Iran's Fordow Still Standing. Mission Not Accomplished!

[krichton]

You shouldn't post when you are drunk. First, I said Iran built nuclear sites, not nuclear reactors, without informing IAEA, which is a requirement of the NPT; Natanz is an example of this. Second, the inspectors are only allowed to inspect sites Iran has declared to be nuclear sites, so they would have no idea if Iran were secretly building a new nuclear site.

There are no facts and there is no argument that can justify Obama officially giving the ayatollahs permission to enrich uranium - thus allowing the ayatollahs to have a plausible nuclear threat to back up their nefarious activities across the ME - when all previous administrations had refused, and there are no protections within JCPOA to prevent Iran from developing nukes as long as they are not doing at a site Iran had declared a nuclear site.

This is why Congress refused to make JCPOA a treaty and why Obama had to increase military aid to Israel, thus acknowledging JCPOA put Israel at greater risk from an Iranian nuke, in order to get enough Democrats to allow JCPOA to go into existence at all.

Just as Obama's critics had said, as soon as the ayatollahs had to face criticism, they started to enrich uranium to weapons grade.

Sites, reactors, whatever. Arak is a reactor, even if Netanz isn't one. Does it matter? Both were constructed in secret, that was your point, right? There was a complete lack of transparency, which the JCPOA sought to address.

So.....Iran wasn't enriching well before 2015? LOL. Iran was enriching uranium to 20%, well past the 3.5% limit for civilian use, for ages. The JCPOA is what ended up halting Iran's nuclear enrichment and keeping them at 3.5%. It prevented them from building new centrifuges, it reduced their stockpile by 98%. Also claiming the JCPOA had no protections to prevent Iran from developing a nuke at another site is just silly. You need a dedicated facility like Netanz, or Fordow to make nuclear weapons, unless you're suggesting that they constructed a whole new secret facility under the noses of the IAEA and every signatory to the JCPOA while being heavily surveilled.

Ultimately, if Iran really wanted a weapon that badly, they would have simply ignored Obama and continued doing what they were already in the process of doing. They chose the JCPOA because sanctions relief was of much greater importance to their country. That, more than the IAEA inspections and constant monitoring was what prevented them from going forward with their nuclear program. The JCPOA proved it's worth, and that's really what you're most outraged with right now.

 

[krichton]

Your own words put it all into perspective.

Being deceptive about full dismantling Arak or declaring sites to the IAEA, etc, is neither evidence nor proof they were building nuclear weapons from 2015 and onward, which was your claim. You continue to make all these claims but never provide any proof. Why is that? Is it because it's all just horseshit and you kind of know it's all horseshit, but you can't pull away from the dogma?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Sites, reactors, whatever. Arak is a reactor, even if Netanz isn't one. Does it matter? Both were constructed in secret, that was your point, right? There was a complete lack of transparency, which the JCPOA sought to address.

So.....Iran wasn't enriching well before 2015? LOL. Iran was enriching uranium to 20%, well past the 3.5% limit for civilian use, for ages. The JCPOA is what ended up halting Iran's nuclear enrichment and keeping them at 3.5%. It prevented them from building new centrifuges, it reduced their stockpile by 98%. Also claiming the JCPOA had no protections to prevent Iran from developing a nuke at another site is just silly. You need a dedicated facility like Netanz, or Fordow to make nuclear weapons, unless you're suggesting that they constructed a whole new secret facility under the noses of the IAEA and every signatory to the JCPOA while being heavily surveilled.

Ultimately, if Iran really wanted a weapon that badly, they would have simply ignored Obama and continued doing what they were already in the process of doing. They chose the JCPOA because sanctions relief was of much greater importance to their country. That, more than the IAEA inspections and constant monitoring was what prevented them from going forward with their nuclear program. The JCPOA proved it's worth, and that's really what you're most outraged with right now.

There is nothing in PCPOA that would prevent Iran from secretly building another nuclear site. When Iran secretly built Natanz, it was already being inspected by IAEA because of the NPT, and no one had any idea what was going on until a group of exiles exposed it to the world. JCPOA specifically restricts the inspectors to site Iran has already declared to be nuclear sites, so if another Natanz were being built under JCPOA, there is no way anyone would know about it.

JCPOA did restrict the number and type of centrifuges Iran could operate, the level of enrichment, and the size of the enriched stockpile, but it did not require Iran to get rid of the centrifuges it was not using and all these restrictions had sunset clauses, so the restrictions were all temporary. Instead of JCPOA solving the problem of Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions, it served merely to pass the buck to the next president, Donald Trump.

