Iran still enriching to 60%

[basketcase]

That's an antisemitic trope to say that criticism of Israeli state policy is racist.
...

You really are becoming idiotic with your own definition of antisemitism. For the rest of the world, claiming that Israel controls US policy is blatant antisemitism.

Of course you're happy to suck up to Iran in your anti-Semitic need to try and blame Jews but:

Do you think there is any peaceful use for Uranium enriched to 60%? Do you think converting a second plant to make more 60% in response to UN criticism is positive?

 

[krealtarron]

You really are becoming idiotic with your own definition of antisemitism. For the rest of the world, claiming that Israel controls US policy is blatant antisemitism.

Of course you're happy to suck up to Iran in your anti-Semitic need to try and blame Jews but:

Do you think there is any peaceful use for Uranium enriched to 60%? Do you think converting a second plant to make more 60% in response to UN criticism is positive?

Iran has every right to develop nuclear weapons. It is a sovereign state that is being threatened and attacked by western nations. Iran may have a lot of internal problems, but being afraid that Iran was going to do something to Israel is really paranoic. I mean Saudi Arabia where a lot of terrorism originates, isn't being accused of being a threat despite not acknowledging Israeli nationhood.

 

[basketcase]

Iran has every right to develop nuclear weapons....

I agree. They can go the way of North Korea, withdraw from the NPT and face the economic consequences.

Since Franky won't answer, do you think there is any civilian justification for enriching Uranium to 60%?



p.s. The Saudis are major enemies with Iran and the only reason why they haven't followed Iran's lead with a questionable nuclear program is the US paid them off. If the US ever decides to stop those 'incentives' then we will have two enemies, both of whom have strong connections with terrorism and engaged in numerous proxy wars armed with nukes. It creates a significant threat like we see from India/Pakistan.

 

[Frankfooter]

I agree. They can go the way of North Korea, withdraw from the NPT and face the economic consequences.

Since Franky won't answer, do you think there is any civilian justification for enriching Uranium to 60%?

I would expect that Iran is enriching to 60% as a negotiating tactic to get the US to renew the JCPOA.
But yes, there is a civilian use in Tc-99m for nuclear medical imaging.

So yes, there is a legit civilian use for enriched uranium.

Why are you so fixated on Iran signing an extra nuclear treaty when Israel, the country you defend every day here, won't sign the NPT or abide by UN resolutions, as you demand Iran do?
You're still just warmongering, trying to justify war with Iran.

 

[krealtarron]

I agree. They can go the way of North Korea, withdraw from the NPT and face the economic consequences.

Since Franky won't answer, do you think there is any civilian justification for enriching Uranium to 60%?



p.s. The Saudis are major enemies with Iran and the only reason why they haven't followed Iran's lead with a questionable nuclear program is the US paid them off. If the US ever decides to stop those 'incentives' then we will have two enemies, both of whom have strong connections with terrorism and engaged in numerous proxy wars armed with nukes. It creates a significant threat like we see from India/Pakistan.

I dont know. I am not a nuclear scientist. All I can say is that military or civilian, a sovereign nation has a right to pursue whatever research/development they want to do. But yes they shouldn't have signed the CTBT and NPT like Israel, India and Pakistan.

But that said, there is a lot of double standards in the way the west treats Israel vs other muslim nations. And the supporters of this relationship have the tried and tested "antisemitic" accusations ready and primed to lob at you to silence you. How criticizing Israel, a multi-religious, multi-ethnic country, and its policies, can be specifically antisemitic is beyond me.

 

[basketcase]

I dont know. I am not a nuclear scientist. All I can say is that military or civilian, a sovereign nation has a right to pursue whatever research/development they want to do. But yes they shouldn't have signed the CTBT and NPT like Israel, India and Pakistan.

But that said, there is a lot of double standards in the way the west treats Israel vs other muslim nations. And the supporters of this relationship have the tried and tested "antisemitic" accusations ready and primed to lob at you to silence you. How criticizing Israel, a multi-religious, multi-ethnic country, and its policies, can be specifically antisemitic is beyond me.

You're right about the double standard. I don't see much complaining about Pakistan being a non-NPT nuclear power. Meanwhile Iran is an NPT signatory that is enriching to 60% and refuses to answer IAEA questions about apparent NPT violations.

