Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush supports Russia sending enriched uranium to Iran
Reuters ^ | 17 Dec 2007 | Tabassum Zakaria

Posted on 12/17/2007 1:01:45 PM PST by BGHater

FREDERICKSBURG, Va., Dec 17 (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush said on Monday he supports Russia sending enriched uranium to Iran for civilian power use because it meant that Tehran did not need to pursue their own enrichment capabilities.

"If the Russians are willing to do that, which I support, then the Iranians do not need to learn how to enrich," Bush said. "If the Iranians accept that uranium for a civilian nuclear power plant, then there's no need for them to learn how to enrich."

Russia has delivered the first shipment of nuclear fuel to Iran's Bushehr atomic power station, which Moscow and Washington say should convince Tehran to shut down its disputed uranium enrichment program.

Bush said Iran was a danger so long as it pursued a nuclear program that could lead to the development of weapons. Tehran insists its program is for peaceful energy purposes only.

Despite a U.S. intelligence assessment that Tehran had halted its nuclear weapons program in late 2003, Bush said: "I think Iran's a danger to peace. My attitude hasn't changed toward Iran. If somebody had a weapons program what's to say they couldn't start it up tomorrow?"

The United States is seeking another round of U.N. sanctions against Iran. "They owe an explanation to the world," Bush said.

"That (intelligence) report says to me, when you read it carefully, Iran was a threat, Iran is a threat to peace, and Iran will be a threat to peace if we don't stop their enrichment facilities," Bush said.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; Russia
KEYWORDS: bush; iran; iraniannukes; russia; uranium
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

1 posted on 12/17/2007 1:01:46 PM PST by BGHater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BGHater

Logic doesn’t work with moonbats. Never has, never will.


2 posted on 12/17/2007 1:04:28 PM PST by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rhombus

Again, the title of the story is misleading.


3 posted on 12/17/2007 1:07:58 PM PST by Perdogg (Fred Thompson for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

THAT’S the George Bush I voted for in 2000 and 2004. I hope that that canny mind comes to its senses about immigration and the “Palestinians” too.


4 posted on 12/17/2007 1:08:18 PM PST by Slings and Arrows ("Bush is destroying the solar system:The ice caps on Mars are shrinking too." --Right_Wing_Madman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater
"If the Iranians accept that uranium for a civilian nuclear power plant...."

And it's not like they're sitting atop a mountain of oil or anything, so they sure do need one.

5 posted on 12/17/2007 1:10:40 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo

That stuff is to valuable to use themselves.


6 posted on 12/17/2007 1:12:26 PM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BGHater
"If the Russians are willing to do that, which I support, then the Iranians do not need to learn how to enrich," Bush said. "If the Iranians accept that uranium for a civilian nuclear power plant, then there's no need for them to learn how to enrich."

Duh! Of course they won't need to learn how to enrich. You can make a nuclear bomb out of uranium already enriched sooner than trying to figure out how to enrich the uranium.

7 posted on 12/17/2007 1:13:14 PM PST by Spunky ("Everyone has a freedom of choice, but not of consequences.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo

Why burn oil that you could sell at $100 a barrel when you can burn uranium instead?


8 posted on 12/17/2007 1:13:23 PM PST by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

I’m no scientist but doesn’t giving them enriched uranium just eliminate a step in their process to developing nuclear weapons. They can either learn to make it or buy it from Russia. Doesn’t make sense to me.


9 posted on 12/17/2007 1:42:38 PM PST by snippy_about_it (Fall in --> The FReeper Foxhole. America's History. America's Soul. WWPD (what would Patton do))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spunky
"Of course they won't need to learn how to enrich. You can make a nuclear bomb out of uranium already enriched sooner than trying to figure out how to enrich the uranium."

The level of enrichment necessary for reactor fuel and for a fission bomb are drastically different, around 25% for fuel, greater than 90% for the banger. If they wanted to make bombs out of the Russian stuff, they'd still need an "in-house" enrichment process to do it.

10 posted on 12/17/2007 1:44:16 PM PST by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: BGHater
Hey, look on the bright side. When the terrorists get nucs they going to detonate them in New York, LA, Seattle, Baltimore ; DC. Think of all the Libs and Lawyers that will be vaporized.
11 posted on 12/17/2007 1:44:51 PM PST by stubernx98 (cranky, but reasonable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

One would think, with 5000 or more centrifugese, they already know HOW to enrich.

Would it be easier to take this lightly enriched Russian uranium and use that in their current enrichment operations?

Will they have a supply of plutonium in the near future?


12 posted on 12/17/2007 1:55:07 PM PST by wolfcreek (The Status Quo Sucks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

It’s the same mistake we made with North Korea, no?

Then again, it doesn’t matter a whole lot what Bush says about this. Russia is going to sell them uranium whether we like it or not.


13 posted on 12/17/2007 1:56:00 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
And it's not like they're sitting atop a mountain of oil or anything, so they sure do need one.

What is wrong with all you people trying to inject logic into a news story?? Don't you know what a "STORY" is????

14 posted on 12/17/2007 2:21:13 PM PST by logic (Support Duncan Hunter for the 2008 GOP presidential nominee. He is THE conservative candidate!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo

They would want to sell the oil rather than burn it themselves.


15 posted on 12/17/2007 2:22:32 PM PST by RightWhale (Dean Koonz is good, but my favorite authors are Dun and Bradstreet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek
One would think, with 5000 or more centrifugese, they already know HOW to enrich. Would it be easier to take this lightly enriched Russian uranium and use that in their current enrichment operations? Will they have a supply of plutonium in the near future?

Perhaps what they were really missing is the source of the raw material? Since they were not able to get it from Niger?

16 posted on 12/17/2007 2:24:11 PM PST by logic (Support Duncan Hunter for the 2008 GOP presidential nominee. He is THE conservative candidate!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: logic

Iran has uranium deposits of its own.


17 posted on 12/17/2007 2:25:33 PM PST by RightWhale (Dean Koonz is good, but my favorite authors are Dun and Bradstreet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

Oops, that was Iraq wasn’t it??


18 posted on 12/17/2007 2:27:33 PM PST by logic (Support Duncan Hunter for the 2008 GOP presidential nominee. He is THE conservative candidate!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: logic

Iran has deposits but not much mining as yet. Mine development is expensive but it could be done later.


19 posted on 12/17/2007 2:31:04 PM PST by RightWhale (Dean Koonz is good, but my favorite authors are Dun and Bradstreet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

bttt


20 posted on 12/17/2007 2:42:54 PM PST by 1COUNTER-MORTER-68 (THROWING ANOTHER BULLET-RIDDLED TV IN THE PILE OUT BACK~~~~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson