McCain

[Bruce]

"SENATOR MCCAIN CALLS ON THE WEST TO BOYCOTT THE G8 SUMMIT IN ST. PETERSBURG
American senator John McCain of the Republican Party representing Arizona and known for his harsh statements against Russian authorities called on leaders of Western countries to boycott the G8 summit planned to be held in July of 2006, in St. Petersburg.

In his speech at the conference in Munich dedicated to security policy senator McCain said that President Putin finally stopped reforms in Russia and did not share democratic values practiced by the US and European Countries. According to the senator, Putin's Russia is neither democratically nor economically developed countries, which provides serious reasons for consideration of expedience of the visit of G8 leaders to the summit in St. Petersburg.

According to McCain, Russia could really help the US and Europe in the process of world arrangement after the cold war. However, instead of this the Kremlin keeps pursuing domestic and foreign policy contradicting democratic values and interests of Western countries.

As an example McCain mentioned the attitude of Russia to the Iranian problem. Even after Iran interrupted negotiations and restarted its nuclear program Russia hinted that it kept considering a possibility to sell short-range missiles worth $1 billion to it. The senator also accused Russia of pressurizing Georgia and Ukraine through raising prices of energy resources whereas Russia kept supplying gas at low prices to Lukashenko's regime in Minsk.

According to McCain, Russia also does its best to support dictatorship regimes in Central Asia. Finally, it continues the war in Chechnya that has already cost lives of 200,000 civilians and thus pushing the Moslem population towards radical Islamic fundamentalists. The senator cracked down on policy of Russian authorities towards civil liberties. McCain stated that Putin practically deprived mass media, parliament, governors and judges of independence.
<ref>lenta.ru, February 05, 2006

RVR"

 

The above is from the Russian article brought to us by RVR.   I am suprised at McCain's harsh stance towards Russia.  If his health holds up he may end up as our next President, so I wonder if he really believes that what he says about Russia will help our relations with Russia or rather he says it because he hopes that it will help his chances of winning the Republican nomination by helping his standing with the "hard right."  I tend to view it all as politics as usual. 

As far as his Iranian comments I agree in principle, but doubt we have the strength or resources to act.  Unfortunately, it looks like the US will let Iran get the bomb and then may only act if and only if Iran does something. 

I still can not figure out why Russia continues to help Iran, other than that they have such a huge population of Muslims comming in illegally as well as already in Russia legally that they have to cowtow to the Muslim line or its all a dollar game and Iran buys alot of Russian goods, so they look the other way or both. 

[Rvrwind]

Where is everybody getting this bull about Russia helping Iran?

Putin already said the last thing he wants to see is Iran with a nuclear weapon & will not help them achieve that goal, they are a lot closer to us that to the US. He has stated publicly that what he offered Iran was a compromise & one I might add that most of the world except the US is prepared to live with. That was that Russia would enrich the uranium for the Bashier Power plant & that Iran do not attempt to enrich it themselves. In that way Russia & the world can be sure they do not get weapons grade material. Russia in no way wants Iran in possession of a nuclear weapon.

The only thing Russia is doing is selling them some short range anti aircraft complexes that are obsolete anyway. When Iran wanted to upgrad to the S-300 complex, Putin said No & refused to even negotiate. The systems he is selling to them are a defensive weapon only & not a very good one at that. Didn't help Iraq one bit.

So why everybody is gettin' in a huff & saying Russia is helping Iran is beyond me. They are not & will not help Iran aquire a nuclear weapon. They offered a compromise that most world leaders accepted as an alternative to war so that Iran could still have their Nuclear Power Plant in Bashier, that's it, that's all.

I ain't a dummy I don't think, but if we could settle this peacfully & everybody can get what they want short of weapons grade uranium, wouldn't that be much preferable to another damn war!!! Or is America getting so friggin' arrogant in their big brother role that even a compromise is out of the question???

RVR-Canadian Cowboy/Agency Owner

[Bruce]

I am just going on what I read and hear on the news................................and it sure sounds like Russia at first was down right helping Iran, and now is trying to broker a deal with Iran and the West. 

Maybe I am wrong - it does happen on occasion.    Maybe its old jouralistic propaganda tendencies and we are not being fed the straight poop once again.  Maybe you are not being given the straight poop in Russia. 

All I know is that I perceive Russia is not cooperating with the USA and now Europe on this Iranian problem the way they could.  I do not know why and I hope you are 100% right in what you just posted.  I sure hope we do not get a big war out of this.  That Iranian leader sure needs some re-education, based on the statements I've read for sure.  Thanks once again RVR . 

[Rvrwind]

I too hope I am right as I am a lot closer to the fallout than you, LOL.

You are right when you say we can only go by what we are fed but I have had several articles come across my desk in regards to this & from the very beginning Russia (Putin) has been trying to convince Iran to allow Russia to enrich the uranium for the power plant.

