Why isn't Obama getting more credit for the Iran breakthrough? (1 Viewer)

[Mad Cow]

So just so I understand things, the way this is going to go is if Obama gets blamed for anything bad, he throws back on the Right and dodges any responsibility. However, if he does something that he should do as part of being, you know, the leader of the Free World, his supporters are going to ##### and moan that he doesn't get enough credit. Is that right? Because man, that seems like it is SOP for the last forever with this guy. Rinse repeat.

 

[jonessed]

It's not useless. It's the material they would use to enrich further. If they have the technical understanding it wouldn't take long to enrich this stock up to weapons grade. At least enough to make a few weapons. Under their energy deal with Russia they actually don't need any nuclear material at all to run their plants. At least for the next decade.

It's taken a long time to get Iran to this point. We need to make sure we don't sell it for a token deal that may set them back a couple of months.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "long."

A few months.

 

[JuniorNB]

Nobel Peace Prize number 2 on the horizon for Obama?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Nobel Peace Prize number 2 on the horizon for Obama?

What was no. 1 for again?

 

[JuniorNB]

Nobel Peace Prize number 2 on the horizon for Obama?

What was no. 1 for again?

Google it

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Nobel Peace Prize number 2 on the horizon for Obama?

What was no. 1 for again?

Google it

Ha ok actually I tried to wiki it. I will attempt this "goggle" you speak of; or perhaps I should bing it.

I've honestly forgotten...

ETA: Ah yes, here it is from the NY Times:

From 205 Names, Panel Chose the Most Visible

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/10/world/10oslo.html?_r=2&hp&

 

[Henry Ford]

It's not useless. It's the material they would use to enrich further. If they have the technical understanding it wouldn't take long to enrich this stock up to weapons grade. At least enough to make a few weapons. Under their energy deal with Russia they actually don't need any nuclear material at all to run their plants. At least for the next decade.It's taken a long time to get Iran to this point. We need to make sure we don't sell it for a token deal that may set them back a couple of months.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "long."

Can you unpack this? It seems like Saints and Jonessed would have us believe it's a relatively easy thing to convert nuclear material that is collected for peaceful purposes into nuclear weapons. For those of us uneducated in these matters (like me) what's the truth of this?

Tim this article is from Henry's wiki's sources:

Under these conditions, Iran’s nuclear “breakout” time would lengthen for the first time since its capability began approaching dangerous levels in the past year. If Iran used all of its installed centrifuges, the time it would need to produce a weapon would expand to at least 1.9 to 2.2 months, up from at least 1 month to 1.6 months. With IAEA monitors checking at Natanz and Fordow every day, this increase would allow the United States and its allies time to respond before Iran produces enough weapons-grade uranium for a bomb.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reaching-a-final-iran-deal-will-be-a-tough-road/2013/11/25/dcc2f752-55ef-11e3-ba82-16ed03681809_story.html

They've been delayed about 3-6 months.

The original expected date for ability to produce nukes was pretty much now, mid-2014.

Given what's actually happened since the article you're quoting, we're looking at a delay of over a year from this point if they started up again, minimum.

 

[Henry Ford]

It's not useless. It's the material they would use to enrich further. If they have the technical understanding it wouldn't take long to enrich this stock up to weapons grade. At least enough to make a few weapons. Under their energy deal with Russia they actually don't need any nuclear material at all to run their plants. At least for the next decade.

It's taken a long time to get Iran to this point. We need to make sure we don't sell it for a token deal that may set them back a couple of months.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "long."

A few months.

Not without a large number of in-service IR2 centrifuges.

 

[jonessed]

It's not useless. It's the material they would use to enrich further. If they have the technical understanding it wouldn't take long to enrich this stock up to weapons grade. At least enough to make a few weapons. Under their energy deal with Russia they actually don't need any nuclear material at all to run their plants. At least for the next decade.

It's taken a long time to get Iran to this point. We need to make sure we don't sell it for a token deal that may set them back a couple of months.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "long."

A few months.

Not without a large number of in-service IR2 centrifuges.

Iran has said they will not give up their future use or construction as part of the larger deal.

 

[Henry Ford]

It's not useless. It's the material they would use to enrich further. If they have the technical understanding it wouldn't take long to enrich this stock up to weapons grade. At least enough to make a few weapons. Under their energy deal with Russia they actually don't need any nuclear material at all to run their plants. At least for the next decade.

It's taken a long time to get Iran to this point. We need to make sure we don't sell it for a token deal that may set them back a couple of months.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "long."

A few months.

Not without a large number of in-service IR2 centrifuges.

Iran has said they will not give up their future use or construction as part of the larger deal.

Be that as it may, it currently cannot use IR2/P2 centrifuges to develop fissile material.

