Iran gets its Nuclear Fuel

Welcome to our community

Take a moment to sign up and join the discussion! It's simple and free.

Grayson

Senior Member
Messages
1,079
Iran gets its Nuclear Fuel

Source: news:www.wanadoo.co.uk/news/politics/story.htm?articleid=JON735223&linkfrom=NEWS_POL&article=More_Headlines&link=link_3

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Russia and Iran have signed a nuclear fuel supply deal long opposed by Washington, paving the way for Iran to start up its first atomic reactor next year.

The agreement, inked by the two countries' nuclear energy chiefs at the Bushehr atomic plant in southern Iran, came as Tehran faced heightened pressure from the United States, which accuses it of secretly developing nuclear weapons.

Iran, OPEC's second largest oil producer, denies the charge and has received strong backing from Moscow, which is keen to play a major role in expanding Iran's nuclear energy programme.

\"This is a very important incident in the ties between the two countries and in the near future a number of Russian experts will be sent to Bushehr to equip the power station,\" Iranian state television quoted Alexander Rumyantsev, head of Russia's Federal Atomic Energy Agency, as saying.

A key part of the agreement obliges Tehran to repatriate all spent nuclear fuel to Russia. Moscow hopes this will allay U.S. worries that Iran may use the spent fuel, which could be reprocessed into bomb-grade plutonium, to develop arms.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has been probing Iran's nuclear programme for over two years, said it would also keep a careful eye on Tehran's use of the fuel.

Spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said inspectors would \"monitor closely the use of the fuel and where it goes\" as part of agency safeguards monitoring aimed at ensuring no nuclear materials are diverted to any covert weapons activities.

A leading Republican senator said the United States should seek to bar Russia from this year's summit of major nations to protest against Moscow's actions including the fuel deal.

\"The United States and our European allies should start out by saying, 'Vladimir, you're not welcome at the next G8 conference,'\" said Senator John McCain, an influential member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. The next summit of the Group of Eight major nations, which includes Russia, is scheduled to be held in Scotland in July.

The White House had no immediate comment on the signing of the supply agreement.

Rumyantsev said Bushehr would start operating in late 2006.

\"We are planning the physical launch at the end of 2006. About half a year before this the first delivery of fuel will take place,\" the Itar-Tass news agency quoted him as saying.

FUEL FROM SIBERIA

Iranian officials put the plant's launch about six months earlier in mid-2006. Diplomats in Tehran said they may have been referring to the reactor's initial test phase.

Rumyantsev said the first batch of enriched uranium fuel was in Siberia ready to be shipped.

Disagreements over the timing of the shipment had delayed the deal, due to be signed in Tehran on Saturday. Tehran wanted Russia to send the fuel earlier, Iranian officials said.

Iran said long delays in signing the agreement, which has been under negotiation for more than two years, were technical and had nothing to do with pressure exerted by Washington, which wants Russia to halt nuclear cooperation with Iran.

\"My understanding is that international developments have had no effect on this contract,\" Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, told state radio.

Once operational, Bushehr will generate 1,000 megawatts of electricity. Initiated before Iran's 1979 Islamic revolution and badly damaged during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, the project was later revived with Russian help and has cost about $800 million.

Iran has announced plans to build several more power plants, generating 7,000 MW from nuclear power by 2021. Russia hopes to claim a significant share of this new business.

The Bushehr power station has aroused less concern in the West than Iran's plans to produce its own nuclear fuel for future reactors using uranium mined, processed and enriched inside the country.

The European Union and United States want Iran to scrap its uranium enrichment plans entirely. Iran has refused but has suspended enrichment while it tries to reach a negotiated settlement with the European Union.

So, despite the best efforts of the US, another player enters the Nuclear Arena. Iran, trusted by the Soviets, feared by the US and OPEC's largest player has access to Uranium and if Europe agrees to support them, soon they will be able to enrich it as well.

Will the US liberate the Iranians from this menace to their health and co-incidentally liberate all that oil as well?

Or, will this Soviet-Iranian Alliance be allowed to 'civilise' the Middle-East with Atomic Energy?

They want Oil and Atoms? The very nerve of them.
 

CaryP

Senior Member
Messages
1,438
Re: Iran gets its Nuclear Fuel

Yeeha, Grayson. Bush has supposedly already signed the orders for limited air strikes on Iran for June. This is supposed to be a joint attack with Israel. We'll see if Russia can back off the U.S. and Israel again with back channel threats of "nuclear" retaliation. Gonna be an interesting summer.