From what I understand it takes a lot more technology than Iran currently has to make weapons grade uranium but that ain't saying they couldn't learn if they had the equpment to do so. Putin felt that if they did not have the equipment & that Russia just enriched the uranium for them that that would satisfy everybody. Russia put a lot of time & money into the Bashier Power Plant & they certainly don't want the Americans to level it. They also feel that Iran, like any other country, is entitled to dyversify their dependibility on oil products & are entitled to alternate sources of electrical power, just like Canada & the US. On this I wholeheartedly agree. But to keep them from developing weapons of mass destruction is paramont. With this deal Putin thought he had the solution that would spare Iran the fate of Iraq. Unfortunately a few US polititions started spouting off & pissed of the Iranian leader & now we are where we are. Tehran has started dealing with China because Putin won't bend to their demands.

Had they let Russia continue its course they could have saved everybody alot of grief, unfortunately I think it now has come too far & chances of a deal being worked out are slim to none. I am hoping Putin can convince Tehran to change its stance because if not I guarrantee you that there will be a lot more bloodshed in the middle east. Iran will not turn tale & run like Iraq did & I am willing to put money on the fact that if the US attacks Iran the entire Middle east will explode, period & the US better bloody well be prepared to accept the consequenses for starting WWIII.

I'll attach acouple of articles in regards to what Putin Had to say as soon as I can find them in my archives, here is one that touches briely on it:

<tit>TEHRAN IS LOOKING AT BEIJING
<stl>Iran is studying the Chinese alternative
<aut>Ivan Gorshkov
<src>Nezavisimaya Gazeta, January 25, 2006, p. 6
<sum>An update on the Russian-Iranian negotiations.</sum>
<cov>RUSSIAN-IRANIAN TALKS IN MOSCOW: HOW CAN SANCTIONS BE AVOIDED?

Two senior Iranian executives came to Moscow ten days before the vital meeting of the IAEA - Deputy Foreign Minister Mehdi Safari and Secretary of the Supreme Council of National Security Ali Larijani. The latter is Tehran's senior negotiator in nuclear program crisis settlement. The talks in Moscow are centered around the possibility of international sanctions against Iran and Russian's project of joint enrichment of uranium on its territory as a means of averting them.
Larijani came to Moscow yesterday and Safari on Monday. Safari met with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Alekseev and with Sergei Kirienko of Rosatom. Larijani met with Secretary of the Security Council Igor Ivanov, yesterday.
This is the last round of the Russian-Iranian talks before the meeting of the IAEA that may vote to transfer the Iranian nuclear folder to the UN Security Council. Sources in Moscow and Tehran maintain that there will be no more bilateral talks before the IAEA meeting on February 2. Kirienko said not long ago that he would visit Iran soon, but preparations for visits on this level usually take over a month. According to what information this newspaper has compiled, preparations for this visit have not even begun yet. The next series of meetings concerning a joint venture for enrichment of uranium is scheduled for the middle of February but will it take place?
Not everything in the Russian proposal that could settle the conflict suits Tehran. An Iranian diplomat told this newspaper that the Iranian delegation came to Moscow mostly to listen to exactly what Russia suggests. "We are interested in cooperation with the Russian Federation and specifically in the matter of enrichment of uranium, but everything depends on the Russians now," the diplomat said. "In the meanwhile, we consider alternative options, say, with China and Russia simultaneously and even with China alone."
UN Undersecretary of State, Robert Zellick, discussed the problem of the Iranian nuclear folder with the Chinese leadership in Beijing while the intensive negotiations in Moscow continued. Zellick met with State Council Premier Ven Tsjabao and Foreign Minister Li Tsiaosin. Like Russia, China stands for a diplomatic solution to the Iranian crisis and objects to the idea of sanctions.
Even before the IAEA meeting its General Director Muhammed El Baradei is expected to make a report on how Iran fulfills the accord on guarantees under the Nuclear Weapons Non-Proliferation Treaty. At first, he had intended to make it in March, and even set up a deadline for Iran for fulfillment of IAEA demands. El Baradei changed his mind under the pressure applied by Western countries including the United States, Great Britain, and France. He said yesterday that he was sending his envoy to Iran to compile the latest data on the Iranian nuclear program. Observers do not think that conclusions in the report will be favorable. It will make it easier for the IAEA to make the decision on transfer of the Iranian folder to the UN Security Council.


RVR-Canadian Cowboy/Agency Owner

[Bruno]

USA keeps pursuing domestic and foreign policy contradicting socialist values and interests of FSU countries.

Do you accept it ?

[RacerX]

RVR ~ I think your feelings towards the current American gov are well known, but wonder if I could ask a small favor: could you stop editorializing when you post news stories?

For example: "US Senator Spouts Off" clearly shows your leaning on this matter.  Me, I might have said "US Senator Urges Russian Boycott."