Put another way, when this deal was struck in November, Iran was said to be in a position to have nuclear capability by July of 2014. They are now many, many steps behind where they were before, have lost tons of nuclear material, and have huge numbers of centrifuges completely offline.

Why do you now think they're 3-6 months away?

 

[Chadstroma]

Of course there are your usual political reasons for some people wanting to downplay or sing the praises about anything that happens. I dont have to explain why those who generally oppose Obama will downplay it. The administration and it's supporters have lost some of their voice in singing too many songs that were meant to be chart toppers but fell flat.

Beyond that there are are a few things that may be reason for the lack of dancing in the streets.

1) A good argument could be made that any real breakthrough is more about the changes in Iranian politics and decision makers than it is about the administration.

2) Nothing is really done yet that really matters.

3) One could very well suspect that the Iranians will not live up to any agreement.

 

[jonessed]

It's not useless. It's the material they would use to enrich further. If they have the technical understanding it wouldn't take long to enrich this stock up to weapons grade. At least enough to make a few weapons. Under their energy deal with Russia they actually don't need any nuclear material at all to run their plants. At least for the next decade.

It's taken a long time to get Iran to this point. We need to make sure we don't sell it for a token deal that may set them back a couple of months.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "long."

A few months.

Not without a large number of in-service IR2 centrifuges.

Iran has said they will not give up their future use or construction as part of the larger deal.

Be that as it may, it currently cannot use IR2/P2 centrifuges to develop fissile material. Put another way, when this deal was struck in November, Iran was said to be in a position to have nuclear capability by July of 2014. They are now many, many steps behind where they were before, have lost tons of nuclear material, and have huge numbers of centrifuges completely offline.

Why do you now think they're 3-6 months away?

I'm talking about the delay of getting the material together to create a bomb if they decided to do it. We have only added a few months to that timeline. It would have been 1-2 months, now it's 2-3. They basically just delayed starting up their newest IR2 centrifuges.Your timeline likely includes the development time on their newest generation centrifuges which they continue to test and build. The IR2s are only an intermediary step. We haven't gained anything there. Stopping that development wasn't included in the temporary deal.

 

[Henry Ford]

It's not useless. It's the material they would use to enrich further. If they have the technical understanding it wouldn't take long to enrich this stock up to weapons grade. At least enough to make a few weapons. Under their energy deal with Russia they actually don't need any nuclear material at all to run their plants. At least for the next decade.

It's taken a long time to get Iran to this point. We need to make sure we don't sell it for a token deal that may set them back a couple of months.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "long."

A few months.

Not without a large number of in-service IR2 centrifuges.

Iran has said they will not give up their future use or construction as part of the larger deal.

Be that as it may, it currently cannot use IR2/P2 centrifuges to develop fissile material. Put another way, when this deal was struck in November, Iran was said to be in a position to have nuclear capability by July of 2014. They are now many, many steps behind where they were before, have lost tons of nuclear material, and have huge numbers of centrifuges completely offline.

Why do you now think they're 3-6 months away?

I'm talking about the delay of getting the material together to create a bomb if they decided to do it. We have only added a few months to that timeline. It would have been 1-2 months, now it's 2-3. They basically just delayed starting up their newest IR2 centrifuges.Your timeline likely includes the development time on their newest generation centrifuges which they continue to test and build. The IR2s are only an intermediary step. We haven't gained anything there. Stopping that development wasn't included in the temporary deal.

With any technology included in general IAEA reports, it's not even possible to go from <20% to fissile material for a nuclear warhead in less than 3 months, excluding transportation time, time to actually get equipment built and running, and time to build the actual device it goes into. That's just enrichment time. I don't know where you're getting your numbers from.

 

[Henry Ford]

It's not useless. It's the material they would use to enrich further. If they have the technical understanding it wouldn't take long to enrich this stock up to weapons grade. At least enough to make a few weapons. Under their energy deal with Russia they actually don't need any nuclear material at all to run their plants. At least for the next decade.

It's taken a long time to get Iran to this point. We need to make sure we don't sell it for a token deal that may set them back a couple of months.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "long."

A few months.

Not without a large number of in-service IR2 centrifuges.

Iran has said they will not give up their future use or construction as part of the larger deal.

Be that as it may, it currently cannot use IR2/P2 centrifuges to develop fissile material. Put another way, when this deal was struck in November, Iran was said to be in a position to have nuclear capability by July of 2014. They are now many, many steps behind where they were before, have lost tons of nuclear material, and have huge numbers of centrifuges completely offline.

Why do you now think they're 3-6 months away?

I'm talking about the delay of getting the material together to create a bomb if they decided to do it. We have only added a few months to that timeline. It would have been 1-2 months, now it's 2-3. They basically just delayed starting up their newest IR2 centrifuges.Your timeline likely includes the development time on their newest generation centrifuges which they continue to test and build. The IR2s are only an intermediary step. We haven't gained anything there. Stopping that development wasn't included in the temporary deal.

