U.S.-Backed Russian Institutes Help Iran Build Reactor

[Afro-European]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/07/washington/07nuke.html?_r=1&ref=world&oref=slogin

Do you people get it? I don't.

[9mmRifle]

The Whitehouse is corrupt Rumsfeld was on the top seat in board of a Company that was selling Nuke Reactors To North Korea it earned him about $180,000 per year

[eskachig]

This is the funniest piece of news I read all year.

[Afro-European]

The US kept selling weapons to Saddam Hussein even after he gazed Kurds.These Neo-cons really amaze me.


The Whitehouse is corrupt Rumsfeld was on the top seat in board of a Company that was selling Nuke Reactors To North Korea it earned him about $180,000 per year

[criticalpass]

nice find AE, now I'll be angry all day and dismiss any future threats made against Iran. No wonder they know whats going on in there, just like they did with Iraq, and now that Iran is making threats against other nations Washington is getting caught in an uh-oh situation and will be forced to go in and take control of the country before the truth be told.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

We're paying Russia under a number of programs, not just this one. Therefore what difference does it make, it all winds up in the same pot. For the record, our beef with Iran is not that they are pursuing nuclear power, but that they are doing so without the inspections required under the NPT.

This is what happens when you have poorly written agreements that don't have enough strings attached. But then again, when we attach all those strings, the very same voices who are spouting off about this issue will turn right back around and accuse us of being short sighted, knuckle-dragging unilateral with-us-or-against-us neocons.

[Rictor]

We're paying Russia under a number of programs, not just this one. Therefore what difference does it make, it all winds up in the same pot. For the record, our beef with Iran is not that they are pursuing nuclear power, but that they are doing so without the inspections required under the NPT.

1. Your sentiments are clearly not shared by the government. Or else they wouldn't place Iran's suspension of enrichment as a prerequisite for talks. They are on record as saying that ending Iranian enrichment, for any purposes, is the ultimate goal. Or do they not know their own policy positions?

2. The dude in charge of inspections, al Baradei, maintains to this day that there is not one shred of evidence of a covert nuclear weapons program. The NIE agrees. At what point did we adopt an "guilty until proven innocent" approach?

[2Sheds_Jackson]

1. Your sentiments are clearly not shared by the government. Or else they wouldn't place Iran's suspension of enrichment as a prerequisite for talks. They are on record as saying that ending Iranian enrichment, for any purposes, is the ultimate goal. Or do they not know their own policy positions?

2. The dude in charge of inspections, al Baradei, maintains to this day that there is not one shred of evidence of a covert nuclear weapons program. The NIE agrees. At what point did we adopt an "guilty until proven innocent" approach?

I admire a well-ordered and numerically delineated post.

1. There's more to a nuclear program than just enrichment, right? In fact, it's possible to have nuclear reactors, with absolutely no enrichment at all. Somebody else would just have to give them the goodies for the fuel rods. The US has never stated that it requires Iran to scrap it's nuclear program, only enrichment. According to the article, there is no evidence that US money is paying these scientists, nor that these scientists have anything to do with enrichment. I'm sure we could find a Chevy pickup or two onsite at Bushehr -is GM helping with enrichment?

2. Neither al Baradei nor the IAEA would be ones to ask about Iran's nuclear program, since they've been locked out for years. In fact, nobody except the Iranians can say with any certainty exactly what they have or don't have. The "guilty until proven innocent" approach has been in effect since the inception of the NPT. Inspections have always been required - or the issue can go to the UNSC and they'll start rattling swords. IIRC the NIE concluded the Iranians could have a weapon within 10 years. Shall we wait and see?

[ViktorNavorski]

2. The dude in charge of inspections, al Baradei, maintains to this day that there is not one shred of evidence of a covert nuclear weapons program. The NIE agrees. At what point did we adopt an "guilty until proven innocent" approach?Read it again, you're off the mark.