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

Skip to comments.

Wrap-up2 Iran ready to remove U.N. seals at nuclear sites
Reuters ^ | January 9, 2006 | Parisa Hafezi

Posted on 01/09/2006 12:22:10 AM PST by FairOpinion

TEHRAN, Jan 9 (Reuters) - Iran confirmed it will resume research on nuclear fuel on Monday, a move that could amplify calls for the Islamic Republic to be sent to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions.

"Iran will today resume nuclear fuel research as scheduled," government spokesman Gholamhossein Elham told a news conference on Monday morning.

European Union and U.S. officials say that, if Iran goes ahead with the move, diplomatic efforts to settle the issue would be endangered and that could lead to Tehran being referred to the Security Council for possible sanctions.

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed ElBaradei told Sky Television in an interview to be broadcast on Monday the world was "running out of patience with Iran".

Austrian Foreign Minister Ursula Plassnik, whose country holds the EU presidency, said Iran's decision was "the wrong step in the wrong direction and is a cause of very serious concern".

Iran insists its nuclear ambitions are entirely peaceful and says it has the right to enrich uranium on its own soil.

The EU and the United States back a plan put forward by Moscow for Iran to enrich uranium in Russia, which would ensure the uranium was only enriched to levels where it could be used to generate electricity and not to make nuclear bombs.

"We will remove the seals and we have announced that we are ready to start research from tomorrow," Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told a news conference on Sunday.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was due on Monday to hold his first major news conference since taking office in August.

MISTRUST IN THE WEST

A staunch conservative, Ahmadinejad has resolutely refused to renounce Iran's right to uranium enrichment and has stirred up more mistrust in the West by dismissing the Holocaust as "a myth" and calling Israel a "tumour" to be "wiped off the earth".

Asefi said Iran would restart work when the IAEA, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, was ready to supervise the removal of seals it put in place two years ago to freeze activities while talks went ahead.

The IAEA said two letters sent by Iran to explain its move still left key questions unresolved and the Vienna-based agency said it had asked for more information. If Iran complies with the IAEA requests, the restart of nuclear work could be delayed.

Iran has not publicly disclosed what activities it plans to resume on Monday. Diplomats and analysts say atomic research and development (R&D) could involve some laboratory tests of uranium enrichment and assembly of centrifuge enrichment machines.

That would mean all of Iran's nuclear programme was active once again, apart from uranium enrichment at an unfinished plant at Natanz.

Diplomats close to the IAEA said that if Iran went ahead and restarted nuclear R&D it would prompt a report to the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors which would then decide whether to call an emergency full meeting of all agency member countries.

That meeting could decide whether to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council which could impose sanctions.

Analysts say Iran is confident it would survive any sanctions vote and sees itself in a strong position because of the high price of oil and instability in neighbouring Iraq.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: gwot; iran; israel; nuclear; nuclearterror; wot
At this point, I don't think sanctions will have any effect.

We either go in and destroy their nuclear facitilities or be prepared to deal with Nuclear Mullahs.

1 posted on 01/09/2006 12:22:11 AM PST by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

"Diplomats close to the IAEA said that if Iran went ahead and restarted nuclear R&D it would prompt a report to the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors which would then decide whether to call an emergency full meeting of all agency member countries. "


I am sure this just terrifies Iran. (/sarcasm)


2 posted on 01/09/2006 12:24:56 AM PST by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
"It has to be "touch those seals and you will be immediately bombed". Sadly anything else will be seen as weakness. You cannot use logic with a fascist. Israel must be defended.
3 posted on 01/09/2006 12:37:07 AM PST by vimto (Life isn't a dry run)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
We either go in and destroy their nuclear facitilities or be prepared to deal with Nuclear Mullahs.

Prepare yourself for the latter. The U.S. isn't going to invade Iran.

4 posted on 01/09/2006 12:42:25 AM PST by Gunslingr3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
I very soon expect:

BOOM!

WHAAAAAAAAAA! EVIL GREAT SATAN! WHAAAAAAAA!

And that's just from the dems.

5 posted on 01/09/2006 12:47:40 AM PST by Manic_Episode (Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
A staunch conservative, Ahmadinejad has resolutely refused to renounce Iran's right to uranium enrichment and has stirred up more mistrust in the West by dismissing the Holocaust as "a myth" and calling Israel a "tumour" to be "wiped off the earth".

Once again, he's not a Muslim extremist or an Iranian hardliner. He's a conservative. A staunch one.

6 posted on 01/09/2006 12:47:40 AM PST by Moonman62 (Federal creed: If it moves tax it. If it keeps moving regulate it. If it stops moving subsidize it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gunslingr3

Israel will go in and get it done... Watch and see...


7 posted on 01/09/2006 12:48:17 AM PST by funeralcom ("What goes around, comes around".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: vimto
"It has to be "touch those seals and you will be immediately bombed". Sadly anything else will be seen as weakness. You cannot use logic with a fascist.