The only way to be sure Iran is not presently building nukes or planning to is to destroy its ability to enrich uranium or process plutonium from spent fuel rods. This was true in 2015 and it is true today. Obama just wasn't the right man to get the job done; maybe Trump is.

 

[Delldude]

You continue to make all these claims but never provide any proof.

Proven..... Here......Thanks anyways.

 

[krichton]

There is nothing in PCPOA that would prevent Iran from secretly building another nuclear site. When Iran secretly built Natanz, it was already being inspected by IAEA because of the NPT, and no one had any idea what was going on until a group of exiles exposed it to the world. JCPOA specifically restricts the inspectors to site Iran has already declared to be nuclear sites, so if another Natanz were being built under JCPOA, there is no way anyone would know about it.

JCPOA did restrict the number and type of centrifuges Iran could operate, the level of enrichment, and the size of the enriched stockpile, but it did not require Iran to get rid of the centrifuges it was not using and all these restrictions had sunset clauses, so the restrictions were all temporary. Instead of JCPOA solving the problem of Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions, it served merely to pass the buck to the next president, Donald Trump.

The only way to be sure Iran is not presently building nukes or planning to is to destroy its ability to enrich uranium or process plutonium from spent fuel rods. This was true in 2015 and it is true today. Obama just wasn't the right man to get the job done; maybe Trump is.

There's literally a provision in the JCPOA that forbids Iran from enriching uranium anywhere else but Netanz. Also any new facility built must first be approved by the IAEA, and this must be followed even after the sunset provisions have expired. Iran cannot "secretly" build anything without violating the JCPOA.

There is no way to ensure the strike did what it was intended to do, unless we have boots on the ground and we occupy Iran. Is that what you want? All I keep hearing is that the strike has only set Iran back months. Some say 1-2 years tops. How is this preferrable to what the JCPOA did? Some provisions expired after 10 years but others last up to 25 years.

 

[krichton]

Proven..... Here......Thanks anyways.

Not to me. Perhaps just in your head only, but not mine.

 

[toomuchtime_]

There's literally a provision in the JCPOA that forbids Iran from enriching uranium anywhere else but Netanz. Also any new facility built must first be approved by the IAEA, and this must be followed even after the sunset provisions have expired. Iran cannot "secretly" build anything without violating the JCPOA.

There is no way to ensure the strike did what it was intended to do, unless we have boots on the ground and we occupy Iran. Is that what you want? All I keep hearing is that the strike has only set Iran back months. Some say 1-2 years tops. How is this preferrable to what the JCPOA did? Some provisions expired after 10 years but others last up to 25 years.

Since JCPOA restricts inspections to declared Iran nuclear sites, there is no way for the inspectors to know if Iran is building and operating new secretly built enrichment sites just as it built Natanz secretly in violation of the NPT. JCPOA essentially put Iran on the honor system despite the fact Iran had behaved dishonorably under IAEA inspections during NPT.

The consensus of US and Israeli intelligence experts is presently that Iran's nuclear weapons program has been set back at least one year and likely longer if Iran tries to rebuild its destroyed sites, but now that Israel has established complete control of the skies over Iran, if there are any suspicions that Iran is trying to rebuild them they can be bombed over and over again. Since the ayatollahs know this, it is not clear now they will even try to rebuild these sites for fear of inviting new attacks. Obama frequently claimed all options were on the table, meaning the use of military force, but no one believed him, especially the ayatollahs. Now they believe it.

 

[Delldude]

Not to me.

You are inconsequential to the topic at hand...................

 

[krichton]

Since JCPOA restricts inspections to declared Iran nuclear sites, there is no way for the inspectors to know if Iran is building and operating new secretly built enrichment sites just as it built Natanz secretly in violation of the NPT. JCPOA essentially put Iran on the honor system despite the fact Iran had behaved dishonorably under IAEA inspections during NPT.

The consensus of US and Israeli intelligence experts is presently that Iran's nuclear weapons program has been set back at least one year and likely longer if Iran tries to rebuild its destroyed sites, but now that Israel has established complete control of the skies over Iran, if there are any suspicions that Iran is trying to rebuild them they can be bombed over and over again. Since the ayatollahs know this, it is not clear now they will even try to rebuild these sites for fear of inviting new attacks. Obama frequently claimed all options were on the table, meaning the use of military force, but no one believed him, especially the ayatollahs. Now they believe it.