And diluted and destroyed hundreds and hundreds of pounds of heavily enriched uranium.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Of course there are your usual political reasons for some people wanting to downplay or sing the praises about anything that happens. I dont have to explain why those who generally oppose Obama will downplay it. The administration and it's supporters have lost some of their voice in singing too many songs that were meant to be chart toppers but fell flat.

Beyond that there are are a few things that may be reason for the lack of dancing in the streets.

1) A good argument could be made that any real breakthrough is more about the changes in Iranian politics and decision makers than it is about the administration.

2) Nothing is really done yet that really matters.

3) One could very well suspect that the Iranians will not live up to any agreement.

Good, fair post I think.

 

[T Bell]

It's Iran - anything they claim without independent verification, is next to worthless as far as I'm concerned. We have no verification as I'm gathering, so this is all hypothetical at best at this point.

Second, the step-back in their enrichment processes (again, subject to verification) sounds like it has put their program on hold, and extended by weeks the length of time in which they could generate a weapon. That's all well and good, but it's not exactly a huge amount of time. If we're closely monitoring them such that we can detect a change in posture on their part, AND* we have the political will to act decisively, we can use that additional time to punish them. More realistically, what this all suggests to me is that Iran will get sanctions lifted for now, will enjoy a huge economic benefit from that, and will have only postponed full weaponization of their uranium.

Sorry, but I don't see this as much of a victory.

*HUGE "and"

 

[Henry Ford]

It's Iran - anything they claim without independent verification, is next to worthless as far as I'm concerned. We have no verification as I'm gathering, so this is all hypothetical at best at this point.

Second, the step-back in their enrichment processes (again, subject to verification) sounds like it has put their program on hold, and extended by weeks the length of time in which they could generate a weapon. That's all well and good, but it's not exactly a huge amount of time. If we're closely monitoring them such that we can detect a change in posture on their part, AND* we have the political will to act decisively, we can use that additional time to punish them. More realistically, what this all suggests to me is that Iran will get sanctions lifted for now, will enjoy a huge economic benefit from that, and will have only postponed full weaponization of their uranium.

Sorry, but I don't see this as much of a victory.

*HUGE "and"

Wait, what? The IAEA had inspections in February (at the very least) on February 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 19 according to the February 20 report. They have boots on the ground daily in Iran right now. http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2014/gov2014-10.pdf

And Iran has diluted and destroyed (turned to oxide for fuel use) huge amounts of uranium. That's more than putting things on hold, it's actual conversion of their enriched uranium.

 

[Henry Ford]

It's not useless. It's the material they would use to enrich further. If they have the technical understanding it wouldn't take long to enrich this stock up to weapons grade. At least enough to make a few weapons. Under their energy deal with Russia they actually don't need any nuclear material at all to run their plants. At least for the next decade.

It's taken a long time to get Iran to this point. We need to make sure we don't sell it for a token deal that may set them back a couple of months.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "long."

A few months.

Not without a large number of in-service IR2 centrifuges.

Iran has said they will not give up their future use or construction as part of the larger deal.

Be that as it may, it currently cannot use IR2/P2 centrifuges to develop fissile material. Put another way, when this deal was struck in November, Iran was said to be in a position to have nuclear capability by July of 2014. They are now many, many steps behind where they were before, have lost tons of nuclear material, and have huge numbers of centrifuges completely offline.

Why do you now think they're 3-6 months away?

I'm talking about the delay of getting the material together to create a bomb if they decided to do it. We have only added a few months to that timeline. It would have been 1-2 months, now it's 2-3. They basically just delayed starting up their newest IR2 centrifuges.Your timeline likely includes the development time on their newest generation centrifuges which they continue to test and build. The IR2s are only an intermediary step. We haven't gained anything there. Stopping that development wasn't included in the temporary deal.

With any technology included in general IAEA reports, it's not even possible to go from <20% to fissile material for a nuclear warhead in less than 3 months, excluding transportation time, time to actually get equipment built and running, and time to build the actual device it goes into. That's just enrichment time. I don't know where you're getting your numbers from.

I didn't say nuclear warhead, I said nuclear materials.

And I said fissile material for a nuclear warhead. Which presumably is the same level of enrichment you're talking about. If you're talking about some other level of enrichment, I'm all ears.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

It's Iran - anything they claim without independent verification, is next to worthless as far as I'm concerned. We have no verification as I'm gathering, so this is all hypothetical at best at this point.

Second, the step-back in their enrichment processes (again, subject to verification) sounds like it has put their program on hold, and extended by weeks the length of time in which they could generate a weapon. That's all well and good, but it's not exactly a huge amount of time. If we're closely monitoring them such that we can detect a change in posture on their part, AND* we have the political will to act decisively, we can use that additional time to punish them. More realistically, what this all suggests to me is that Iran will get sanctions lifted for now, will enjoy a huge economic benefit from that, and will have only postponed full weaponization of their uranium.

