Stop SPAM wrote in message ...
Thelasian wrote:
Stop SPAM wrote in message ...
Thelasian -

I suggest you read the article I posted, which said, amungst other things:

The Iranian list, presented during talks in Paris, includes demands that
the three European powers:
- Support Iran's insistence its nuclear program have access to "advanced
technology, including those with dual use," which is equipment and
know-how that has both peaceful and weapons applications.

YEs, and since all nuclear technology is inherently dual use, all that
means is that Iran insist on its RIGHT to receive all the technology
and not just the ones that the EU3 thinks is safe enough to give
away.

Thelasian -

I suggest you learn a bit more about nuclear technology before you
embarrass yourself further.


Don't presume so much.


All nuclear technology is not "inherently" dual use. There are many
nuclear reactor designs that cannot be used for weapons use;


This is true. However, if someone is hellbent on characterizing
something as "could be used to make nukes" then ANY technology is
'dual use'
Someone could say with a straight face that my pocket calcular "could
be used to make nuclear weapons" - and they'd be right.
So even proliferation-proof reactors can be maligned this way - they
could argue that the fuel for the reactors "could be used to make a
dirty nuke".

That's the problem with the US accusations against Iran - we are told
that Iran's civilian ligh****er reactor "Could be used to make nukes"
and so could the uranium enrichment facilities. Sure, it "could" but
so could my pocket calculator.

Anyway do you see anyone sharing the proliferation proof technology
with Iran? Nope. So what's Iran supposed to do?


that run on low grade fuel come to mind.

Actually, Iran's ligh****er reactor does indeed run on low-grade fuel.
However, according to several sources, even that lowgrade fuel "could
be" used to make nuclear weapons . . .

Both the USSR and the US export
such designs and equipment to countries truly looking for peaceful uses
of nuclear power. Without reprocessing or extraction plants (which do
utilize dual use technology) such a low grade reactor is not dual use,


So you're saying that even the proliferation proof technology CAN BE
dual use, right? After all, the fuel has to be reprocessed. It can't
just disappear.


and with an outside country swapping fuel loads as needed there is no
need for any in-country dual use technology.


Unless that country doesn't want to have be reliant on the foreign
country for its energy needs.



So why is Iran insisting it needs dual use nuclear technology when, if
all it wants is peaceful nukes, it could go with non-dual use technology?


That's sort of like asking why doesn't the USA just buy all of its oil
from OPEC instead of pumping its own oil.

Because Iran doesn't want to be reliant on a foreign cartel to provide
its nuclear energy. And because it is Iran's fundamental right to have
access to the technology.

Look, the best way to control the technology is through
joint-ventures. Iran would be happy to allow that. But the USA is
saying "No way - no nuclear technology AT ALL" - and that's just not
going to fly. You can't stick the toothpaste it back into the tube.


Go back, read something reasonable about nuclear technology, and then
come back and post.

Until then, quit posting factually wildly incorrect statements such as
"all nuclear technology is inherently dual use".

All nuclear technology is inherently dual use, especially because it
can be CHARACTERIZED as such.

Heck the US even objects to Iran gaining access to the lowest-level,
safest nuclear technology because it COULD provide Iranians with the
knowledge to one day POSSIBLY build nukes. And so could my pocket
calculator.