![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
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. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| What is missile defense? An expensive fraud Bush needs Poland as a future nuclear battlefield | Paul J. Adam | Military Aviation | 1 | August 9th 04 09:29 PM |
| Libya Returns Nuclear Fuel to Russia | Dav1936531 | Military Aviation | 3 | March 17th 04 06:29 PM |
| Israel to Destroy Iran's Nuclear Power Plants | Air Force Jayhawk | Military Aviation | 7 | February 23rd 04 07:39 PM |
| Czechoslovak nuclear weapons? Warszaw Pact War Plans ( The Effects of a Global Thermonuclear War ...) | Matt Wiser | Military Aviation | 25 | January 17th 04 03:18 PM |
| Warszaw Pact War Plans ( The Effects of a Global Thermonuclear War ...) | Matt Wiser | Military Aviation | 0 | December 7th 03 09:20 PM |