Again, Iran's motives for joining the JCPOA was to get sanctions relief. They could have built a "secret" facility without ever agreeing to the JCPOA and being surveilled constantly and being forced to cripple their own nuclear programs. You're not establishing a motive, you're just trying to force feed a narrative. It's been 7 years since the end of the JCPOA and there still has been no discovery of a "secret facility" much less one being built while the JCPOA was still being enforced. That's 11 years total and people like yourself are still trying to use the whole Iraq WMD playbook, which all leads down the same rabbit hole of war, occupation and regime change.

Big whoop. All that means is that we'll be at this in a few months and we still won't actually be able to prove whether Iran has a nuclear weapon or not. Just admit it, the JCPOA restricted Irans enrichment of uranium to no further than 3.5%, limited their centrifuge usage, their stockpiling and required approval of any new nuclear facilities to be built for 10-25 years. They have gone from 3.5% to 60% now because of one orange fool, who ripped up an agreement just so he could put his own name on it.

 

[krichton]

You are inconsequential to the topic at hand...................

No evidence, no proof, just repetitive right wing dogma and conspiracy theories to get out of actually having to answer any real questions about your claims. Just stick to that and you'll satisfy anyone without any intellectual honesty or curiosity and won't question anything. Which is likely how someone hooked you in the first place.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Again, Iran's motives for joining the JCPOA was to get sanctions relief. They could have built a "secret" facility without ever agreeing to the JCPOA and being surveilled constantly and being forced to cripple their own nuclear programs. You're not establishing a motive, you're just trying to force feed a narrative. It's been 7 years since the end of the JCPOA and there still has been no discovery of a "secret facility" much less one being built while the JCPOA was still being enforced. That's 11 years total and people like yourself are still trying to use the whole Iraq WMD playbook, which all leads down the same rabbit hole of war, occupation and regime change.

Big whoop. All that means is that we'll be at this in a few months and we still won't actually be able to prove whether Iran has a nuclear weapon or not. Just admit it, the JCPOA restricted Irans enrichment of uranium to no further than 3.5%, limited their centrifuge usage, their stockpiling and required approval of any new nuclear facilities to be built for 10-25 years. They have gone from 3.5% to 60% now because of one orange fool, who ripped up an agreement just so he could put his own name on it.

No matter how hard you try there are certain facts you just can't overcome.

There are no practical reasons for Iran to enrich its own uranium or process it spent fuel rods if it is not want to have a nuclear threat.

It has been estimated Iran's insistence on enriching its own fuel has cost it between 2 and 3 trillion dollars, largely because of sanctions, which makes no sense if Iran only wanted nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

JCPOA provides no mechanism by which IAEA can inspect suspected sites unless Iran declares them to be nuclear sites so we don't know if Iran has already built secretly built new nuclear sites.

While JCPOA restricted Iran to only use six hundred of its older centrifuges for a limited period of time, it did not require Iran to get rid of its other more advanced 19,000 centrifuges, so that Iran would be able to begin rolling nuclear warheads off the assembly line within a month after the restrictions were lifted.

At best, JCPOA provided a pause in Iran's nuclear weapons program but put Iran on the honor system with no way of enforcing its restrictions, leaving it to the next President, Donald Trump, to find a solution to the problem.

The problem has been redefined, Iran may no longer have a plausible nuclear threat, which means it may no longer possess the capability to enrich uranium or to process spent fuel rods. The recent US bombing of Iran's nuclear sites was step one in denying Iran the capability of enriching uranium, and if Iran tries to rebuild these sites or build new ones there can be steps 2, 3, 4, etc. as needed since Iran does not have an effective defense against US or Israeli aircraft.

No one is talking about boots on the ground or forcing regime change or occupation except for you, and you are only doing it because you cannot find any reasonable grounds to object to the US bombing of Iran's nuclear sites.

 

[krichton]

No matter how hard you try there are certain facts you just can't overcome.

There are no practical reasons for Iran to enrich its own uranium or process it spent fuel rods if it is not want to have a nuclear threat.

It has been estimated Iran's insistence on enriching its own fuel has cost it between 2 and 3 trillion dollars, largely because of sanctions, which makes no sense if Iran only wanted nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

Estimated by whom? And no practical reason, you say? Why would Iran allow a different entity supplying them to potentially cut them off completely at the drop of a hat, by Trump snapping his fingers, which is precisely what Trump did by threatening other countries not to do business with Iran after the US left the JCPOA. Iran would basically be opening themselves up to energy blackmail, which have absolutely happened under Trump.