Cary
 

Grayson

Senior Member
Messages
1,079
Re: Iran gets its Nuclear Fuel

Thanks for that 'heads-up' Cary. Never sure which way Bush will jump, into the sh1t or onto the sh1t, but he wants to be the Nuclear President and this is his chance. Thing is, there may be no-one around to document his stupidity... ah well.

Factor 4gajillion sun cream on order then, along with the lead suit and gaily painted gas mask.
 

The_Ruffneck

Member
Messages
278
Re: Iran gets its Nuclear Fuel

JUNE? damn , i got a girl flying over to visit me for a month in August , as long as the world ends after i see her.I'll send a memo to Bush right now , mad props for the heads up.
 

CaryP

Senior Member
Messages
1,438
Re: Iran gets its Nuclear Fuel

Hey kids, thought you'd want some source of the Bush has signed the orders for a June attack on Iran. Here it is. No, I can't provide a link because this came in an email from a financial site. But it backs up what I've been reading elsewhere.



In recent weeks, the news media has been overflowing with reports on the increasing tension between the U.S. and Iran, supposedly based on the Islamic country\'s unwillingness to drop its nuclear programs. A clear-cut case of another tyrannical nation whose government needs to be ousted in order to make the world a safer place, it seems. But WWNK has found information that\'s largely been flying under the radar screen of the mainstream press... and that might paint an entirely different picture.

On February 18, Scott Ritter, ex-Marine and former United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) weapons inspector who played a major role in Iraq, dropped a bombshell during a speech delivered to an audience in the Capitol Theater in Olympia, WA. The event\'s sponsor, United for Peace of Pierce County (UFPPC), a Washington state activist group that nonviolently opposes \\"the reliance on unilateral military actions rather than cooperative diplomacy\\", had invited Ritter and independent war journalist Dahr Jamail to talk about the war in Iraq.

In his speech, Ritter claimed that President George W. Bush has received and signed off on orders for an aerial attack on Iran planned for June 2005, citing an anonymous official as the source of this information who--according to Ritter--was involved in the manipulation of the election outcome in Iraq, which reduced the percentage of the vote received by the United Iraqi Alliance from 56% to 48%. Ritter also stated that \\"this would soon be reported by a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist in a major metropolitan magazine\\", an allusion to New Yorker reporter Seymour M. Hersh, believes ?the UFPPC. ?

In a January 17 article in the New Yorker, Hersh had written that \\"Strategists at the headquarters of the U.S. Central Command, in Tampa, Florida, have been asked to revise the military\'s war plan, providing for a maximum ground and air invasion of Iran.\\"

But why? Is Iran really such an imminent threat that it would justify invading that country, with a U.S. army already stretched to the max by its commitment in Iraq? Aside from the \'official\' nuclear-threat argument, there may be other, economic, reasons that seem far more logical.

In October 2004, William Clark, award-winning writer and author of the ?soon-to-be published book Petrodollar Warfare--Oil, Iraq, and the Future of ?the Dollar (spring 2005), gave his opinion on the reasons for a pending U.S.-Iran crisis in an essay titled \\"The Real Reasons Why Iran is the Next Target: The Emerging Euro-denominated International Oil Marker\\".

Clark blames \\"unspoken macroeconomic drivers\\" for the U.S.\' determination to attack Iran, in particular the fact that the Tehran government plans to open a euro-based oil exchange in 2005 or early 2006, which--if successful--\\"would solidify the petroeuro as an alternative oil transaction currency, and thereby end the petrodollar\'s hegemonic status as the monopoly oil currency.\\" This, says Clark, would deliver a devastating blow to U.S. corporations, which own both the London\'s International Petroleum Exchange (IPE) and the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX), the main global oil traders.