Sorry, but I don't see this as much of a victory.

*HUGE "and"

Wait, what? The IAEA had inspections in February (at the very least) on February 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 19 according to the February 20 report. They have boots on the ground daily in Iran right now. http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2014/gov2014-10.pdf

And Iran has diluted and destroyed (turned to oxide for fuel use) huge amounts of uranium. That's more than putting things on hold, it's actual conversion of their enriched uranium.

Once again, they are not in total compliance:

The IAEA report also pointed to a new delay in Iran's construction of a plant designed to turn low-enriched uranium gas (LEU) into an oxide powder that is not suitable for further processing into highly enriched bomb-grade uranium.

Iran told the IAEA last month that the site would be commissioned on April 9. But Thursday's update by the U.N. nuclear watchdog said the commissioning had been put off, without giving any reason.

However, "Iran has indicated to the agency that this will not have an adverse impact on the implementation of (its) undertaking" to convert the uranium gas, the agency said.

The delay means that Iran's LEU stockpile - which it agreed to limit under the Geneva pact - is almost certainly continuing to increase for the time being, simply because its production of the material has not stopped, unlike that of the 20 percent uranium gas.

Yes they can build this thing and still meet the deadline for end of June, but yet again basically the US is in a position on relying upon Iran to do this. Yes there will be monitoring, so let's see.

 

[jonessed]

It's not useless. It's the material they would use to enrich further. If they have the technical understanding it wouldn't take long to enrich this stock up to weapons grade. At least enough to make a few weapons. Under their energy deal with Russia they actually don't need any nuclear material at all to run their plants. At least for the next decade.

It's taken a long time to get Iran to this point. We need to make sure we don't sell it for a token deal that may set them back a couple of months.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "long."

A few months.

Not without a large number of in-service IR2 centrifuges.

Iran has said they will not give up their future use or construction as part of the larger deal.

Be that as it may, it currently cannot use IR2/P2 centrifuges to develop fissile material. Put another way, when this deal was struck in November, Iran was said to be in a position to have nuclear capability by July of 2014. They are now many, many steps behind where they were before, have lost tons of nuclear material, and have huge numbers of centrifuges completely offline.

Why do you now think they're 3-6 months away?

I'm talking about the delay of getting the material together to create a bomb if they decided to do it. We have only added a few months to that timeline. It would have been 1-2 months, now it's 2-3. They basically just delayed starting up their newest IR2 centrifuges.Your timeline likely includes the development time on their newest generation centrifuges which they continue to test and build. The IR2s are only an intermediary step. We haven't gained anything there. Stopping that development wasn't included in the temporary deal.

With any technology included in general IAEA reports, it's not even possible to go from <20% to fissile material for a nuclear warhead in less than 3 months, excluding transportation time, time to actually get equipment built and running, and time to build the actual device it goes into. That's just enrichment time. I don't know where you're getting your numbers from.

Maybe somebody needs to talk to the administration because Kerry said they could do it in 2 months fewer than 2 weeks ago.

 

[Henry Ford]

It's Iran - anything they claim without independent verification, is next to worthless as far as I'm concerned. We have no verification as I'm gathering, so this is all hypothetical at best at this point.

Second, the step-back in their enrichment processes (again, subject to verification) sounds like it has put their program on hold, and extended by weeks the length of time in which they could generate a weapon. That's all well and good, but it's not exactly a huge amount of time. If we're closely monitoring them such that we can detect a change in posture on their part, AND* we have the political will to act decisively, we can use that additional time to punish them. More realistically, what this all suggests to me is that Iran will get sanctions lifted for now, will enjoy a huge economic benefit from that, and will have only postponed full weaponization of their uranium.

Sorry, but I don't see this as much of a victory.

*HUGE "and"

Wait, what? The IAEA had inspections in February (at the very least) on February 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 19 according to the February 20 report. They have boots on the ground daily in Iran right now. http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2014/gov2014-10.pdf

And Iran has diluted and destroyed (turned to oxide for fuel use) huge amounts of uranium. That's more than putting things on hold, it's actual conversion of their enriched uranium.

Once again, they are not in total compliance:

The IAEA report also pointed to a new delay in Iran's construction of a plant designed to turn low-enriched uranium gas (LEU) into an oxide powder that is not suitable for further processing into highly enriched bomb-grade uranium.

Iran told the IAEA last month that the site would be commissioned on April 9. But Thursday's update by the U.N. nuclear watchdog said the commissioning had been put off, without giving any reason.

However, "Iran has indicated to the agency that this will not have an adverse impact on the implementation of (its) undertaking" to convert the uranium gas, the agency said.