The way you are going, I would be surprised to see your next headline about our Senator McCain read: "US Senator is a POS"

[Bruno]

The Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has issued the Fatwa that the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons are forbidden under Islam

http://mathaba.net/0_index.shtml?x=302258

[/font]

[Rvrwind]

I write the headline to grab your attention & attract the reader to the article. Thats my job & I try to do it well.

As for:

"US Senator is a POS"

I have no idea what a POS is so it is highly unlikely that I would say it.

As for my stand on the US Government, It is no different than any other Government-I consider them a waste of flesh- to put it bluntly. So don't ever think I am only against the US Government because you would be totally wrong.

As for what I write I write what I consider the facts. The fact that US Newspapers have a US based audience & Western slant is no different than those I post leaning towards Russia. I only present the Russian point of veiw as opposed to a western point of veiw, if it contradicts then obviously somebody is bullsh!ttin' somebody, which we all know politicians would never do, right.:noidea:

But thanks for your comments, at least I know your reading what I write & I ain't wastin' my time.

Bruce here's the other articles I promised. Only a few as I don't have time to hunt down the rest but these should give you some idea. They are in no partcular order so you'll have to sort that on your own as I took them from several different issues & papers but they are all from 2006 IIRC. Enjoy:

<tit>IRAN: STORM AND ONSET
<aut>Aleksei Malashenko
<src>Vedomosti, January 23, 2006, p. A4
<sum>Malashenko, member of the Moscow Carnegie Center, elaborates on the Iranian nuclear program and distinctive features of the Russian-Iranian relations.</sum>
<cov>ALEKSEI MALASHENKO, MEMBER OF THE MOSCOW CARNEGIE CENTER, ON THE IRANIAN NUCLEAR PROGRAM AND DISTINCTIVE FEATURES OF RUSSIAN-IRANIAN RELATIONS

The Iranian nuclear program is a sacred cow of all Iranian politicians regardless of their convictions.
Might is what counts, and particularly when it is based on possession of nuclear weapons is the simple idea that took root in the Iranian mentality.
I do not really believe that the Iranians will manage to manufacture nuclear weapons. First, they cannot hope to make them fast and without the rest of the world being aware of it. The process will take several years. Second, they will not be permitted to make them. Even Russia will do its best to prevent this turn of events. It knows better than wishing in the Caspian region for a neighbor with nuclear weapons in its arsenals and a radically Islamic disposition.
So, the matter concerns the eternal longing for nuclear weapons rather than the actual manufacture of them. To some extent, Iran is like Russia that owes its geopolitical prestige first and foremost to the presence of nuclear weapons and delivery means in its arsenals.
President of Iran does not think the Iraqi scenario possible in application to his country. The United States knows better than want such a risk. America cannot hope to endure two or even two and half (there is also Afghanistan) wars at once. Bush is unlikely to impart the necessity of an invasion into Persia on the US Congress and particularly society whose support of the acting Administration is already below 40%.
Now that the Iraqi liberals capitulated the West all but left them to their own devices, President of Iran Mahmud Ahmadinejad feels confident. The country is with him. He knows that his soldiers will not run from the battlefield like Saddam's did. There are no Shi'ah vs Sunni intrigues or Kurds in Iran. If the West thinks that a civil war in Iran will help it, it had better thing again.
Neither can the possibility of the so-called asymmetric response to the military operation be entirely discounted. It may take the form of several terrorist acts against organizers of the operation as such. European capitals (and not only Madrid and London that already suffered from Islamic terrorism) cannot afford to dismiss the idea out of hand.
His confidence that the Americans will not go to beyond a certain point imbues the Iranian leader with a feeling of invulnerability and irresponsibility. Hence, his arrogance in dealings with Russia. On the one hand, the Americans are not going to take the risk. On the other, he reckons, if they nevertheless do, Moscow will not come to Iran's help in any case. It will abandon Iran like it abandoned Iraq in 2004.
Ahmadinejad is deliberately positioning himself in such a manner as to make Russia depend on him and not vice versa. This factor seriously disorganizes Russian foreign policy.
As a matter of fact, Russia is being defeated in the Iranian direction - if it has not been defeated yet. The following nuances are clear now. One: its clout with the Iranian partner is nearly as strong as it pretends. Two: it is practically dependant on Iran. Three: Tehran will not hesitate to sacrifice its kindly neighbor for the sake of its own goals and objectives. Four: Russia's cooperation with Iran (cooperation in the nuclear sphere included) will always be in jeopardy and Tehran may sacrifice it at any moment. Ergo: Iran is a strategic partner for Russia, while Russia is but a tactical partner for Iran.
Hence, the Kremlin's rushing about between its friendship with Iran and G8 presidency.
Russia hopes that it will not be forced to make the ultimate choice once and for all. Its ministers and deputy ministers are stalling for time - Russia itself does, for that matter. Ministers could be understood. For Russia, its relations with Iran are a symbol of independence of its foreign policy, another nuance that boosts its clout in the Caspian region, small but regular economic dividends (construction of only the first part of the nuclear power plant in Bushehr will earn it $1 billion).
Abandoning it all or seeing it all going down the drain is not easy. That is why Moscow will go on forgiving Ahmadinejad for his tactlessness. It will try to keep the Iranian folder from being handled by the UN Security Council and have the matter coped with on the IAEA level. Should the folder be forwarded to the UN Security Council, however, Moscow will do everything to thwart sanctions against Iran (they will hurt Russia itself) or at least secure a combined variant. In the meantime, everything will depend on Iran itself and its cooperativeness, not on Moscow at all.
So, what is the president of Iran really after?
A tangible triumph is something Tehran cannot count on. But the ability to keep world powers jittery, the awareness that they condemn the unpredictable Iran and therefore respect it and therefore fear it - is it not a triumph of sorts?
Iran will probably get the coveted political dividends. It will finally dawn on Ahmadinejad what he can trade concessions for - and that concessions are what Iran will eventually make is beyond doubt. That and the peace that will finally bee established will be presented by Iran as its victory.