JCPOA provides no mechanism by which IAEA can inspect suspected sites unless Iran declares them to be nuclear sites so we don't know if Iran has already built secretly built new nuclear sites.

While JCPOA restricted Iran to only use six hundred of its older centrifuges for a limited period of time, it did not require Iran to get rid of its other more advanced 19,000 centrifuges, so that Iran would be able to begin rolling nuclear warheads off the assembly line within a month after the restrictions were lifted.

At best, JCPOA provided a pause in Iran's nuclear weapons program but put Iran on the honor system with no way of enforcing its restrictions, leaving it to the next President, Donald Trump, to find a solution to the problem.

The problem has been redefined, Iran may no longer have a plausible nuclear threat, which means it may no longer possess the capability to enrich uranium or to process spent fuel rods. The recent US bombing of Iran's nuclear sites was step one in denying Iran the capability of enriching uranium, and if Iran tries to rebuild these sites or build new ones there can be steps 2, 3, 4, etc. as needed since Iran does not have an effective defense against US or Israeli aircraft.

No one is talking about boots on the ground or forcing regime change or occupation except for you, and you are only doing it because you cannot find any reasonable grounds to object to the US bombing of Iran's nuclear sites.

Under Article 75 of the JCPOA, the IAEA can request access to any location in Iran if it has concerns about undeclared nuclear activities.

"“if the IAEA has concerns regarding undeclared nuclear materials or activities, or activities inconsistent with the JCPOA, at locations that have not been declared under the comprehensive safeguards agreement or Additional Protocol, the IAEA will provide Iran the basis for such concerns and request clarification.” (Par. 75)"

Does an "honor system" force another country to allow unfettered surveillance of all their nuclear facilities and reactors and to maintain strict compliance? Does your claim of having "no way of enforcing it's restrictions" include a provision where any signatory country can unilaterally reimpose UN Sanctions on Iran if it even suspects they're not complying with the JCPOA, even if they have no evidence that Iran is not?

Cool story, bro. No one even knows that Iran was readying to make a weapon, much less that all their facilities were destroyed beyond repair. You're complaining about the JCPOA being a 10-25 year "pause," but for some reason you don't seem to have an issue with a one year delay, which is the only thing this strike accomplished.

Trump floated the idea of regime change in a tweet, and we all know Bibi absolutely wants regime change, and if Bibi wants something, there's a good chance that Trump is going to go along with it.

 

[Delldude]

No evidence, no proof

'The Iranians are very deceptive'.....

Got it from a knowledgeable source.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Estimated by whom? And no practical reason, you say? Why would Iran allow a different entity supplying them to potentially cut them off completely at the drop of a hat, by Trump snapping his fingers, which is precisely what Trump did by threatening other countries not to do business with Iran after the US left the JCPOA. Iran would basically be opening themselves up to energy blackmail, which have absolutely happened under Trump.



Under Article 75 of the JCPOA, the IAEA can request access to any location in Iran if it has concerns about undeclared nuclear activities.

"“if the IAEA has concerns regarding undeclared nuclear materials or activities, or activities inconsistent with the JCPOA, at locations that have not been declared under the comprehensive safeguards agreement or Additional Protocol, the IAEA will provide Iran the basis for such concerns and request clarification.” (Par. 75)"

Does an "honor system" force another country to allow unfettered surveillance of all their nuclear facilities and reactors and to maintain strict compliance? Does your claim of having "no way of enforcing it's restrictions" include a provision where any signatory country can unilaterally reimpose UN Sanctions on Iran if it even suspects they're not complying with the JCPOA, even if they have no evidence that Iran is not?

Cool story, bro. No one even knows that Iran was readying to make a weapon, much less that all their facilities were destroyed beyond repair. You're complaining about the JCPOA being a 10-25 year "pause," but for some reason you don't seem to have an issue with a one year delay, which is the only thing this strike accomplished.

Trump floated the idea of regime change in a tweet, and we all know Bibi absolutely wants regime change, and if Bibi wants something, there's a good chance that Trump is going to go along with it.

Virtually everyone who has looked into it has estimated the cost of Iran's enrichment program has run into trillions of dollars.

Google Search

www.google.com

And the costs continue to grow due to continuing and growing sanctions as well now to the cost of trying to reconstruct its enrichment sites if Iran foolishly tries to do so. Iran's nuclear program will never produce enough electricity to justify these enormous costs.

