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

Skip to comments.

IAEA: Iran 3-8 years from atomic weapons
AP on Yahoo ^ | 5/24/07 | Robert Wielaard - ap

Posted on 05/24/2007 9:49:03 AM PDT by NormsRevenge

LUXEMBOURG - The head of the U.N. nuclear agency said Thursday he agreed with CIA estimates that Iran was three to eight years from being able to make nuclear weapons and he urged the U.S. and other powers to pursue talks with the Islamic country.

The best way to keep Iran from acquiring nuclear arms is "through a comprehensive dialogue," International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei told a news conference in Luxembourg. "One way to do that, rather than to continue the rhetoric, is to ... sit down together."

On Wednesday, the IAEA reported that Iran's uranium enrichment program was expanding in defiance of U.N. demands that it be suspended, findings that could lead to new sanctions against the country.

The report also warned that the IAEA's knowledge of those activities was shrinking.

"We are moving toward Iran building (nuclear) capacity and knowledge, without (the IAEA) in a position to verify the nature or scope of that program," ElBaradei said.

ElBaradei would not offer his own view of when Iran would be able to produce nuclear weapons. But he added, "I tend to agree with (CIA estimates) that even if Iran wanted to go to nuclear weapons it would not be before the end of this decade or sometime in the middle of the next" — three to eight years.

Iran insists it has no intention of pursuing nuclear weapons — as the U.S. and its allies fear — saying its program is only for producing an alternative source of energy.

Pushed by the United States, France and Britain, the U.N. Security Council has imposed sanctions twice against Iran for its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment, which can produce both fuel for a reactor and the material for a nuclear warhead.

ElBaradei said the United States should take "inspiration" from negotiations that have recently defused the crisis over North Korea's nuclear activities — even though the North has yet to fulfill its pledge to scrap its weapons program.

ElBaradei attended a conference of about 60 nuclear arms technology experts from a dozen nations, including the United States, Russia, Japan, Canada and Sweden.

In an opening address, ElBaradei said the U.N. needs a far more "agile and systematic approach for responding to cases of (nuclear) proliferation."

He said the acquisition of nuclear arms technology by India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea showed the current shortcomings.

Monitoring compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty must be "drastically reformed," he said, adding that he will propose a set of changes in the next few weeks.

One idea is the creation of an international nuclear "fuel bank," which would eliminate any reason for countries seeking a peaceful nuclear program to enrich uranium themselves.

The emphasis on containing enrichment has gained prominence because of the concern about Iran's nuclear ambitions. The IAEA started investigating Iran's program after revelations that the country for nearly two decades had been clandestinely developing enrichment and other nuclear activities that could be used to make weapons.

___

Associated Press writer George Jahn contributed to this report from Vienna, Austria.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Israel; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: atomic; iaea; iran; weapons

Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency Mohamed ElBaradei gestures as he attends the International Conference on Preventing Nuclear Catastrophe in Luxembourg, Thursday, May 24, 2007. (AP Photo/Yves Logghe)


1 posted on 05/24/2007 9:49:05 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

fyi for the ‘When does Iran go nukular?’ pool crowd.


2 posted on 05/24/2007 9:50:27 AM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... For want of a few good men, a once great nation was lost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Sounds like a stretch, based on all that I've already heard.

I might believe it's 3-8 years before something is done about Iran, though.

3 posted on 05/24/2007 9:51:09 AM PDT by C210N (Bush SPIED, Terrorists DIED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C210N

I heard on Lars show yesterday, they have over 2,000 centerfuges enriching uranium. Sounds like that are closer....


4 posted on 05/24/2007 10:00:16 AM PDT by b4its2late (Liberalism is a mental disorder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Bullcrap. 2-3 inmho. Forget the 5-8. Two years, maybe three.


5 posted on 05/24/2007 10:09:05 AM PDT by rjp2005 (Lord have mercy on us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rjp2005

If you take this title and plug it in the FR search engine and check out the results,, there are threads saying 2-3 years ago from 2 and 3 years ago. ;-)

I’m sure Ahmabadpatootiepie will let us know when it’s soup... if he doesn’t get tossed out of office before then.