<tit> THE PROBLEM OF S-300 SUPPLY OF IRAN REMINDS OF THE PROBLEM CONNECTED WITH MISSILE SYSTEMS SUPPLY OF SYRIA A YEAR AGO
Yesterday Vice-Minister and Defense Minister Sergey Ivanov stated that Russia didn't and does not negotiate with Iran about air defense missile systems S-300 supply of this country by Russia. According to the words of Strategy Analysis and Technology Center expert Konstantin Makienko, the situation reminds of the one which centered around Russia's delivery of missile systems to Syria. Let us remind, that after the information drain in the middle of January 2005, Sergey Ivanov denied that Moscow negotiates with Damask about "Iskander" and anti-aircraft missile systems "Igla" sales. However, a month later the Minister admitted that Syria is supplied with anti-aircraft missile systems "Strelets" (a mobile setting of four "Igla" complexes). And at the end of April 2005, Vladimir Putin made the situation clear. During his visit to Israel, he said that Russia planned to supply Syria with "serious systems".
"The negotiations really took place. Our military people were ready to supply Syria with new missile systems "Iskander", but I prohibited realization of this", stated Mr. Putin. As Makienko says, international negotiations about armament sales point to the fact, that, in case of information drain before entering into a contract, the sides either deny negotiation (like Russia did) or keep silent (like Iran did).
<ref>Kommerstant, January 14, 2006, p. 4

<tit>RUSSIA WILL EXPORT SYSTEM OF ANTI-AIRCRAFT DEFENSE TOR-M1 TO IRAN FOR DEFENSE PURPOSES
The contract for exporting zenith-missile complexes of the anti-aircraft defense TOR-M1 to Iran is "not connected" with the Iran "nuclear file", as the press-service of the Federal service in charge of military-technical cooperation declared to RIA Novosti.
"The contract was signed in full correspondence with the present standards of international law. The contract touches upon only armament of defense character, the usage of which as an attacking one is excluded a priori", as it is said in the message of the press-service.
<ref>RIA Novosti, January 13, 2006

<tit>WILL IRAN CREATE ITS OWN A-BOMB?
<aut>Sergei Leskov
<src>Izvestia (Moscow issue), January 10, 2006, p. 3
<sum>Tehran revives its nuclear program over the international community's protestations.</sum>
<cov>IRAN IS RESUMING ITS NUCLEAR PROGRAM