If the world had not been convinced Iran was planning to produce nuclear weapons, there would have been no reason for JCPOA.

Russia and France both have commercial industries that handle all or part of the fuel cycle for many countries that use nuclear energy, and the IAEA also does this, so Iran would have no reason to fear the US could cut off its fuel supply. There continues to be no practical reason for Iran to suffer these horrendous costs if it only wanted nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Again, if the world, including Obama, did not believe Iran planned to produce nuclear weapons, thee would not have a reason for JCPOA.

JCPOA provides a mechanism for the IAEA to request access to a non declared site, but if Iran says, no, there is no option for the world but to scrap JCPOA.

What the strike against Iran's nuclear sites accomplished is to have changed all the rules concerning Iran's nuclear program. The US has now established a credible military threat to Iran if it continues to try to resurrect it destroyed nuclear program.

Neither the US nor Israel has threatened to force regime change in Iran or putting boots on the ground or occupying parts of Iran. When you feel the need to tell these lies, it means you do not believe the actual facts support your argument.

 

[krichton]

Virtually everyone who has looked into it has estimated the cost of Iran's enrichment program has run into trillions of dollars.

Google Search

www.google.com

And the costs continue to grow due to continuing and growing sanctions as well now to the cost of trying to reconstruct its enrichment sites if Iran foolishly tries to do so. Iran's nuclear program will never produce enough electricity to justify these enormous costs.

If the world had not been convinced Iran was planning to produce nuclear weapons, there would have been no reason for JCPOA.

Russia and France both have commercial industries that handle all or part of the fuel cycle for many countries that use nuclear energy, and the IAEA also does this, so Iran would have no reason to fear the US could cut off its fuel supply. There continues to be no practical reason for Iran to suffer these horrendous costs if it only wanted nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Again, if the world, including Obama, did not believe Iran planned to produce nuclear weapons, thee would not have a reason for JCPOA.

JCPOA provides a mechanism for the IAEA to request access to a non declared site, but if Iran says, no, there is no option for the world but to scrap JCPOA.

What the strike against Iran's nuclear sites accomplished is to have changed all the rules concerning Iran's nuclear program. The US has now established a credible military threat to Iran if it continues to try to resurrect it destroyed nuclear program.

Neither the US nor Israel has threatened to force regime change in Iran or putting boots on the ground or occupying parts of Iran. When you feel the need to tell these lies, it means you do not believe the actual facts support your argument.

The direct cost of enriching uranium itself didn't cost Iran 2 to 3 trillion. That number is only a wild guess at the potential their country has lost in economic opportunities due to their nuclear program and the sanctions that followed.

"Iran would have no fear of the US cutting off their fuel supply." The US literally bombed the shit out of their nuclear facilities LMAOOOOO.

They do, it's called a snapback mechanism, and it allows other signatory countries to do exactly as I described in my last post.

You cannot destroy a nuclear program with a strike, you can only destroy buildings, which hasn't even been verified yet. If the US has to continue bombing every few months then you're literally forcing Iran to build an actual nuclear weapon in response, thus escalating into a full blown war, which is what Bibi wants, and want Bibi wants, Trump is likely going to give him. Why deny the obvious?

Trump himself floated the idea of regime change on truth social

 

[toomuchtime_]

The direct cost of enriching uranium itself didn't cost Iran 2 to 3 trillion. That number is only a wild guess at the potential their country has lost in economic opportunities due to their nuclear program and the sanctions that followed.

"Iran would have no fear of the US cutting off their fuel supply." The US literally bombed the shit out of their nuclear facilities LMAOOOOO.

They do, it's called a snapback mechanism, and it allows other signatory countries to do exactly as I described in my last post.

You cannot destroy a nuclear program with a strike, you can only destroy buildings, which hasn't even been verified yet. If the US has to continue bombing every few months then you're literally forcing Iran to build an actual nuclear weapon in response, thus escalating into a full blown war, which is what Bibi wants, and want Bibi wants, Trump is likely going to give him. Why deny the obvious?

Trump himself floated the idea of regime change on truth social

If Iran had agreed to outsource its fuel cycle, none of its current problems would have existed, but it has chosen to sacrifice its economy and risk all out war in order to retain the capability to produce nuclear weapons. Now the time for negotiations over enrichment is over: Iran can surrender its enrichment infrastructure and enjoy some sanctions relief or see it blown up and remain under heavy sanctions.