The delay means that Iran's LEU stockpile - which it agreed to limit under the Geneva pact - is almost certainly continuing to increase for the time being, simply because its production of the material has not stopped, unlike that of the 20 percent uranium gas.

Yes they can build this thing and still meet the deadline for end of June, but yet again basically the US is in a position on relying upon Iran to do this. Yes there will be monitoring, so let's see.

Once again, despite not having on line yet a plant they intended to have online, and despite the fact that the article writer says that it "almost certainly" will continue to increase... they are currently in compliance as long as they meet their June deadline.

 

[Henry Ford]

It's not useless. It's the material they would use to enrich further. If they have the technical understanding it wouldn't take long to enrich this stock up to weapons grade. At least enough to make a few weapons. Under their energy deal with Russia they actually don't need any nuclear material at all to run their plants. At least for the next decade.

It's taken a long time to get Iran to this point. We need to make sure we don't sell it for a token deal that may set them back a couple of months.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "long."

A few months.

Not without a large number of in-service IR2 centrifuges.

Iran has said they will not give up their future use or construction as part of the larger deal.

Be that as it may, it currently cannot use IR2/P2 centrifuges to develop fissile material. Put another way, when this deal was struck in November, Iran was said to be in a position to have nuclear capability by July of 2014. They are now many, many steps behind where they were before, have lost tons of nuclear material, and have huge numbers of centrifuges completely offline.

Why do you now think they're 3-6 months away?

I'm talking about the delay of getting the material together to create a bomb if they decided to do it. We have only added a few months to that timeline. It would have been 1-2 months, now it's 2-3. They basically just delayed starting up their newest IR2 centrifuges.Your timeline likely includes the development time on their newest generation centrifuges which they continue to test and build. The IR2s are only an intermediary step. We haven't gained anything there. Stopping that development wasn't included in the temporary deal.

With any technology included in general IAEA reports, it's not even possible to go from <20% to fissile material for a nuclear warhead in less than 3 months, excluding transportation time, time to actually get equipment built and running, and time to build the actual device it goes into. That's just enrichment time. I don't know where you're getting your numbers from.

Maybe somebody needs to talk to the administration because Kerry said they could do it in 2 months less than 2 weeks ago.

You mean a week and a half before the IAEA released its report that Iran has now slashed its enriched uranium stockpiles by 75%? I'd imagine that's the sort of information that changes timetables.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Anad again from one of the source articles:

Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said the agreement was an opportunity for the "removal of any doubts about the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear programme".

But he insisted that Iran had not given up its right to enrich uranium.

"We believe that the current agreement, the current plan of action as we call it, in two distinct places has a very clear reference to the fact that Iranian enrichment programme will continue and will be a part of any agreement, now and in the future," he said.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-25074729

There's a big difference between enriching uranium and enriching uranium to weapons-grade. They haven't given up on enriching for power purposes. The uranium you use for powering a nuclear reactor is useless for building a nuclear weapon.

And in the same article the US disagreed and countered what Iran said as being wrong. I doubt they are disagreeing on a point of no moment.

The question is whether the agreement recognizes Iran's right to enrich uranium for energy production purposes. The U.S. says "just because we're allowing it doesn't mean Iran has a right to it." Iran says "this agreement means the world has recognized we are allowed to use nuclear energy."

It's not about whether they're allowed to build nuclear weapons. Everyone agrees the agreement does not allow them to enrich weapons-grade nuclear material.

Totally incorrect. Their ability to build nuclear weapons for themselves or anyone is the whole point.

There is a really serious disagreement here.

This is like the DMV saying you have a license providing the right to drive, but you can't take your car on a public road, or a private road, or any other terrain, and in fact you can't even have have a car. And yet you say there is a right? Someone is going to be severely disappointed.

Iran says:

"We believe that the current agreement, the current plan of action as we call it, in two distinct places has a very clear reference to the fact that Iranian enrichment programme will continue and will be a part of any agreement, now and in the future,"

USA:

The US denied any such right had been conceded...

There is no middle ground here. The US would not be denying this if it did not matter.

 

[jonessed]

It's not useless. It's the material they would use to enrich further. If they have the technical understanding it wouldn't take long to enrich this stock up to weapons grade. At least enough to make a few weapons. Under their energy deal with Russia they actually don't need any nuclear material at all to run their plants. At least for the next decade.

It's taken a long time to get Iran to this point. We need to make sure we don't sell it for a token deal that may set them back a couple of months.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "long."

A few months.

Not without a large number of in-service IR2 centrifuges.

Iran has said they will not give up their future use or construction as part of the larger deal.

Be that as it may, it currently cannot use IR2/P2 centrifuges to develop fissile material. Put another way, when this deal was struck in November, Iran was said to be in a position to have nuclear capability by July of 2014. They are now many, many steps behind where they were before, have lost tons of nuclear material, and have huge numbers of centrifuges completely offline.