This Monday, the government of Iran announced revival of the national nuclear program over the United States' and EU's protestations. The statement was made even more scandalous by the fact that negotiations with the Russians that have just ended in Tehran. Government delegations discussed cooperation in the nuclear sphere and agreed to set up a joint venture in Russia to enrich uranium for the Bushier nuclear power plant. The key question, the one experts cannot reach a consensus on, remains unanswered: what are Iran's own capacities in uranium enrichment it regularly uses to scare the international community with?
The IAEA charter and the Nuclear Weapons Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran is a signatory of, do not forbid enrichment of uranium (Iran has a rich uranium field in Sagand in the center of the country). Nuclear energy production requires enrichment of uranium to 4%, military purposes to 90%. Academician Alexander Rumyantsev (as the nuclear energy minister, he headed nuclear talks for years) says, however, that the complexity of the enrichment processes is not linear. It means that the first steps are really difficult but things become easier afterwards. Does Iran have the secret of enrichment? Our consultant (he represents certain services) told this correspondent at the IAEA General Assembly in Vienna that Iran had mastered only the simplest manipulations so far, the so-called conversion of uranium in Isfahan. Rumyantsev also says that bona fide enrichment of uranium is beyond Iran's grasp and will remain beyond it for years to come.
There is, however, the so-called "black" market of nuclear materials and equipment where scandals burst out with alarming regularity. The so far worst scandal involved Abdul Han, the "father" of the Pakistani A-bomb, who turned secret technologies over to Libya, Iran, and North Korea. Iran avows that what uranium-enrichment equipment it covertly bought is meant for peaceful purposes only. The 500 centrifuges were made by Urenco (Great Britain - Holland). IAEA experts discovered that the equipment is dismantled and that Iranian specialists do not know how to use it. Moreover, enrichment of uranium requires several thousands centrifuges, not just 500. As for weapons-grade uranium, Iran does not have any at this point. It only has 40 tons of non-enriched uranium. Its global early consumption is estimated at 60,000 tons nowadays and only 35,000 tons are produced.
What does Iran need a nuclear program for - even a peaceful one - when it possesses the worlds second largest stock of natural gas and the third of oil? Referring to national security, official Tehran refuses to depend on oil and gas alone. The output of the Russian-made nuclear power plant in Bushier is estimated at 1 GWt. Iranian output is supposed to be brought up to 6 GWt by 2020. Along with the nuclear power plant, which is not even completed, a conversion plant, and uranium mines, Iran has two other nuclear objects. The research reactor in Tehran is one of them. It was built by the Americans in 1967, in the period of warm friendship with the shah. Argentine upgraded the reactor in 1992, and reduced the degree of enrichment of uranium from 93% (good for weapons-grade uranium) to 20%. Its output is 5 MWt, much more than the power of the Soviet reactor in Iraq the Americans grew suspicious about and blasted in the course of Operation Desert Storm in 1991. There is also a miniature (30 KWt) reactor built by the Chinese and an unsophisticated plant where heavy water is made in Arrack.
And yet, the Americans got a report from a source in the Iranian opposition on clandestine sides of Tehran's nuclear program three years ago. Washington has claimed ever since that Tehran is quietly working on an A-bomb program. It even gives the date: Iran will have an A-bomb to threaten the world within five years from now. Iran officially denounces all accusations and pleads innocent.

<tit>OVERCOMING A TENDENCY
<stl>The right + the left / the opposition
<aut>Garri Kasparov
<src>United Civil Front (the opposition weekly), No 2 (20), January 23 - 29, 2006, p. 1
<sum>The Action Committee of the All-Russian Civil Congress met on January 17.</sum>
<cov>The Action Committee

The Action Committee, executive body set up to work between meetings of the All-Russian Civil Congress the year round, met on January 17. Representatives of non-government and political organizations met on the premises of the Independent Press Center and discussed two issues of paramount importance for the country: the necessity of urgent unification of all democratic forces (1) and a coalition with left political forces (2).

Even as shortly as half a year ago, the idea of a broad oppositionist coalition encompassing everyone from right-wing liberals to left-wing patriots the United Civil Front has always promoted looked exotic to many. The meeting of the Action Committee proved it anything but. Both for the opposition and the authorities, that is. Because this is what the Kremlin fears the worst - consolidation of different forces of the opposition.

The document from the Kremlin recently posted on certain web sites confirms it. This instruction to the tame media concerning how the massacre in the Moscow synagogue should be covered states in no uncertain terms that the worst threat to stability in the country (i.e. stability of Putin's regime) must be reported as posed by an alliance between the Union of Right Forces, Yabloko, CPRF, and Motherland. The regime is doing what it can - well in advance, that is - to discredit their coalition. Political technologists on the Kremlin's payroll contribute as much as they can: they need to heat up xenophobic trends in society and persuade the country that fascists might come to power and therefore stick the label "fascists" on all opposition. Putin and his circle are supposed to look like the only anti-fascists to count on as a result. Who will want  fascists in charge? This is the Kremlin's reasoning, quite sound as it is.

It takes more than just opposition to challenge the regime that is overdoing things by far. A force representing broad strata of society is needed. The United Civil Front is working on it. Negotiations are under way on nominations of candidates for elections that will take place on March 12. The politician who has the best chances and who no member of the oppositionist coalition objects to should become the candidate. Regardless of what party of the opposition he exactly represents. What counts is the man's readiness to fight the United Russia dictatorship. His readiness to fight and defeat them. We have to overcome the existing tendencies and form a new political reality.

A representative of the moderate left wing may become such a candidate. After all, the so-called "turn to the left" is not a figment of Mikhail Khodorkovsky's imagination but an actual state of affairs. This is what is required. Do not try to frighten us with the claims that the communists will forget democracy as soon as they are back in the corridors of power. As things are, even some nationalists - who are not fascists by the way - subscribe to democratic demands: the necessity to do away with the one-party system, an end to tyranny of security structures, free and fair elections, and freedom of speech.

We must learn to come to terms to be successful. To come to terms with each other, not with the Kremlin.

