 |
| At the talks, November 8, 2013 [Image Source] |
Desperate for a deal — even if it helps Iran get a bomb
John R. Bolton, a former US ambassador to the United Nations, writing in the New York Post on November 19, 2013
Beyond whatever specific terms emerge this week in Geneva, the West's efforts to negotiate with Iran are doomed to failure because the parties' objectives are utterly incompatible. Obama sees negotiations as deflecting the threat of Iranian nuclear weapons. Iran sees them as helping ensure success for that very weapons program. Iran's nuclear program has never been peaceful. Evaluating the terms of the upcoming interim deal is beside the point. The negotiation process itself buys Iran both time to continue its nuclear-weapons activities and international legitimacy... (New York Post)The background indication:
Media bias and Iran's 'right' to enrich uranium
Dore Gold, a previous ambassador of Israel to the United Nations, writing on the Israeli news site Yisrael Hayom | November 22, 2013
While press reports claimed that Iran had virtually frozen its nuclear program in the last few months, they missed a key point made in the IAEA's latest report. The report states that "preparatory installation work" had been completed for another 12 IR-2m cascades at Natanz. A "cascade" contains 164 centrifuges. That means Iran has laid the groundwork for another nearly 2,000 advanced centrifuges. Thus, not only has Iran been enriching more uranium, it has also been quietly working on a big expansion of its Natanz facility. A sharp increase in the number of fast centrifuges totally changes the scenario regarding the importance of 20%-enriched uranium. As Gary Samore, who served on the U.S. National Security Council during President Obama's first term, has recently warned: "Ending production of 20%-enriched uranium is not sufficient to prevent breakout because Iran can produce nuclear weapons using low-enriched uranium and a large number of centrifuge machines."
No comments:
Post a Comment
Like many sites that advocate for a moderate, Israel-friendly viewpoint, we unfortunately receive abusive, offensive and racist messages on a routine basis. We want it to be clear that we reserve the right to reject them in our absolute discretion. Racist and Israel-hating sites abound on the web. So not being allowed to play in our sandbox can hardly be called a hardship. Anonymous postings or messages where email address of the poster is hidden from us will generally not be accepted.