You might want to claim ignorance as a way to ignore the reason why the UN is currently concerned about Iran's program so I'll help you out.
U-235 enriched to 3.67% is commonly used as fuel for a reactor. Small amounts of U-235 enriched to 19.75% can be used for medical isotopes.
There is no civilian justification for Uranium enriched to 60%. Its only use is either as a step to 90% enrichment or a threat that they can do it if they want.

The other issue identified by the UN is their enrichment capacity. Because of lack of IAEA access, we don't know the exact extent of Iran's centrifuge program but last reports had them with with similar enrichment capacity as the US despite having only one civilian reactor.

p.s. the only reason anti-semitism was brought up was because Franky claimed Israel is controlling US policy.

 

[basketcase]

I would expect that Iran is enriching to 60% as a negotiating tactic to get the US to renew the JCPOA.
...

So blackmail? And the flaw in your justification is Iran is the one who refuses to re-join.

More importantly, Iran's latest spike in 60% is a direct result of the UN criticizing their refusal to explain the undeclared nuclear sites..

 

[krealtarron]

p.s. the only reason anti-semitism was brought up was because Franky claimed Israel is controlling US policy.

Israel does have powerful lobbyists in D.C. They have a lot of money and clout. Controlling US policy maybe not. But heavily influencing US middle east policy, definitely.

Also, even if Iran wants to develop nuclear weapons or atleast make that threat, it is wholly justified. The west threatens them, has in the past bombed their nuclear reactors, has extra judicially killed their generals and scientists etc., That is actually terrorism. They have a right to defend their sovereignty through any means necessary even if it means breaking the NPT/CTBT.

 

[Frankfooter]

You're right about the double standard. I don't see much complaining about Pakistan being a non-NPT nuclear power. Meanwhile Iran is an NPT signatory that is enriching to 60% and refuses to answer IAEA questions about apparent NPT violations.

You might want to claim ignorance as a way to ignore the reason why the UN is currently concerned about Iran's program so I'll help you out.
U-235 enriched to 3.67% is commonly used as fuel for a reactor. Small amounts of U-235 enriched to 19.75% can be used for medical isotopes.
There is no civilian justification for Uranium enriched to 60%. Its only use is either as a step to 90% enrichment or a threat that they can do it if they want.

The other issue identified by the UN is their enrichment capacity. Because of lack of IAEA access, we don't know the exact extent of Iran's centrifuge program but last reports had them with with similar enrichment capacity as the US despite having only one civilian reactor.

p.s. the only reason anti-semitism was brought up was because Franky claimed Israel is controlling US policy.

For 18 pages you've been pushing this nonsense lie about that there is no civilian use for 60% enriched uranium.
It took 3 minutes of googling to find an answer, and now you're ignoring that answer.

But yes, there is a civilian use in Tc-99m for nuclear medical imaging.

Now all you're doing is warmongering.
You knew all along there is a use yet you keep pushing disinformation to justify a war with Iran.

If you really want Iran to abide by UN calls, you have to also support their calls on Israel.

UN votes 152 to 5 telling Israel to get rid of its nuclear weapons | MR Online

The United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly, 152 to 5, to tell the Israeli apartheid regime to get rid of its nuclear weapons, which are illegal under international law.

mronline.org

And allow me to offer you some free wank material.
Israel, US to hold air drill simulating striking Iran nuclear program
The drill, one of the largest Israel Air Force drills in years, will include long-range flights such as those that Israeli pilots might need to make in order to reach Iran.

 

[basketcase]

Israel does have powerful lobbyists in D.C. They have a lot of money and clout. Controlling US policy maybe not. But heavily influencing US middle east policy, definitely.
...

Thanks Kanye.

So does Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, India, .................

And sorry but Iran has zero right to develop nukes as long as they are in the NPT. 60% has no civilian use so at best its is a threats to get the UN to stop investigating their NPT violations. As I said, if they want to leave the NPT they can. The NPT includes financial incentives that Iran would lose if they want to leave the deal.

 

[basketcase]

For 18 pages you've been pushing this nonsense lie about that there is no civilian use for 60% enriched uranium.
...

