|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 8:03 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| A Solution? Come up with a way to make an Iranian nuclear weapon strategically worthless or close to it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 9:14 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Very well. Please put this matter to rest. What is your position on these issues? |
OK, Goph, now it's your turn. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 9:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
3. In which of these scenarios are we more likely to garner international support and cooperation? Preventing the outright acquisition of nuclear power technology or preventing the development of nuclear weapons? Remember that other countries are under no obligation to prevent one, but according to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, should not allow two.
|
This should be less of an obstacle when the following is considered:
| Quote: |
| Most present day reactors (Light Water Reactors or LWRs) use enriched uranium where the proportion of the U-235 isotope has been increased from 0.7% to about 3 or up to 5%. (For comparison, uranium used for nuclear weapons would have to be enriched in plants specially designed to produce at least 90% U-235.) |
Source: http://www.uic.com.au/nip33.htm
From the same:
| Quote: |
| Enrichment accounts for almost half of the cost of nuclear fuel. |
If enrichment at 3-5% counts for half the cost of nuclear fuel, imagine the cost of enrichment at even middle ranges of 50%, still not isotopic enough for most workable nuclear devices.
It is a long way to enrich from 5% to 90%. In that time period, most IAEA member-states should be able to openly account for their enrichment activities. Those that deceive or are duplicitious should recieve harsher measures than Iran has recieved. The problem is in the international political will to punish Iran on behalf of Russia or China, not any sort of doubt or lack of belief that what Iran is doing is duplicitous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 5:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kuros,
Problem with your arguement and obfuscation is that Iran until just a few weeks ago, has consistently received favourable reports from the IAEA that all enrichment is under 3.5%. Or not even close.... Are you unaware of this or then why are you discussing the issue or even jumping to conclusions of punishment and the lack of will in nations to do so...?
Or are you with Bush in being able to divine and punish just for what he thinks might happen? Seems he is good at that and quite culpable of it too.....
So where is the boggie man in your opinion? Inform yourself here..
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Focus/IaeaIran/index.shtml
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 8:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
Kuros,
Problem with your arguement and obfuscation is...
|
I'm obfuscating? From your link:
| Quote: |
"We have been going through the verification process for the last four years and unless Iran is able to provide answers to the Agency about our concerns, then we will continue to be in a position where we have to reserve judgment about their programme," the Director General said.
He called on Iran "to cooperate fully" with the Agency. "This would help a lot in diffusing the emerging crisis about Iran�s programme. It would enable a comprehensive solution that on the one hand guarantees Iran�s right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes but at the same time provides the international community with the confidence that is needed after many years of undeclared nuclear activities in Iran about its programme and future direction," he said. |
The position that Iran does not have any weapons programs is based on limited information. The IAEA wants more.
Obfuscation. 
Thanks for the link, though. It helps go to show what Iran needs to do. They need to open all facilities for inspection. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe obfuscation was the wrong word. But I thought that anyone casually reading your post would think that Iran had or was about to produce weapons grade, enriched uranium.
Iran is a long way away from weapons grade production and there is no evidence suggesting they are producing anything but that needed for nuclear power production.
Yes, I think Iran should have continued to cooperate with the IAEA but unfortunately, the U.S. government thought it could divert public attention so they pushed through the sanctions and ratched up the rhetoric. And then the Iranian govt saw this as an opportunity for themselves also, to use it to garner public support.
So I would blame the U.S. approach here, as much as the Iranians reaction - for the present state of affairs. The U.S. gave the Iranians a win-win situation and I just don't see why the State dept. didn't just pursue diplomatic negotiations and let the IAEA continue to operate by not giving the Iranians an excuse to block their inspectors? But on the other hand, what else can you expect from the Bush team?
As it is -- we are at the same place we were in Iraq, pre invasion. Blix saying there are no weapons of mass destruction, no evidence at all. But still saying, there might be because their were some places/issues not fully explored. So the U.S. uses this as meaning "there must be WMD!". Same scenario here with Iran. No evidence of anything but peaceful pursuit of nuclear energy but the U.S. using the few issues the Director General ElBaradei mentions, to fan the flames of war and say, "they have nuclear weapons!".
To much politics and not enough diplomacy.
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
