Eyes on the Skies Over Bushehr Nuclear Reactor

reply to post by ~Lucidity
I guess what I mean is if all they need to start their program is the the fuel, then don't let them get the fuel.
Disable the route.
Unless the Military really wants to have a war with Iran

reply to post by Misoir


Thanks for the advice.

Here is a pic of the Bushehr Nuclear Reactor, in future posts we can use this as the "before" picture


Maybe some of you computer whizs can photoshop what this will look like after a bombardment

Its like everyday you wake up thinking when i turn on the TV is it going to be the day. The tension is high. The world is going to hell in a basket. I would love the removal of the Iran Government, from what I heard many people in iran want freedom and seek to be free from the establishment. I think most of the younger generation in the middle east, who are not brainwashed by there fathers, want to be like the United States. If we do this If we decide to attack we have to go all the way. We can just bomb and run, we must educate and reform these countries. Although the task at hand is not easy look at Iraq its still a mess I seriously think it will be another 20 years. A good example is South Korea, I lived there for a year its been over 50 years since the war and the S koreans have one of the best economies in Asia. If it works out it will take possibly many generations before we see a republic in these countries. Then we have China and Russia to worry about the great Bear of the north. Lord have mercy thats realy all we can hope.

reply to post by minkey53


This nuclear plant at Bushehr is a light-water reactor, which renders it incapable of producing weapons grade plutonium .

Though Iran has plenty of oil it lacks the necessary infrastructure to refine it , thats why the sanction cut so deeply . It imports a substantial percentage of its refined petroleum needs .

It has a substantial investment already made in nuclear technology over the past decades - to cut it loose now would be a financial disaster as well as being seen to lose face internationally.

reply to post by UmbraSumus


If Iran has the ability to make a nuclear reactor, one would think that they would have the ability to refine oil and make fuel.

Originally posted by humbleseeker
If we do this If we decide to attack we have to go all the way. We can just bomb and run, we must educate and reform these countries. Although the task at hand is not easy look at Iraq its still a mess I seriously think it will be another 20 years.

Yeah because we are so good at reforming countries, what we need to do is mind our own damn business for a change and fix OUR country, lets worry about our people that are starving and poor piss on all these other countries and the rest of the world for all that matters in my opinion. For once lets take care of America!!!!

Originally posted by SUICIDEHK45
reply to post by UmbraSumus

 

If Iran has the ability to make a nuclear reactor, one would think that they would have the ability to refine oil and make fuel.

That may be an indicator as to the actual reserves held by Iran , they may not be as vast as we are held to believe.

To the best of my knowledge there is a general lack of refinement capacity worldwide. How one interprets this reluctance on the part of the big oil corporations to invest, in the infrastructure to supply the worlds future oil needs is anyone's guess.
Perhaps there isn`t as much oil left as we are lead to believe..... why invest in something without a future ? There hasn`t been a huge oilfield discovered in quite some time . Perhaps this is why the risks associated with deep drilling have been pushed to one side .

reply to post by UmbraSumus


Very good point, why wouldn't big oil invest in more oil refineries? Hopefully we will find better alternatives to oil that don't involve uranium.

Oh yeah

GO COWBOYS!!!

reply to post by Misoir

Best post I've read in a long time. Kudos for your wise words.

reply to post by minkey53

Why do they need Nuclear Power when they have like, a 100 years of oil under their feet?

Because they have the right under NPT to obtain Nuclear Power.

Why do they need it>?

Non of your business.

Why does the US need 5000 nukes?

Originally posted by MegaCurious


Looks like Israel and the US need to make up their minds quick, as the radioactive material is on its way to the reactor. Otherwise, unless they want a radioactive catastrophe, they'll need to call it off


Some how I don't think these sick nut jobs care about nuclear fall out .As a matter of fact I think they have been waiting for it and that has been the delay . They want maximum casualties as we are all unsustainable useless breeders to the elite . They don't care about radiation ,their illegal use of dirty uranium munitions in the middle east proves that .Have you seen the child deformities over there . It's a disgrace that humans can do that to another living thing including each other .They despise us all even their own citizens . A third World War and a culling of the masses is just what they want .

