back, and the Brits were like "We just GTFO of there, deal with it.". They went to Eisenhower and he put the CIA on the job.

Yes, we created (quite literally) our own worst enemy, by having the CIA over-throw a democratic government and put the monarchy back on the throne - for oil.

Wrabbit2000
Now how do you deal with ignorance at that level? I asked her about Wahhabi sect members after class short of an argument..but enough to determine she truly believed what she was saying and it was by no means an intentional dis-info jab.

Make an appointment to see her outside of class or see her during her regular office hours and ask if you can compare notes with your sources versus hers. Maybe you have sources she doesn't know and maybe she has sources you don't know, but that's how I'd approach it. If it turns out she has no credible sources, then you can deal with her ignorance as you see fit, but maybe looking at yours might sway her?

Back to the OP topic, I hope Iran doesn't blow it this time, but only time will tell.

Wrabbit2000
Speaking of Iran...a point to mention here? I'm in World History and this is a college level course. 101..but still. It's not a cursory blow through. It's also an older instructor who has been doing this all her life. I actually agreed with her until today ..and it took all I had to bite my tongue and not have major words on the spot for the level of outright B.S. we got this morning.

While people believe Iran was related to 9/11? Heck, Obama is actually fighting the US public to work peace with Iran. It's nuts and it's stupid, but there it is.

What did she say by the way? Well... I've heard the 20% radical figure before for what is estimated to be fighting radical across the Middle East. That didn't bother me too much. When she said Sunni's were the good guys and the WHOLE 20% of Radicals were represented by the Shia and specifically Iran? Well.... That's hard to stay quiet with.

When..a couple minutes later....she walked over the where Shia and Sunni were written on the grease board, pointed to Shia and said 'these guys are who did 9/11' before moving on? Well... I think my tongue is a littlw swollen ..even now.

This....is...a...college...history and Poli-Sci instructor making such a profound and fundamental error ...while teaching the origins and basic structure of Islam and Muhammad, no less.

Now how do you deal with ignorance at that level? I asked her about Wahhabi sect members after class short of an argument..but enough to determine she truly believed what she was saying and it was by no means an intentional dis-info jab. Scary, huh?

edit on 16-10-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

Wow. I'm totally speechless. I can see why you were biting your tongue and why it is so swollen!!!

The Shia are simply a different sect of Islam - they have conflict with the Sunni due to theological issues, much like Catholic / Protestant differences and it gets played out politically and sometimes with violence (like Ireland back in the day, a bit, though making a direct comparison is still somewhat dicey - but its as accurate as saying the IRA = Catholic and that the Irish Catholics as a whole were responsible for 9/11...see what I mean? Iran had as much to do with 9/11 as that. Yep. It's Crazy talk...) I hope that made sense...

You absolutely cannot point to the entirety of the Shia in Iran as "The Bad Guys" and certainly not for 9/11!!!! "What the....?" Is the appropriate response to your professor... Yikes!

peace,
AB