Why do you now think they're 3-6 months away?

I'm talking about the delay of getting the material together to create a bomb if they decided to do it. We have only added a few months to that timeline. It would have been 1-2 months, now it's 2-3. They basically just delayed starting up their newest IR2 centrifuges.Your timeline likely includes the development time on their newest generation centrifuges which they continue to test and build. The IR2s are only an intermediary step. We haven't gained anything there. Stopping that development wasn't included in the temporary deal.

With any technology included in general IAEA reports, it's not even possible to go from <20% to fissile material for a nuclear warhead in less than 3 months, excluding transportation time, time to actually get equipment built and running, and time to build the actual device it goes into. That's just enrichment time. I don't know where you're getting your numbers from.

Maybe somebody needs to talk to the administration because Kerry said they could do it in 2 months less than 2 weeks ago.

You mean a week and a half before the IAEA released its report that Iran has now slashed its enriched uranium stockpiles by 75%? I'd imagine that's the sort of information that changes timetables.

By half, and no, they still have plenty. I imagine Kerry already knew what what was in the report by that time. It's not like they are on the public release schedule.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

By the way a lot has changed since November, primarily Russia's relationship with the US and the West. Russia is a member of the talks.

Just one of many reasons Obama is dead wrong for saying that Russia is not a geopolitical power.

 

[Dr Oadi]

This will be a fun bump when Iran has the bomb.

 

[Henry Ford]

By half, and no, they still have plenty. The report is a result of months worth of work so I imagine Kerry already knew what went into it.They don't get the report information at the same time the public does

The public still doesn't have all the information. The only reason it was confirmed is because the U.S. finally got the information and released $450 million in payments pursuant to the agreement on the 17th - when the U.S. got the information. The reports in previous months were all dated the 19th or 20th.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

This will be a fun bump when Iran has the bomb.

I don't know if "fun" is the right word here.

 

[jonessed]

By half, and no, they still have plenty. The report is a result of months worth of work so I imagine Kerry already knew what went into it.

They don't get the report information at the same time the public does

The public still doesn't have all the information. The only reason it was confirmed is because the U.S. finally got the information and released $450 million in payments pursuant to the agreement on the 17th - when the U.S. got the information. The reports in previous months were all dated the 19th or 20th.

Alright Kerry was totally in the dark when he made those comments.

You win.

 

[fatness]

Iran has acted to cut its most sensitive nuclear stockpile by nearly 75 percent in implementing a landmark pact with world powers, but a planned facility it will need to fulfill the six-month deal has been delayed, a U.N. report showed on Thursday.

The monthly update by the International Atomic Energy Agency , which has a pivotal role in verifying that Iran is living up to its part of the accord, made clear that Iran so far is undertaking the agreed steps to curb its nuclear program.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/17/us-iran-nuclear-idUSBREA3G0FL20140417

As pointed out above, it's funny what gets highlighted, you could have easily said:

Iran has acted to cut its most sensitive nuclear stockpile by nearly 75 percent in implementing a landmark pact with world powers, but a planned facility it will need to fulfill the six-month deal has been delayed, a U.N. report showed on Thursday.

The monthly update by the International Atomic Energy Agency , which has a pivotal role in verifying that Iran is living up to its part of the accord, made clear that Iran so far is undertaking the agreed steps to curb its nuclear program.

And:

Tehran has also continued to convert the other half of its stock of uranium gas refined to a 20 percent fissile purity - a relatively short technical step from 90 percent weapons-grade material - into oxide for making reactor fuel.

Altogether, Iran has in the last three months either diluted or fed into the conversion process a total of almost 155 kg (340 pounds) of its higher-grade uranium gas, which amounted to 209 kg when the deal came into force, a bit less than the roughly 250 kg experts say would be needed for a bomb, if refined more.

And:

The IAEA report also pointed to a new delay in Iran's construction of a plant designed to turn low-enriched uranium gas (LEU) into an oxide powder that is not suitable for further processing into highly enriched bomb-grade uranium.

Iran told the IAEA last month that the site would be commissioned on April 9. But Thursday's update by the U.N. nuclear watchdog said the commissioning had been put off, without giving any reason.

However, "Iran has indicated to the agency that this will not have an adverse impact on the implementation of (its) undertaking" to convert the uranium gas, the agency said.

The delay means that Iran's LEU stockpile - which it agreed to limit under the Geneva pact - is almost certainly continuing to increase for the time being, simply because its production of the material has not stopped, unlike that of the 20 percent uranium gas.

Western diplomats said earlier that this matter was of no immediate consequence as Iran's commitment concerns the size of the reserve towards the end of the deal, in late July, meaning it has time both to complete the site and convert enough LEU.

