Iran Will Allow IAEA Inspectors
[Guest post by DRJ]
Iran today said it will allow inspectors access to its uranium enrichment facility at Qom:
“The presence of a second uranium-enrichment site that could potentially produce material for a nuclear weapon has provided one of the strongest indications yet that Iran has something to hide — despite its repeated assertions that its program is only to generate power.
That impression was reinforced by a close aide to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who said the site will be operational “soon” and would pose a threat to those who oppose Iran.
“This new facility, God willing, will become operational soon and will blind the eyes of the enemies,” Mohammad Mohammadi Golpayegani told the semi-official Fars news agency.”
The purpose of the second facility is to protect Iran’s nuclear facilities from outside threats:
“Given the threats we face every day, we are required to take the necessary precautionary measures, spread our facilities and protect our human assets. Therefore, the facility is to guarantee the continuation of our nuclear activities under any conditions,” he told the television.
Iran did not say when inspections would be allowed and a spokesman claimed Iran is in compliance with UN notification requirements:
“Vice President Ali Akbar Salehi, who heads Iran’s nuclear program, said on national television that inspectors from the IAEA could visit the site, though he did not specify when.
Salehi said there was nothing secret about the site and that Iran complied with U.N. rules that require it to inform the world body’s nuclear agency six months before a uranium enrichment facility becomes operational.
“Under (NPT) rules, we are required to inform the IAEA of the existence of such a facility 180 days before introducing materials but we are announcing it more than a year earlier,” he said.
The Iranians claim to have withdrawn from an agreement with the IAEA requiring them to notify the agency of the intent to build any new nuclear facilities and instead are now only subject to the six-month notification requirement before a facility becomes operational.”
The announcement followed President Obama’s warning of grave consequences unless Iran agreed to “a serious meaningful dialogue” over its nuclear program. The White House responded to Iran’s offer by urging Iran’s “complete and immediate cooperation with the IAEA.”
Iran seems to be following the North Korean playbook.
— DRJ
I repeat, nothing but military action will keep Iran from getting and using nukes. So Obama promises ‘grave consequences’? an empty threat, Obama will never take the action truly necessary to get the Mad Mullahs to back down.
And I blame Bush for not moving against Iran. Perhaps if he hadn’t been wasting American lives in Iraq, he might have had the resources and guts to do something about a far more imminent threat. And this second facility? Bush knew about it, knew it meant Iran couldn’t be trusted… and still he left town without doing anything. If/when Iran uses their nukes, Bush deserves a special place in hell for those who could have done something but were too weak to act. And Bush’s inaction on this should forever quiet his supporters who brag how brave Bush was to continue in Iraq. That was stubborness, true bravery would have led him to move against Iran, with or without ‘international community’ support.
steve sturm (3811cf) — 9/26/2009 @ 3:12 pm“Bush deserves a special place in hell for those who could have done something but were too weak to act.”
steve – According to Seymour Hersh, we invaded Iran several times under President Bush. Also, the left demanded that Bush stop acting like a cowboy, which they falsely claimed he did with Iraq, and work with allies in the case of Iran. Perhaps adding a fourth front to his wars, Afghanistan, Iraq, liberals at home, and then Iran, was too much to ask of Bush and the country. A large segment of the population certainly felt that way.
daleyrocks (718861) — 9/26/2009 @ 3:45 pmDuring the campaigns, didn’t Barry assure us that Iran couldn’t possibly pose a threat to the US?
Chuck Roast (d47868) — 9/26/2009 @ 4:20 pmsturm, your comments are quite silly.
SPQR (26be8b) — 9/26/2009 @ 4:36 pmSPQR: I disagree with your assessment of my terrific analysis. Am I wrong that Bush could have acted and, ignoring Cheney’s advice, chose not to? And his sin is compounded by Obama winning; Bush knew a lightweight was going to be President and still he did nothing.
Daleyrocks: since Bush ignored the Democrats and a good chunk of the public when they wanted the troops out of Iraq, so why would he have felt it necessary to coddle them/Iran? Bush didn’t let much stop him from doing what he thought was right, so what happened with Iran? Other than a going away F-U to the country?
steve sturm (3811cf) — 9/26/2009 @ 5:08 pmIran is using the North Korean playbook because North Korea won. Neither regime should have survived 1991, but the Democrats were too busy spending the “peace dividend” to buy votes to take them out. Both Bushes dropped the ball but Clinton and Obama don’t even know what a ball looks like. Madeleine Albright was MVP on Kim’s squad and it looks like HRC is trying for that distinction in the Iran game.
Republicans have often failed the country but, unlike the Democrats, they have rarely played for the other side.
Ken Hahn (c9f5b2) — 9/26/2009 @ 5:09 pmIf nothing else, Obama could have sent a message of hope and solidarity to the people of Iran when the protesters were in the streets, instead of “not interfering with internal affairs” like in Honduras.
So, 2 for 2 he backs the authoritarian tyrants rather than the democratic desires of the people.
With that as a background, he makes Carter’s foreign policy, no matter how flawed, out to be a paragon of virtue.
MD in Philly (d4f9fa) — 9/26/2009 @ 5:09 pmObama is the reincarnation of President Merkin Muffley (as played by Peter Sellers), from Dr. Strangelove. President Muffley was the one who said, “You can’t fight in here. This is the War Room.”
Let me be clear: Merkin. Muffley.
I think Obama is simply afraid to do anything. Meanwhile, I wouldn’t be surprised if Iran’s ally, North Korea, has threatened to turn Seoul into an ashtray if anyone messes with Iran.
Official Internet Data Office (918234) — 9/26/2009 @ 5:20 pmIran seems to be following the North Korean playbook.
And we seem to be following Jimmy Carter’s.
Kevin Murphy (3c3db0) — 9/26/2009 @ 5:23 pmAnd why wouldn’t they? That’s where they acquired the technology, so why wouldn’t they copy the successful politics as well?
Over at the Huffpo they’re commenting that somehow this proves Obama is a brilliant strategist. That somehow all of us who have been saying Obama is a sucker have been wrong because, and I don’t know why, sucking up to the Iranians while knowing that they’re lying is playing the game at a higher level.
Well, this isn’t the first time that a President has lied to his own people and covered up for his enemies because he needed to put on a dog-and-pony show for domestic political purposes. And it won’t be the last.
The NORKs know this. Apparently so do the Iranians.
What Bush did to Saddam Hussein was the exception.
So, if you want to believe UN sanctions are keeping a dictator in some fictitious box, or an oppressive regime has stopped its pursuit of nuclear weapons because we offered them a deal, then relax.
You again have a president who’s willing to tell you what you want to believe.
Steve (21a8b8) — 9/27/2009 @ 4:09 pmEdit to my last post: I mistakenly said Obama is lying to “his own people” and covering up for “his enemies.”
Obviously I reversed the two groups.
The Iranians are definitely not “his enemies.” If they were, he would have sought to become their president.
Just as he did in order to punish the crowd he and Reverend Wright and Saul Alinsky and Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dorn and Michelle have long identified as their personal enemies.
No one is Barack Obama’s enemy unless one of his associates have attempted to kill them.
Steve (21a8b8) — 9/27/2009 @ 4:14 pm