This is all a set up. Unfortunately, it looks like the writing is on the wall. I hear that new moons are a typical time to launch a strike because of the darkness. So, I think most are looking out for Aug 10-13. There is the triple conjunction on Fri Aug 13 2010.

Israeli military and politicians usually equate Iranian access to nuclear fuel for electrical generation with Iran's acquisition of a nuclear weapon. A light water reactor, Bushehr won't be capable of producing weapons grade plutonium (unlike Israel's heavy water reactor at Dimona).

They even admit that it's for electricity and it's not possible to make weapons grade material...

Once Bushehr's nuclear fuel arrives from Russia, whatever military options against Iran that may be "on the table" that include Bushehr will have to come off. Israel and the U.S. have only a few weeks to launch an attack on Iran before Bushehr has the means to begin generating electricity.

People are dumb if they believe that this is about weapons... Even the Israeli apartheid government admits this...

IAEA approval of Iran's nuclear energy programme is contingent upon Iran buying its fuel from approved suppliers abroad, and exporting its nuclear waste back to its source so that the radioactive material it contains can't be diverted for use in weapons of mass destruction or fall into the wrong hands. Russia qualifies as an approved supplier[...] He said (Sergei Kiriyenko), "No one is against the development of Iran's civilian nuclear programme; the construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant is being carried out under the control of the International Atomic Energy Agency."

Come on, people are being led by the MSM to believe that it's not for energy... The IAEI is involved completely and agreeing to this plant, the Russians are doing everything in their power to zccount for the materials to prevent it from getting into the wrong hands... What more do they need?


WHEN WILL PEOPLE WAKE UP AND LEARN TO THINK FOR THEMSELVES TO SEE THE TRUTH???

Magnum

[edit on 10/8/9 by Magnum007]

If a commercial nuclear power plant is operated on standard refueling cycles then it is not possible to make the waste into Nuclear weapons. Any Plutonium produced will be contaminated with other waste elements, which are extremely difficult to separate from the Plutonium thus a large, easy to detect facility is required. Additionally, any Plutonium produced will be contaminated with Plutonium-240 which is impossible to separate from Plutonium-239, therefore it is not weapons grade material and is unsuitable for use in a bomb. If the reactor is operated on short operating cycles, then it may be possible to produce Plutonium-239 not contaminated with Plutonium-240, but this is very easy to detect because shutting down a reactor that produces enough electricity to power a small country is easy to detect, and furthermore refueling a reactor is a huge operation (and you would still need to separate the Plutonium from the other actinides in a very expensive, easy to detect, facility).

It would make no sense at all to destroy the reactor.
1. It is practically impossible weaponize any byproducts.
2. Any attempt to weaponize byproducts will be easily detected.
3. All fuel will be sourced from Russia.
4. Spent fuel will be returned, to Russia.
5. If Iran wants Nuclear weapons, they will likely use a small unconventional 'research' reactor to do it. Or they will enrich the Uranium to 99%.
6. No country has ever built a nuclear weapon from the waste from a light water reactor.

Why You Can’t Build a Bomb From Spent Fuel

depletedcranium.com...

Why do they need Nuclear Power when they have like, a 100 years of oil under their feet?

So they can have cheap electricity. Oil is expensive for electricity, very expensive. Also, it's so they can sell the oil and gas to other countries, instead of wasting it on electricity.

[edit on 9/8/2010 by C0bzz]

I gotta say, all of the warmongers on this site, and in particular this thread really make me sick. I understand that you are not fully informed of the truth of the situation so i'll ask a few questions, please if there is any doubt in your minds that beating of the drums of war against Iran is the right and just thing to do, please - take some time and do some research on your own.
Here are some topics to look up, and some questions to ask yourself.