All three current oil markers, the West Texas Intermediate crude (WTI), the Norway Brent crude, and the UAE Dubai crude are dollar-denominated. Iran, however, has required payment in euros for its European and Asian/ACU exports since spring 2003. \\"It would be logical to assume the proposed Iranian Bourse will usher in a fourth crude oil marker--denominated in the euro currency,\\" predicts Clark... a probable scenario in light of the fact that \\"the European Union imports more oil from OPEC producers than does the U.S., and the E.U. accounts for 45% of imports into the Middle East.\\"

In June 2004, the UK Guardian noted that \\"Some industry experts have warned the Iranians and other OPEC producers that western exchanges are controlled by big financial and oil corporations, which have a vested interest in market volatility.\\" BP, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, proud owners of the IPE since 2001, refused to comment. In light of the fact that Iran, holder of the second biggest oil reserves worldwide after Saudi Arabia, exports 2.7 million barrels of crude/day and produces 13 million tonnes of petrochemicals/year, the Guardian foresaw bright prospects for the new oil ?exchange. ?

That is not the only reason, though: Other recent events indicate that Tehran\'s IPE and NYMEX competitor might be just what a large part of the world has been waiting for. Not only has the euro substantially risen against the dollar since late 2002--in May 2004, the countries using the euro as their currency increased from 12 to 22. Within the last two years, notes Clark, Russia as well as China raised their central bank holdings of the euro, \\"which appears to be a coordinated move to facilitate the anticipated ascendance of the euro as a second World Reserve currency.\\"

According to a July 2004 article on Rigzone.com, an insider website for the oil and gas industry, Chris Cook, a former IPE executive turned independent consultant, commented that recently the Saudis, too, have declared their interest in the project. Since 9/11, says Rigzone, \\"Saudi Arabian investors are opting to invest in Iran rather than traditional western markets as the kingdom\'s relations with the U.S. have weakened.\\"

A lot of good reasons for the U.S. government to set their eyes on regime change in Iran, says William Clark. And it wouldn\'t be the first time, he says. His award-winning 2003 essay \\"The Real Reasons for the Upcoming War with Iraq\\" suggests that Saddam Hussein signed his own death warrant in 2000, when he announced that Iraq would no longer accept US dollars for oil being sold under the UN oil-for-food program, but that the country\'s official oil export transaction currency would be switched to the euro.
?

uh, yeah. Sounds familiar. Watch for the demonization of Iran and its "nukular" weapons of mass destruction, evil doers, threat to our safety, liberty and our way of life, etc., etc. Iraq redux is all it is. "Them boys got our oyl 'neath their damn sand. Can you 'blieve them arr'gunt soms-a-bitches? The damn nurv!!! We got to smoak 'em out, git 'em on the run and bring 'em ta justiss. Yeeha, wave ya cowboy hat and smile when you say that boy."

I feel so relieved that our safety, liberty and way of life are being so well guarded.

Cary
 

Darkwolf

Active Member
Messages
713
Re: Iran gets its Nuclear Fuel

Watch for the demonization of Iran and its \"nukular\" weapons of mass destruction, evil doers, threat to our safety, liberty and our way of life, etc., etc. Iraq redux is all it is.
The really unfortunate thing Cary is that they may be telling the truth. I know Iran has been working on nukes since at least the mid eighties, good chance that they do in fact have a couple, or at least close by now. Their leadership are insane theocrats who would use said nukes if it was the "will of allah". In fact due to the nature of the docterine, the islamists are going to expand their influence until somone stops them. If we were to pull our support for Isreal, and they fell, They would next move on western europe, after they had that consolidated, we're next. I can't agree on the theory that all of this is JUST for oil.
 

Eutychus

Junior Member
Messages
37
Re: Iran gets its Nuclear Fuel

The demonization of Iran is likely, but I really don't think it needs to happen. The domino effect is already happening. People in the middle east saw Iraq hold an election, begin to chart their own course, and look at the direction things are taking. Would the nice folks in Lebanon have had the testicular fortitude to voice an honest opinion to their Syrian neighbors/puppetmasters to the puppet government in place in Lebanon if they didn't have some indication that fear could be overcome like it was in Iraq? There has been quiet disgust with the leaders in Iran for some time now. With Iraq showing that they can vote and shape their destiny in spite of threats of violence, who knows, maybe it can work in other neighborhoods as well. I think regimes that try to control people are doomed to fail because humans desire freedom. It can take a long time (70 some years for the USSR), but eventually this inborn desire for autonomy will shape the political landscape. Iran is at the lower end of a slope whose summit recently let loose. An avalanche of democritization is in motion, and our military would be well advised to get out of the way and let it happen.
 

Darkwolf

Active Member
Messages
713
Re: Iran gets its Nuclear Fuel

democritization is in motion, and our military would be well advised to get out of the way and let it happen.