<tit>BIRCH-RODS READY
<aut>Yevegeny Verlin
<src>Profil, No 2, January, 2006, pp. 47 - 49
<sum>An update on the Iranian nuclear problem.</sum>
<cov>The EU and official Washington are through with Tehran

<par>The EU and official Washington are through with Tehran. The Iranian nuclear folder will probably be forwarded to the UN Security Council now and Iran will be slapped with international sanctions. The West is unlikely to bring matters to an armed conflict, and that offers Russia a unique chance.

As soon as Tehran unsealed nuclear objects on its territory, the West knew that it did not need anything else to have the Iranian nuclear folder transferred to the UN Security Council's jurisdiction. With the prospect of an international economic embargo looming, that is. Diplomats of the European Trio (Great Britain, Germany, France) plus those representing Russia the United States, and China met in Beijing last week but failed to reach a consensus. Moscow and Beijing called for "tolerance" while the rest where anything but tolerant.

Foreign Minister of Russia, Sergei Lavrov, said that the time for sanctions has not come yet and that it was best for the time being to use the IAEA and its potential. This was the oblique way for Moscow to support the European Trio's idea of a meeting of the Board of the IAEA on February 2-3. "Russia will be prepared for it," Lavrov meaningfully said. He added that the Kremlin would try to have the meeting reach a consensus on the basis of the IAEA recommendations aimed to promote the non-proliferation regime.

This newspaper's attempts to get comments from the Foreign Ministry were futile which is not that surprising what with President Putin's words at the meeting with Angela Merkel of Germany that "this is a matter of utmost sensitivity, and I will not permit a single careless word from myself or the Foreign Ministry for that matter."

In the meantime, it became known - from the president himself that Russia has offered Tehran fuel for the nuclear power plant in Bushehr from a join venture established and operating on the territory of Russia.

Official Tehran responded promptly for a change. President Named Ahmadinejad said last Thursday that Iranian and Russian expert teams were discussing the idea and that Moscow should expect an Iranian delegation soon.

Ahmadinejad began speaking of the readiness to "cooperate with Russia" as soon as it became clear that the West ran out off patience (hardly surprising) and Moscow too. At the very least, this is the impression of foreign observers and Rose Gettemueller, the new Director of the Moscow Carnegie Center. Gettemueller is of the opinion that official Moscow does not share the West's opinion on Iran merely because of a difference in tactics.

As things are, Moscow does not have proof of either conviction - that the Iranian nuclear program is definitely aimed at manufacture of a bomb or that it is "entirely peaceful" as it claims.

<itl>An interview with Rose Gettemueller

Question: Has anything changed in the Iranian nuclear program since the late 1990's?

Rose Gettemueller: Changes in the Russian policy are what really counts. Fortunately, Moscow nowadays is more worried by Tehran as a source of a nuclear threat than it ever was in the past. It is also important that the Kremlin is at least contemplating the transfer of the matter to the UN Security Council.

Question: How closely has Iran approached the level of construction of a nuclear bomb?

Rose Gettemueller: Iran has persistently worked on it these last few years. On attaining the ability to enrich uranium that is. It has not attained it so far. So far as we know, North Korea has enough weapons-grade plutonium for six to eight bombs. Iran does not have a sufficient quantity for even one bomb for the time being, according to what intelligence reports. The Iranians' way to possession of nuclear weapons is still long. All the more important for us to apply diplomatic pressure and stop Tehran.

<tit>SENSING TROUBLE
<stl>Preparations for a war on Iran are getting into high gear
<aut>Vladimir Dernovoi
<src>Russky Kurier, No 5, February 6 - 12, 2006, p. 7
<sum>A resolution on stiffer sanctions against Iran was forwarded to the US Senate last week.</sum>
<cov>A ban on arms deals

The document suggests restriction of US aid to the countries whose companies invest in the Iranian energy production industry and a ban on arms deals between Iran on the one hand and Russia and China on the other.

Evan Bay, the author of the resolution is not an economist. Instead, he sits on the senatorial committees for intelligence and armed forces... Consequences of the document are easily predictable: sanctions today, air raids tomorrow. But air raids have to be prepared.

Hence the appeal in the resolution to the UN Security Council to introduce a stiff regime of international inspections (by the IAEA) in Iran. Something like what was forced on Iraq in the wake of the Persian Gulf War in 1991.

"A ban on arms deals with Iran, including the ones involving Russia and China, is necessary," the resolution stated. It stated as well that the decision of the government of Russia to sell $1 billion worth of weapons to Iran (29 antiaircraft complexes, that is) would "damage American-Russian relations."

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov already explained that the situation with the Iranian nuclear folder was not going to have any effect on the Tor-M1 complexes contract with Iran and that the deal in question met all international requirements.

As good a complex as it is, Tor-M1 does not reach far and therefore cannot solve the problem of defense of Iran. If Tehran gets some, the Iranian campaign will cost the United States a lot. Had Iran received some S-300 complexes, American victory would have been outright problematic but Ivanov says that the sale of S-300s is not even discussed. By the way, Israel should have approached Moscow for some S-300s because they are good against ballistic and guided missiles. After all, Iran may be counted on to strike back.