This presumes we know what and where to bomb, given the state of knowledge on Iraq's WMD programs (while we spent a decade overflying the country and one would hope creating human intelligence sources inside) I don't see public (or more importantly/immediately Congressional) support for a bombing campaign that can't resolve anything. The administration is not going to open that can of worms while still trying to stabilize and minimize the issue in Iraq.

Israel must be defended.

That's why Israel has a military and nukes of their own. Unless and until we add Israel as a U.S. state or territory it is not ours to defend.

8 posted on 01/09/2006 12:48:37 AM PST by Gunslingr3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: funeralcom
Israel will go in and get it done... Watch and see...

There is no Osirak to target. Iran's effort is deliberately dispersed and hidden throughout the country. They'll have a bomb... Watch and see...

9 posted on 01/09/2006 12:52:05 AM PST by Gunslingr3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Gunslingr3

No, they won't have a bomb.

There's a high cost to stopping them; but less than not stopping them.


10 posted on 01/09/2006 12:55:03 AM PST by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Gunslingr3
Unless and until we add Israel as a U.S. state or territory it is not ours to defend.

They can deliver bombs to Russia, Western Europe and places in between. A whole lot of the world needs defending against the mad mullahs.

11 posted on 01/09/2006 12:57:11 AM PST by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr
No, they won't have a bomb.

Care to place a bet?

There's a high cost to stopping them; but less than not stopping them.

The Bush adminstration doesn't have the political capital to afford that high cost. They spent it on Iraq. You're not going to see Congressional support for attacking Iran.

12 posted on 01/09/2006 1:09:53 AM PST by Gunslingr3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator

"Iran will today resume nuclear fuel research as scheduled," government spokesman Gholamhossein Elham told a news conference on Monday morning.

====

I don't mean to get picky here, but why doesn't such announcement qualify for breaking or frontpage news, while "Man Who shot the Pope to be Released" qualifies for Breaking News.

Iran just announced officially this at a news conference Monday, Jan. 9th, morning, just a few hrs ago that they will remove the UN seals. I would think that both in new-ness and impact of such news it fits the general criteria for breaking and frontpage news.


13 posted on 01/09/2006 1:12:30 AM PST by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator

P.S. to my post 13 directed to you:

The article had "wrap up 2" in the title, but then it went on and said:

(Updates with Iran confirming to resume research)

The fact that Iran officially confirmed that it will resume nuclear research is major news.


14 posted on 01/09/2006 1:15:11 AM PST by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
"I don't mean to get picky here, but why doesn't such announcement qualify for breaking or frontpage news, while "Man Who shot the Pope to be Released" qualifies for Breaking News."

Why you ask, well the MSM (being America hating libs), want to see more nuclear power countries ... especially Iran ... so they will be a balance to the evil United
States. If the Arab world became nuclear powers, the MSM would praise it as a victory for the Muslims to be able to stand on their own against the only world superpower.
15 posted on 01/09/2006 3:17:32 AM PST by MaDeuce (Do it to them, before they do it to you!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
At this point, I don't think sanctions will have any effect.

Aye, that's pretty clear. But if we can go through all the little steps and check as many boxes as we can along the way it will work out a lot better for us in the end. You'll have less belly-aching from the international community when we eventually do have to take decisive action.

16 posted on 01/09/2006 3:21:53 AM PST by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gunslingr3
The Bush adminstration doesn't have the political capital to afford that high cost.

I'm not arguing with you. But I am curious what you do see unfolding in Iran. Let's for the moment take your assumption at face value- Iran will develop a bomb and there's nothing we can do about it at the moment. Ok, what then?

Do you think they'll use it? How do you think a nuclear Iran will change the regional power struggle for both the neighboring countries and for us in the West? Do you see a nuclear Iran as a threat at all?

Again, I'm not arguing. Just curious. You seem like you've given the matter a little bit of thought and I would like to learn how you have this situation extrapolated into the coming years. Food for thought sort of thing.

17 posted on 01/09/2006 3:28:31 AM PST by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

Talking is useless.

We need to go in with a humongous air strike targeting their nuke facilities. Millions of lives hang in the balance. Cowardice will result in them being needlessly killed.


18 posted on 01/09/2006 4:39:42 AM PST by tomahawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gunslingr3
Prepare yourself for the latter.

I disagree.

The U.S. isn't going to invade Iran.

There is no need to invade Iran. Everything that needs to be done can be acomplished from 15,000' or by blockade in the Persian gulf. Stop their oil shipments, cut off their funding, eliminate their reactors, problem solved (for a while)

19 posted on 01/09/2006 5:57:39 AM PST by Thermalseeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Gunslingr3

Yeah, I'd bet Iran won't have a bomb. They'll be stopped prior if necessary.

There's more than Israel at stake though Israel may be the stopper of last resort.

An attack on Iran may come from many places, NATO even. And it would not be the same as the Iraq campaign involving ground and occupying forces. A much briefer campaign, involving a great deal less risk.

There'd be more congressional support than you think, IMHO. And, if it came to it, Bush would not need congressional approval anyway.


20 posted on 01/09/2006 10:08:31 AM PST by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

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