But they also say that the Islamic Republic's progress in building the conversion line will be closely monitored. The longer it takes to complete it, the more material Iran will have to process to meet the target in three months' time.

I mean, this is quite the game of chicken we're playing here.

As you pointed out earlier, you didn't even know anything had been verified. So I let you know that it had. Sorry that the answer disappoints you.

Saints, you seem to be ignoring facts on the ground in favor of suppositions. I can't go along with your analysis. As Henry Ford had pointed out, the evidence is that Iran has already done much to dismantle her nuclear program.

Iran has already diluted and destroyed enough of its weapons-grade uranium to make it impossible to build a nuclear warhead at the moment.

As verified by whom and where?

+++++++

I will say this for Obama, Iran has been btching and moaning enough about the implanted viruses that wreaked havoc on them that there may be some truth to that aspect of things.

Looking forward to your 24th post in the topic.

 

[SacramentoBob]

I'm sure this will be dismissed by the hard left here at FBGs, but it seems to me that the people who deserve the credit for this are the Iranian voters who chose a moderate leader willing to work with the west and not threaten to destroy Israel every other day.

 

[Henry Ford]

I'm sure this will be dismissed by the hard left here at FBGs, but it seems to me that the people who deserve the credit for this are the Iranian voters who chose a moderate leader willing to work with the west and not threaten to destroy Israel every other day.

I'm on board with this.

 

[timschochet]

I'm sure this will be dismissed by the hard left here at FBGs, but it seems to me that the people who deserve the credit for this are the Iranian voters who chose a moderate leader willing to work with the west and not threaten to destroy Israel every other day.

Absolutely. But I think Obama also deserves credit. Perhaps his stated willingness to work with Iran had an impact on the election? Just a thought...

 

[tommyGunZ]

I'm sure this will be dismissed by the hard left here at FBGs, but it seems to me that the people who deserve the credit for this are the Iranian voters who chose a moderate leader willing to work with the west and not threaten to destroy Israel every other day.

Of course those folks deserve credit. Anyone suggesting otherwise is a clown.

 

[RBM]

I'm sure this will be dismissed by the hard left here at FBGs, but it seems to me that the people who deserve the credit for this are the Iranian voters who chose a moderate leader willing to work with the west and not threaten to destroy Israel every other day.

Absolutely. But I think Obama also deserves credit. Perhaps his stated willingness to work with Iran had an impact on the election? Just a thought...

Pretty sure nobody takes Obama seriously Tim.

 

[timschochet]

I'm sure this will be dismissed by the hard left here at FBGs, but it seems to me that the people who deserve the credit for this are the Iranian voters who chose a moderate leader willing to work with the west and not threaten to destroy Israel every other day.

Absolutely. But I think Obama also deserves credit. Perhaps his stated willingness to work with Iran had an impact on the election? Just a thought...

Pretty sure nobody takes Obama seriously Tim.

Based on some of your posts, you certainly do.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Iran Nuclear Deal Falters as Contingency Plans ConsideredThe top diplomats from the U.S. and Iran said progress in nuclear negotiations may not be enough to meet a July 20 deadline for clinching a long-term accord.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry flew back to Washington after failing to reach a breakthrough with his Iranian counterpart, Mohammad Javad Zarif. Iran’s foreign minister is staying on in Vienna in an attempt to bridge the gaps to an agreement over the next five days.

Kerry will meet with President Barack Obama and consult with Congress over “a path forward if we do not achieve one by the 20th of July,” he told journalists today in Vienna. Both sides are in a “difficult position” to reach a deal by the deadline, Zarif said at a separate press briefing.

Fourteen days into negotiations, neither side has shown a willingness to budge on the key issue of Iran’s uranium-enrichment capacity. If a deal isn’t reached before next week, Iran has said it’s ready to restart nuclear activities it had suspended. The U.S. Congress has said it’s ready to introduce tighter sanctions.

....

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-15/kerry-says-real-gaps-remain-in-talks-with-iran-despite-progress.html

 

[jon_mx]

Iran Nuclear Deal Falters as Contingency Plans ConsideredThe top diplomats from the U.S. and Iran said progress in nuclear negotiations may not be enough to meet a July 20 deadline for clinching a long-term accord.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry flew back to Washington after failing to reach a breakthrough with his Iranian counterpart, Mohammad Javad Zarif. Iran’s foreign minister is staying on in Vienna in an attempt to bridge the gaps to an agreement over the next five days.

Kerry will meet with President Barack Obama and consult with Congress over “a path forward if we do not achieve one by the 20th of July,” he told journalists today in Vienna. Both sides are in a “difficult position” to reach a deal by the deadline, Zarif said at a separate press briefing.