American intelligence reports that Chinese companies were involved in the work on germ and chemical warfare means and nuclear weapons for Iran. In 2001, Tehran bought from Ukraine twenty or so X-55 high-precision missiles with a range of up to 2,500 kilometers. They are much better than then American Patriots that defend the Israeli skies.

And yet, will Russia supply Iran with Tor-M1s? It depends on the maturity of the state and independence of its foreign policy. On the one hand, Moscow has to think of its interests in Iran that may earn it billions. On the other hand, this position does not exactly check with the course for membership in the World Trade Organization and integration into the international community.

The Americans may decide on a compromise yet. They may offer Russia a loan ($2-3 billion) for oil production somewhere in the northern seas. And Russia will scrap its advanced technologies quite in line with Washington's colonial policy.

In short, the resolution does not mean a war yet, but it is certainly a step closer to it.

RVR-Canadian Cowboy/Agency Owner

[RacerX]

[user=259]Rvrwind[/user] wrote:  Thats my job & I try to do it well.

I'm not exactly sure what "job" you are referring to, but if I was your employer I would be kicking your a$$ about now and just tell you: "look son, we all know how you feel about their President Bush, but you just need to suck it up and only present the facts."

[Rvrwind]

Well its a good thing you ain't my boss then because he knows a money maker when he sees one or should I say reads one.

The most read newspapers & listened to radio personalities are the ones that create controversy & I do that, no doubt about it & I get well paid for it, bonus:)!!

The way I look at it, as long as your pickin' at me, you're leaving everybody else alone and as long as you are, I know your reading & that is the bottom line, the more who read, the more I succeed.

Once again, Thanks for readin'!!!

RVR

[latstaley]

Here is the question I want answered. With a nation like Iran that has so much already in terms of Mineral and Energy sources, why do they feel they need to install an expensive nuclear power plant? When one considers the costs of building such a facility, how long would it take the before the potential revenue began to outweigh the costs vs using oil and natural gas to generate electricity? Doesn't this facility seem like a lot of money for a third world nation to be spending for energy generation when it would be much cheaper to generate electricity from Dinosaur juice?

[Rvrwind]

[user=720]latstaley[/user]- I read in one of the articles I came across, don't know if I can find it now or if I already posted it in News From the Russian Front. Anyway it was just a short blurb where some official from Iran felt that Dinosaur Juice as you call it won't last forever & they felt that by getting the Bashier power plant functioning that that would be of help to them in the long run.

Its my understanding that Russia actually built the plant & put alot of money into it which Iran is supposed to repay over the long term. The only question I see that really needs to be answered is - Why are they so damn adamant about enrichng the uranium themselves knowing full well it is going to cost them dearly if they try? I would think that agreeing to the deal Russia submited would be best for them & everybody else & save countless lives in the bargain.

The rest of the world is not against them getting the power plant up & running but they are against them having control over the uranium enrichment process as sooner or later they will learn to make a nuke.

RVR

[ronin308]

latstaley, as the some here have said not everything is about profit.  In this way Iran is being smart, probably smarter than the US is and definately smarter than some of their oil rich neighbors.

By financing a plant now when they have a lot of oil revenues coming in they are taking that money and ensuring a strategy that when the oil runs out they will continue to have the technology to move forward in the world.  It's a dramatic difference when you look at the Saudis who love to buy expensive toys and not invest into the future. 

Rvr, if they outsource the enriching process they do not obtain the energy independence that they would want.  Instead of trying to negotiate a solution like most "western" worlds would they take the same pigheaded no compromise stance that has gotten them and many Islamic governments into trouble in the past.  They seem to think the world should revolve around them. 

 

[latstaley]

They have enough methods for creating energy that don't rely on either fossil fuels or nuclear power to create energy. There is solar, hydroelectric, and wind. Sure, these aren't as dependable in regards to the 2 prior choices but they have much less environmental impact than nuclear or fossil fuels. Lest we forget, the Russians don't have the best safety record with their nuclear plants and the areas around Chelyabinsk and Chernobyl are going to be contaminated for quite some time to come. We are working right now on securing financing for a wind plant in the Texas Panhandle, so I have been trying to learn all I can about the process and the ins and outs of green credits and a lot of other technical jargon. Each one of those turbines costs around $1 million, but are capable of providing enough power for 200 homes. Sure, you would still need to suplement your electrical generation process with some fossil fuels, but it is entirely possible to create enough energy without creating a radioactive catastrophe. Sorry, I just don't buy planning for the future as a viable excuse for them wanting to develop a nuclear power plant, unless that future means developing nuclear capabilities for eradicating the Jews.