When was the first nuclear reactor built in Iran?

Who built it?

Where does/did Iran get their current supply of fuel for this reactor?

How much do they pay for it?

What do they stand to gain my making their own fuel for their reactor?

Who stands to loose if they are "allowed" to make their own fuel?

How much uranium does Iran currently have?

What percentage refined is the majority of it?

What technology, and how much real time is required to refine uranium to 3%? ...20%? ...98%?

What are the only uses for these three levels of refinement?

Now onto the grittier questions...

Have you ever been personally involved in a spearhead operation?

Have you seen the effect a .50 caliber round has when it comes close to a human body?

How easy is it to discriminate between an "insurgent" and a civilian?

Who in modern history originated the idea of "pre-emptive war"?

Last i'd like to issue a challenge:
Give me one good and honest justification for pre-emptive war.

reply to post by blood0fheroes


Couldn't agree more with your post...

Who in modern history originated the idea of "pre-emptive war"?

That would be Hitler... Just finished watching 13 hours of "WWII, The Complete History"...

Magnum

reply to post by Magnum007

That would be Hitler... Just finished watching 13 hours of "WWII, The Complete History"...

That was exactly the point I was getting at with that question.

I see nothing from the OP that gives an inkling that the US or any other forces are at any time ACTUALLY going to strike this facility in any way. Only thing I'm reading is the "Watch out now US! Iran may or may not be doing something bad in the near future so do something about it, but we're not gonna be behind you at all because whatever you do is wrong, wrong, wrong!"
Seriously there are people here that just want the entire thing to be over with (i.e. military actions)?? Why would anyone for any reason feel this way? Do you hope war breaks out because protesting the quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan just aren't the "in" thing to do any more??
There have been more posts concerning a war with Iran that while being completely against any military action are more warmongering in nature than the people who believe Iran poses a viable threat!

Do people seriously think that any nuclear materials transferred from one nation to another, publicly reported on to boot, is reason enough for the US to strike against Iran without a viable reason?? This isn't 2001, the US government doesn't have the ability to ride the coattails of a recent national disaster like they did 9-11 and they sure as ^%$ don't have the public support for any kind of preemptive strike against Iran.

Even if the government gave the US public the big fat middle one and went ahead with a strike against Iran, in all seriousness, what are you going to do about it? I'm not even trying to be an A-Hole about it, what are you going to do? Oh sure you could protest, but as I wrote in another thread, even if there were to be a 5 million man march on DC that's a pittance of a percentage compared to the millions of American who just don't give a damn.

reply to post by MegaCurious


hopefully you say..... ?!?!?!?!?

let Iran get that fuel from Russia
and remove the military option from the table on Iran
and then HOPEFULLY ... everybody is at peace

dont ever say HOPEFULLY THEY WILL STRIKE SOON
that is just wrong at so many level saying that ..wtf ...

Fuel or no fuel, Israel wants Iran attacked.

Hell, they'll probably do it anyway, then demand a "New" Jewish homeland somewhere else that doesn't cause cancer or make one's bagels to glow in the dark!

Kinda makes me remember back when the Israelis bombed the Iraqi Osirak reactor site, claiming there was a secret nuclear weapons development site beneath it. Guess what? There wasn't any secret nuclear site underneath, confirmed when we invaded.
So, once again they want to blow up a power station, based on the premise that the Iranians have evil intent and are hell bent on developing nuclear weapons, which they'll use to attack Israel or, shudder, give to Al Qaida trrrrrrists to attack America.

And they expect us to believe all this? No, it doesn't matter whether they think we'll believe it or not, as long as they say it, it is the truth.
There is one nuclear armed Middle Eastern country, guilty of a clandestine nuclear weapons programme, guilty of proliferation and attempted (or perhaps actual) selling of nuclear weapons to others....and it isn't Iran!