I'd say that the folks in Iran might benifit from some help from our special forces. That is if they want it. Thats going to be a rough fight for them, and we could make it easier, and have a much better relationship with them when it all ends.
 

CaryP

Senior Member
Messages
1,438
Re: Iran gets its Nuclear Fuel

Well, looks like that whole part of the world may be getting some military action. An Israeli paper said that the Bush administration just "green lighted" Syria. The article below is from Aljazeera.com. That don't make it rubbish. In case you didn't know Fox News just bought Aljazeera in response to pressure from, you guessed it, the Bush administration. So if Aljazeera is reporting this, it must be part of the neocon agenda IMO.

http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_serv...service_id=7210

U.S. gives Israel ?go-ahead? to strike Syria

Bush?s administration gave Israel the go-ahead to attack Syria in retaliation to Tel Aviv bombing that took place last weekend, killing 5 Israelis, the Hebrew daily ?Yediot Ahronot? reported.

Also, the U.S. didn?t ask Tel Aviv to exercise self restraint, as in past cases vis-?-vis the Palestinian commando raids, the newspaper added.

?Yediot Ahronot?, moreover, said that the Israeli ambassador to Washington discussed with a senior U.S. official intelligence information obtained by the Israeli intelligence service claiming that Jihad Resistance Movement had masterminded the Tel Aviv blast from inside Damascus.

In his meeting with his Belgian counterpart in the occupied Jerusalem, the Israeli foreign minister Silvan Shalom said he had tabled an official request to the Belgian government to include the Lebanese Hezbollah Movement in the European list of ?terror groups?.

The Israeli chief diplomat claimed that Hezbollah was financially supporting the Palestinian resistance groups and planning various military attacks targeting the Israeli occupation forces.

Washington has stepped up its pressure against Damascus, calling on it to immediately pull its troops out of Lebanon and accusing it of having hands in Tel Aviv bombing.

Attending 'Supporting the Palestinian Authority' meeting in London, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice claimed that she had \"firm evidence\" that Syrian-based Jihad movement was \" involved in planning\" the Tel Aviv attack.

\"There is firm evidence that Palestinian Islamic Jihad, sitting in Damascus, not only knew about these attacks but was involved in the planning,\" Rice told ABC News.

\"And so the Syrians have a lot to answer for,\" Rice said. \"We don't know the degree of Syrian involvement, but certainly what is happening on the territory of Syria, in and around Damascus, is clearly threatening to the different kind of Middle East we're trying to grow.

?\"We will be prepared to talk with others ... with the Israelis, with the Palestinians, with others in the region about this.\"

Meanwhile, a Bush administration official made a similar statement in Washington, claiming that the United States had obtained \"firm evidence that the bombing on the 25th of February was not only authorized by Palestinian Islamic Jihad leaders in Damascus but that PIJ leaders also were actively involved in planning.\"

?However, the official refused to state the evidence, only saying it was based on \"U.S. intelligence.\" ?


Rock and roll. Yeeha. How many of our young troops are going to be sacrificed to take on Israel's "enemies"? I know this is about Israel attacking Syria, but don't be surprised if the U.S. military gets called in the "help work things out." The PNAC'ers have got their global ongoing war ready to heat up to a high rolling boil. Got to spread "Pax Americana" no matter what.


Cary
 

BubbuClinton

Junior Member
Messages
133
Re: Iran gets its Nuclear Fuel

I don't think that this is really about Israel. Israel is simply an easy facade to cover the true intentions. This is most likely about chasing resources and control over the middle east. The oil supply is dwindling and demand is rising. Its pretty straight forward. Bush and his boys want to get the profit from what ever is left. Promoting Christianity, Freedom, or Fighting Israels enimies is just the excuse.

The whole idea of giving Iran Nukes is akin to saying to them" Ok Boys, here's your gun, are you goint to use it?" When you shoot them, they drew first. It is the whole idea of setting them up, is to take them down.

The musslims don't tend to want to play with the same rules that Euro/American/Russian alliance likes to play by. So they are being played like pawns on a chess board or more like armies in a Risk game.

Yes this will get messy over there within 2 years. Bush has to have this done at least a year before the 2006 elections. They need time to get their boy Arnold in position to run for the Presinator.

Look for a stealthy consitutional convention based on a terror threat or something within the next 2 years.
 

Top