Fourteen days into negotiations, neither side has shown a willingness to budge on the key issue of Iran’s uranium-enrichment capacity. If a deal isn’t reached before next week, Iran has said it’s ready to restart nuclear activities it had suspended. The U.S. Congress has said it’s ready to introduce tighter sanctions.

....

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-15/kerry-says-real-gaps-remain-in-talks-with-iran-despite-progress.html

I am concerned that Tim may get worried that Obama is not getting enough credit for this.

 

[timschochet]

Well, let's hope it doesn't fall through.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

...

The IAEA report also pointed to a new delay in Iran's construction of a plant designed to turn low-enriched uranium gas (LEU) into an oxide powder that is not suitable for further processing into highly enriched bomb-grade uranium.

Iran told the IAEA last month that the site would be commissioned on April 9. But Thursday's update by the U.N. nuclear watchdog said the commissioning had been put off, without giving any reason.

However, "Iran has indicated to the agency that this will not have an adverse impact on the implementation of (its) undertaking" to convert the uranium gas, the agency said.

The delay means that Iran's LEU stockpile - which it agreed to limit under the Geneva pact - is almost certainly continuing to increase for the time being, simply because its production of the material has not stopped, unlike that of the 20 percent uranium gas.

Western diplomats said earlier that this matter was of no immediate consequence as Iran's commitment concerns the size of the reserve towards the end of the deal, in late July, meaning it has time both to complete the site and convert enough LEU.

But they also say that the Islamic Republic's progress in building the conversion line will be closely monitored. The longer it takes to complete it, the more material Iran will have to process to meet the target in three months' time.

I mean, this is quite the game of chicken we're playing here.

As you pointed out earlier, you didn't even know anything had been verified. So I let you know that it had. Sorry that the answer disappoints you.

Saints, you seem to be ignoring facts on the ground in favor of suppositions. I can't go along with your analysis. As Henry Ford had pointed out, the evidence is that Iran has already done much to dismantle her nuclear program.

Iran has already diluted and destroyed enough of its weapons-grade uranium to make it impossible to build a nuclear warhead at the moment.

As verified by whom and where?

+++++++

...

...

From the above link:

...Kerry said, adding that Iran must cut the 19,000 uranium-enriching centrifuges it currently has installed.

“We need to have the option” of making nuclear fuel, said Zarif. While the current interim deal may be extended until Nov. 25, a prolongation hinges on whether a final accord is “feasible” and the extra time “helpful,” he said.

Obama and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in a phone conversation today, agreed it’s “imperative that Iran take the necessary steps to assure the international community that its nuclear program will be exclusively peaceful,” according to a White House statement.

...

Assurance is essentially the same as "verification."

 

[jonessed]

Obama seems to be having a lot of ME breakthroughs lately. He really deserves more credit than he has been getting up to now.

 

[fatness]

http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/iran-complying-with-nuclear-deal-un-watchdog_949001.html

Tehran: Iran has diluted its entire stock of medium-enriched uranium as required under a November deal with world powers, the UN atomic agency said in its latest report seen by AFP Monday.

Even as talks to reach a nuclear deal with Iran were extended beyond an initial July 20 deadline, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said Tehran was standing by its international commitments.

As agreed under a so-called Joint Plan of Action reached in November, the Islamic Republic has cut half of its stock of 20-percent enriched uranium down to five-percent purity.

The rest was being converted into uranium oxide.

Tehran also refrained from enriching above the five-percent level at any of its nuclear facilities, the IAEA report said.

 

[jon_mx]

Obama seems to be having a lot of ME breakthroughs lately. He really deserves more credit than he has been getting up to now.

Like what, the war in gaza? These Iranian talks have basically fallen apart and are on life-support being propped up by giving Iran access to $2.8 billion. We are on the verge of starting the cold war back up with Russia. Any more breakthroughs and we will be starting WWIII.

 

[Dan Gladden's Mustache]

Obama seems to be having a lot of ME breakthroughs lately. He really deserves more credit than he has been getting up to now.

Like what, the war in gaza? These Iranian talks have basically fallen apart and are on life-support being propped up by giving Iran access to $2.8 billion. We are on the verge of starting the cold war back up with Russia. Any more breakthroughs and we will be starting WWIII.

 

[HellToupee]

Hostages that seemingly were ignored are finally released

 

[The General]

If you call someone the devil for 8 years pretty hard to give him credit for anything.

 

[MaxThreshold]

If you call someone the devil for 8 years pretty hard to give him credit for anything.

You mean Bush, right?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

If you call someone the devil for 8 years pretty hard to give him credit for anything.

You mean Bush, right?

That is some serious butthurt.

 

[Rove!]

I think John Kerry has actually been doing a good job as SoS. Definitely much better than his predecessor....

 

[HellToupee]

I think John Kerry has actually been doing a good job as SoS. Definitely much better than his predecessor....

He makes Hillary look competent