6 posted on 05/24/2007 10:27:55 AM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... For want of a few good men, a once great nation was lost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
It took us about three and a half years from the beginning of the Manhattan Project until we destroyed New Mexico's will to fight with an atomic bomb. Iran is a lot further along than we were in January 1942 and most of the basic research is readily available. Anyone who claims more than three years for a technologically advanced country to get an atomic bomb is just fooling himself or trying to fool us.
7 posted on 05/24/2007 10:42:43 AM PDT by KarlInOhio (Parker v. DC: the best court decision of the year.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

If you take these estimates & adjust them based on the IAEA’s & CIA’s track record with estimate accuracy, that translates into Iran actually being anywhere from ~6 months to ~20 years away. Not extremely useful for decision-making.


8 posted on 05/24/2007 10:43:29 AM PDT by sanchmo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rjp2005
Bullcrap. 2-3 inmho. Forget the 5-8. Two years, maybe three.

I'm leaning towards 1 to 2 years myself. Don't forget when we built the first atomic weapons it took us 5 years from scratch. We did not have an ample supply of nuclear enrichment facilities, reactors, scientists skilled in this field or anything else. Iran is building its nukes with the help of Russkie expertise and equipment. I find it hard to imagine that they don't have a weapon at the moment.

9 posted on 05/24/2007 10:44:33 AM PDT by pnh102
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
The best way to keep Iran from acquiring nuclear arms is "through a comprehensive dialogue," International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei told a news conference in Luxembourg.

Umm. Yeah Sure.

10 posted on 05/24/2007 10:53:43 AM PDT by Gorzaloon (Global Warming: A New Kind Of Scientology for the Rest Of Us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Cachelot; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; Lent; GregB; ..
If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]

----------------------------

11 posted on 05/24/2007 11:02:37 AM PDT by SJackson (Be careful -- with quotations, you can damn anything, Andre Malraux)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
You will go down in history as the man who let the genii out of the bottle that lead to the death of millions of innocents. How do you look at the mirror without blushing?
12 posted on 05/24/2007 11:13:58 AM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Three to eight? Then probably we won’t have to do anything for maybe seven and a half years.

Now, what is the chance we’ll be any more willing to do anything about it seven years from now, if we aren’t willing to do anything now?

Unless they have a plan to bring down the Tehran government, they are whistling past the graveyard. Tragedy is headed our way, and we are deer staring into the headlights.


13 posted on 05/24/2007 11:59:51 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

3-8 years from nukes. That would be 3-8 years since nukes and 11 years since first test.


14 posted on 05/24/2007 12:00:55 PM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the Treaty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio
It took us about three and a half years from the beginning of the Manhattan Project until we destroyed New Mexico's will to fight with an atomic bomb.

Yep, you sure got us back for that dropping all those enchiladas on Pearl harbor.

15 posted on 05/24/2007 12:02:25 PM PDT by Tijeras_Slim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
"One way to do that, rather than to continue the rhetoric, is to ... sit down together."

...and engage in... rhetoric?

16 posted on 05/24/2007 12:06:38 PM PDT by TChris (The Republican Party is merely the Democrat Party's "away" jersey - Vox Day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Whatever you hear from the IAEA, the truth is worse.


17 posted on 05/24/2007 12:09:50 PM PDT by SlowBoat407 (A living insult to islam since 1959.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio
It took us about three and a half years from the beginning of the Manhattan Project until we destroyed New Mexico's will to fight with an atomic bomb.

No, we didn't destroy New Mexico's will to fight, we destroyed Japan's will to fight!

18 posted on 05/24/2007 3:57:47 PM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TChris
"One way to do that...is to sit down together."

Very fitting that a man named "Mohamad" would suggest that negotiating with Ahmadinejad is worthwhile!

19 posted on 05/24/2007 5:10:13 PM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Mohamed El Baradei arrives at the International Conference on Preventing Nuclear Catastrophe in Luxembourg May 24, 2007. (Thierry Roge/Reuters)


20 posted on 05/24/2007 5:14:35 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... For want of a few good men, a once great nation was lost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

A picture released by the US navy shows (from top to bottom) the USS John C. Stennis, the USS Bonhomme Richard and the USS Nimitz steaming through the Gulf of Oman. The US Navy kicked off its largest display of naval power in the Gulf in years Wednesday, amid rising tensions with Iran over its clandestine support for Iraqi extremists and unchecked nuclear program.(AFP/US NAVY-HO/Petty Officer First Class Denny Ca)


21 posted on 05/24/2007 5:17:09 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... For want of a few good men, a once great nation was lost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | 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