Sorry but that's pure bullshit. The HEU needed for the Mo-99 parent isotope is at 20%, not 60%. I'm sure you would accept that as an excuse to enrich to 90% since that would produce a higher yield of Tc-99

A political message
Uranium enriched to 60 per cent cannot be used to make a useful nuclear explosive device, and Iran has no other realistic use for this material.

Nevertheless, 60 per cent was not an arbitrary choice. Cascades of centrifuges are designed to enrich uranium in steps; Iran’s centrifuges are likely set up to enrich up to 20 per cent, from 20 to 60 per cent, and from 60 to 90 per cent. Assuming the 60 per cent-enriched uranium is stored in the form of uranium hexafluoride (UF6) gas—and there would be no point in Iran converting it to any other chemical form—the enrichment step from 60 per cent-enriched to weapons-grade uranium is very short.

This strongly suggests that Iran’s decision was intended to send a political message: ‘We have gone as far as we can go in response to provocations without producing weapons-grade uranium.’

Why is Iran producing 60 per cent-enriched uranium?

On 13 April, Iran announced its intention to enrich uranium to 60 per cent U-235. This was characterized by Iran as a response to a sabotage of its vast underground enrichment cascades at Natanz two days before.

www.sipri.org

But I'm sure you'll claim the STOCKHOLM INTERNATIONAL PEACE RESEARCH INSTITUTE is just Israeli war mongering.

 

[krealtarron]

Thanks Kanye.

So does Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, India, .................

And sorry but Iran has zero right to develop nukes as long as they are in the NPT. 60% has no civilian use so at best its is a threats to get the UN to stop investigating their NPT violations. As I said, if they want to leave the NPT they can. The NPT includes financial incentives that Iran would lose if they want to leave the deal.

Saudi Arabia, India and Pakistan dont have the kind of pull that Israel does. That is a fact. Saying so is not anti-semitic.

Iran has every right to develop nuclear weapons. NPT/CTBT etc are just treaties - a sovereign nation when threatened, does not have to abide by such treaties. Financially they have lost so much anyway with all the sanctions.

 

[Frankfooter]

Sorry but that's pure bullshit. The HEU needed for the Mo-99 parent isotope is at 20%, not 60%. I'm sure you would accept that as an excuse to enrich to 90% since that would produce a higher yield of Tc-99

HEU is used in Moly Cows.
You've been bullshitting about this for 18 pages just so you can warmonger.

A political message

But I'm sure you'll claim the STOCKHOLM INTERNATIONAL PEACE RESEARCH INSTITUTE is just Israeli war mongering.

From your article:

This strongly suggests that Iran’s decision was intended to send a political message: ‘We have gone as far as we can go in response to provocations without producing weapons-grade uranium.’
....
If this is the case, it would seem to confirm that demonstrating the capability to produce 60 percent-enriched uranium is more important to Iran than actually producing that material.


You're still warmongering.
You just want another war in the middle east.

 

[basketcase]

Saudi Arabia, India and Pakistan dont have the kind of pull that Israel does. That is a fact. Saying so is not anti-semitic.
...

Bullshit. have you not heard of the oil lobby? Have you not looked at how the US treats Saudi with kid gloves? I can post a list of lobbying expenditures if you want. You'll see pro-Israel lobbies are way down the list. More importantly, groups like AIPAC are AMERICANS lobbying their government, not a foreign power interfering. Unless you are suggesting that American Jews are really foreign agents.

And sorry but as long as Iran is a NPT member they have given up the 'right' to develop nukes.

 

[basketcase]

HEU is used in Moly Cows.
You've been bullshitting about this for 18 pages just so you can warmonger.




From your article:

This strongly suggests that Iran’s decision was intended to send a political message: ‘We have gone as far as we can go in response to provocations without producing weapons-grade uranium.’
....
If this is the case, it would seem to confirm that demonstrating the capability to produce 60 percent-enriched uranium is more important to Iran than actually producing that material.


You're still warmongering.
You just want another war in the middle east.

You're still making excuses for Iran because of your Israel obsession.

Yes, Iran is sending the political message that if the UN doesn't stop investigating NPT violations, they will make nukes. That's exactly why I'm criticizing them.



And I see you ran away from Iran wanting to use the 60% uranium for civilian purposes. Iran has no resources to convert 60% to Mo-99, no market to use it in medical imaging, and has given no hints that's why they are doing it.

