Posted on 03/04/2003 5:19:10 PM PST by knak
Iran will start operating a uranium processing plant within the next few weeks, it said yesterday, a move that has long concerned experts as a stage in the possible development of nuclear weapons.
Western intelligence agencies have given warning for more than a decade that Teheran was secretly developing a nuclear weapons programme under the guise of creating an alternative energy supply.
Washington has contended that Iran does not need nuclear energy because of its extensive oil and gas supplies. Teheran says the volatile situation in the Middle East and the constant shift in alliances means it has to ensure supplies that are independent of outside influences.
The announcement by Hassan Rohani, secretary-general of the National Supreme Security Council, that a uranium processing plant in Isfahan, central Iran, would open shortly was bound to set fresh alarm bells ringing.
Iran has always firmly denied developing a secret nuclear weapons programme, but the Isfahan plant would be an essential piece in a chain of installations that go towards producing the enriched uranium essential for atomic armaments. The plant would process uranium from nearby mines, and the resulting gas would then be enriched at a plant in the town of Natanz. Uranium must be enriched for use in nuclear reactors to generate electricity. But highly enriched uranium is a key ingredient for weapons.
Mr Rohani said: "Having access to the technology is not translated into having access to an atomic bomb.
"It is scientific technology used for peaceful purposes."
Mohammed ElBaradei, the head of the Vienna-based United Nations nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, visited Natanz, 200 miles south of Teheran, last month and reported seeing a sophisticated facility with a pilot project.
He said part of a larger unit still under construction was being built underground. Underground facilities are of particular concern to inspectors because they cannot easily be monitored from the air.
A UN spokesman said that as far as is known, Iran had so far operated within the constraints of the IAEA and all its facilities are "under our safeguards".
US officials say Iran's existing facilities could, nevertheless, be used to gain access to fissile material by clandestinely diverting it from a location such Natanz.
If Iraq is worthy of a US Military action so then is Iran and Syria. Both "have and still do" support terrorism and "have" the one thing Iraq does not have, "Strategic Ballistic Weapons Platforms". Like Iran's Shihab 3 which Iran tested in 1998 and 2000, which lead to the development of Shihab 4 "ballistic launch vehicle" while Iran's Fajr 5 Rockets are well renown. Syria also has "Scud B ballistic launch vehicles", which the Syrians successfully tested in July of 2001 armed with a "chemical" warhead. Both Countries "have" advanced WMD research programs. Why are we not at least placing severe sanctions on Countries like these even more so than Iraq?
In 2000 and 2001 this was the CIA's stance. What changed?
It was noted in the December 2000 Global Trends Report produced by the National Intelligence Council who reports to the Director of Central Intelligence that; "Iran sees its short- and medium-range missiles as deterrents, as force-multiplying weapons of war, primarily with conventional warheads, and as options for delivering biological, chemical, and eventually nuclear weapons. Iran could test an IRBM or land-attack cruise missile by 2004 and perhaps even an ICBM or space launch vehicle as early as 2001".
AND
"Iraq's ability to obtain WMD will be influenced, in part, by the degree to which the UN Security Council can impede development or procurement over the next 15 years. Under some scenarios, Iraq could test an ICBM capable of delivering nuclear-sized payloads to the United States before 2015; foreign assistance would affect the capabilities of the missile and the time it became available. Iraq could also develop a nuclear weapon during this period."
AND
CIA Director George Tenant in his February 2nd 2000 report to Senate Select Committee on Intelligence regarding "The Worldwide Threat in 2000: Global Realities of Our National Security" stated. "Iran in the next few years may be able to supply not only complete Scuds, but also Shahab-3s and related technology, and perhaps even more-advanced technologies if Tehran continues to receive assistance from Russia, China, and North Korea". Director Tenant further explains "Some of these terrorists are actively sponsored by national governments that harbor great antipathy toward the United States. Iran, for one, remains the most active state sponsor. Although we have seen some moderating trends in Iranian domestic policy and even some public criticism of the security apparatus, the fact remains that the use of terrorism as a political tool by official Iranian organs has not changed since President Khatami took office in August 1997".
Note the phrase "the most active state sponsor" with reference to Iran not Iraq.
Iran to Start Nuke Activities in Isfahan Shortly
March 03, 2003 Islamic Republic News Agency IRNA
Secretary of Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) and representative from Semnan in the Assembly of Experts Hojjatoleslam Hassan Rowhani said here Monday Iran would inaugurate its nuclear sites in Isfahan in the early new Iranian year.(starting March 21)
Speaking in the Imam Khomeini Mosque, Rowhani said the Natanz nuclear plant would enrich the uranium extracted in Iran's Yazd province to provide the fuel necessary for other nuclear power plants.
He said the gigantic nuclear site of Isfahan was constructed over the last two years adding that the use of the nuclear technology would reinforce the authority of Iran's system.
The nuclear technology is a complex one in which Iran has invested a lot, Rowhani added.
Iran has today acceded to the technology of enriching the uranium, he said while explaining that this would not mean that Iran has acceded to the atomic bombs.
He reiterated that Iran would continue its nuclear plans for the peaceful purposes.
Rowhani noted that with the inauguration of the Natanz sites, Iran would achieve self-sufficiency in the sphere of production of the necessary fuel to run the nuclear power stations.
US officials were cited late last year as alleging that American satellites had spotted two sites, which suggested they could be used for making nuclear weapons.
Iran strongly rejected the allegations and reiterated that the two plants were intended to generate electricity.
Iran's Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi said recently Iran has plans to produce 6,000 megawatts of electricity from nuclear plants in the next 20 years while clarifying that the launch of these two centers are aimed at producing necessary fuel for these plants.
The comments came after President Mohammad Khatami announced for the first time that Iran had started excavating uranium ore from a mine, 200 km from the central city of Yazd, to produce fuel for its nuclear plants.
Despite Washington's unease, President Khatami's announcement was taken with no qualms by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and its chief Mohamed Elbaradei announced his readiness to visit Iran on February 25 while Tehran asked the date to be brought ahead to February 23.
After a visit to the under-construction nuclear energy facility in central Natanz, the IAEA head reaffirmed Iran's nuclear activities were for peaceful purposes.
A little tough to swallow on it's face since they export two thirds of their production which accounts for approximately eighty percent of their hard, currency imports.
Excuse me Duh. Since your so knowledgeable on this matter. Please explain to me how we are going to take on Iran after Iraq when:
1. The Shiite Muslims are the majority in Iraq and in Iran and each are aliened.
2. There are two million Iraqi Shiites living in Iran and who will return to Iraq and attempt to form the new Iraq Government.
Think they might have something to say if we decide that our next stop over will be Iran?
I'd venture to guess, "not much," since our mission is the same in both nations... removal of rulers who do not represent or care about the safety of their populations. The ruling mullahs in Iran and the pro-Western younger generations (45% of the entire population at last count) in Iran aren't exactly having a love-fest.
Since you're so educated yourself, I'm sure I don't need to tell you that the above is not a sentence. (You need a preposition somewhere, presumably.)
Anyway, I eagerly await the post in which you put forth the details of your research (and calculations if applicable) by which you've concluded SDI a "hoax". Best,
!!! Whoa! I'm a moron! All this time, I failed to realize that we're about to have Iran literally surrounded!
Man, now that's some nice Risk-playing, Mr. President!
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.