[TigerPaws]

[user=307]ronin308[/user] wrote:

latstaley, as the some here have said not everything is about profit.  In this way Iran is being smart, probably smarter than the US is and definately smarter than some of their oil rich neighbors.

By financing a plant now when they have a lot of oil revenues coming in they are taking that money and ensuring a strategy that when the oil runs out they will continue to have the technology to move forward in the world.  It's a dramatic difference when you look at the Saudis who love to buy expensive toys and not invest into the future. 

Rvr, if they outsource the enriching process they do not obtain the energy independence that they would want.  Instead of trying to negotiate a solution like most "western" worlds would they take the same pigheaded no compromise stance that has gotten them and many Islamic governments into trouble in the past.  They seem to think the world should revolve around them.  [color="blue"][size="4"][/size][/color]

[size="-1"]
 [/size][color="blue"][size="4"]ronin308,
 
 I hope you realize the L.A. area is one of the primary targets for a terrorist nuke? If you think for a minute Iran has any other reason to want a nuclear power plant than to be able to build their own Nukes than you are deluding yourself.

 Point in fact a 3 kiloton nuke which is more or less what was dropped on[/size][/color][size="-1"] [color="blue"][size="4"]Hiroshima now weighs 19 lbs and is easily transported by 1 person. The technology for this level of miniaturization has been around sense the mid 60's so it is well proven as well as being available. In fact the same basic technology can produce a nuke up to 10 kilotons and again is easily transported by 1 person.

 We should be far more than worried about Iran we need to be terrified. not because they (Iran) have the capability of launching a direct attack on the U.S. but because they would have no problem giving such a weapon to someone who would be happy to die in order to kill several million Americans.

 Like it or not someone is going to have to take out their mfg. capabilities before very much longer and will be either us or Israel because the Europeans simply do not have the guts to do anything any more. [/size][/color][/size]

[BC]

Tiger,

Your figures are quite a ways off imho... trust me.

You really do give Iran too much credit..

 I remember Sadaam sent all his fighters to Iran a while back.. maybe he sent his WMD there this time too?..  If so why would Iran need more?

[TigerPaws]

[size="4"][color="blue"]BC,

 WMD's such as gas or bio are difficult to keep and spread (weaponize) while an extremily sophisticated bio weapon is possible it is all but impossible for a country like Iran to develop such a weapon. On the other hand Nukes are fairly easy to make, small and very easy to deploy with devastating results. The technology is out the in wild and available to any country willing to buy it, the problem is and has always been uranium. Iran has several sources and the ability to mine their own, the rest is simply a matter of equipment.[/color]

 [color="blue"]Iran is a threat and will have to be delt with sooner or later the only question is when, who and how. Radical Islam will not be going away anyime soon either we deal the radicals a serious blow or we glow in the dark, the choice is yours.[/color]
[/size]

[TigerPaws]

[ronin308]

All of which are easily obtainable, heck watch and read enough of the right books and you get a head start on how to make a bomb, or learn basic physics and be that much further along.  The issue goes back to the actual ability to enrich the Uranium which is something the Iranians cannot do as of now, if they could they wouldn't be throwing a temper tantrum about it.  They might have a bit of enriched material gathered from various sources (including the US).

I'm curious though if a nuke is so easy to make, why hasn't one been made and used yet?  Especially with the lack of focus on a domestic security agenda and our laughable DHS.  

There's no doubt that Iran and the fundamentalist message it's leadership is spreading is a threat, but the question is can we nuetralize them in a different way?  After all our last attempt at controlling a "terrorist" state ended up with us creating more terrorist groups than there were in the past and reducing the good will we recieved after 9-11. 

 

[coco]

Don't worry Knack wii find out that is all the fault of France and his woman who don't shave.

[latstaley]

I think I would be a little more convinced they were not wanting to use this plant to become nuclear armed if they were using Thorium instead of Uranium. Thorium can be used as nuclear filler as well and is about 3 times as abundant as uranium. It is not possible to get weapons grade plutonium from Thorium, either.

[TigerPaws]

 While Thorium holds great promise the technology is still 30 plus years away from commerical use, the only reason Iran wants a reactor is to make Nukes.

 

[latstaley]

You seem to have a little knowledge of the Nuclear industry. I have been looking at investing some of my money into 2 separate outfits. There is Thorium resources out of Washington, D.C. and Novastar out of some place in Wyoming. Tigerpaws, do you know anything about either one of these firms? I don't usually play penny stocks, but these seem like a pretty good bet.

[TigerPaws]

latstaley,

 I think it all depends on your investment time frame with a 20 to 30 year development cycle it will be a LONG time before you if ever see a return on your money. There is a very good reason those companies are penny stocks, then again it all depends on how much you are willing to put a high risk and forget about the money for many years to come.

 Personally I would not invest .10c in the technology, the real future is in Fusion Energy but then again that is 25 to 30 plus years away as well.