I love the stupid way that you say criticizing Iran making 60% uranium is war mongering (while your obsessive demonization of Israel isn't). It's just like when you say it's racist to say a group is terrorists just because they use terrorism (while at the same time describing Israel as terrorists).

 

[krealtarron]

Bullshit. have you not heard of the oil lobby? Have you not looked at how the US treats Saudi with kid gloves? I can post a list of lobbying expenditures if you want. You'll see pro-Israel lobbies are way down the list. More importantly, groups like AIPAC are AMERICANS lobbying their government, not a foreign power interfering. Unless you are suggesting that American Jews are really foreign agents.

And sorry but as long as Iran is a NPT member they have given up the 'right' to develop nukes.

I am not saying there are no other powerful lobbies. There are. But that doesn't take away from Israel's influence. It is a fact that Israel has a lot of pull on US middle east foreign policy.

No country that has signed the NPT has given up their right to develop nuclear weapons. They have merely pledged that they wont in return for help with civilian nuclear technology and sales of nuclear fuel (to put it in short).

 

[basketcase]

...

No country that has signed the NPT has given up their right to develop nuclear weapons. ...

Yes, Americans have the legal right to lobby for all sorts of reasons. Some Americans choose to lobby for support of Israel just like Americans have the right to lobby for support of abortion. That's how democracy works. Saudi Arabia has a huge influence on US policy in the middle east but for some reason, people only want to complain about Americans who support Israel.


And sorry but Iran have agreed to give up that 'right' as long as they are members of the treaty; if they want nukes, they lose the financial benefits. Would you think it a positive thing for the world if Iran chose to exercise their 'right'?

 

[krealtarron]

Yes, Americans have the legal right to lobby for all sorts of reasons. Some Americans choose to lobby for support of Israel just like Americans have the right to lobby for support of abortion. That's how democracy works. Saudi Arabia has a huge influence on US policy in the middle east but for some reason, people only want to complain about Americans who support Israel.


And sorry but Iran have agreed to give up that 'right' as long as they are members of the treaty; if they want nukes, they lose the financial benefits. Would you think it a positive thing for the world if Iran chose to exercise their 'right'?

We are talking about Israel, not Saudi Arabia. US foreign policy and hostility towards Iran is driven more by the influence of the Israeli lobby than the Saudi one. Saudis only hate Iran because Iran is majority Shia.

No country has "agreed to give up their right". Countries have pledged to not develop nuclear weapons. These are very different statements. Sure reasonable for them to lose financial benefits if they break the terms of the treaty.

There is inherently nothing positive or negative about Iran developing nuclear weapons. Nukes are mostly a deterrent. You are comfortable living next to the only country to have used nuclear weapons and you are worried about Iran trying to defend their sovereignty?

 

[Frankfooter]

You're still making excuses for Iran because of your Israel obsession.

Holy shit.
For 18 pages you've been falsely claiming there is no civilian use for enriched uranium.
I call you out and now you accuse me of 'making excuses for Iran' for answering the question you asked for 18 pages straight.

The only one making excuses for a warmongering, nuclear power that is actively trying to start another war is you.

'Deliberate ambiguity': Israel's nuclear weapons are greatest threat to Middle East

Yes, Iran is sending the political message that if the UN doesn't stop investigating NPT violations, they will make nukes. That's exactly why I'm criticizing them.

No, Iran is sending a message that they want to renew the JCPOA as part of a deal that will end the sanctions the US said they wouldn't put in place when they signed the deal orignally.
Iran is signalling that they could enrich further if they wanted, but they'd rather just sign the treaty.

Israel is signalling that they want a war started.

 

[basketcase]

Holy shit.
For 18 pages you've been falsely claiming there is no civilian use for enriched uranium.
...

Iran has no civilian use for 60% uranium. That is a fact. They have absolutely no facilities, infrastructure, or market for those medical isotopes and have given absolutely no indication that they will be using HEU for it. Sorry but that Swedish peace group's analysis is spot on.

And yes, you have been obsessively making excuses for one of the most repressive governments in the world simply because the Mullahs share your Israel fixation. It says a lot that you can't even answer a question without trying to make it about Jews.


P.S. you keep ignoring the fact that Iran are the ones who refused to rejoin the deal, according to them because the IAEA wants answers on undeclared nuclear sites.