Spokane7
59°
January 2, 2012 in Nation/World
Iran reports progress on nuclear program
In this image made available by the Iranian Students News Agency, an Iranian navy vessel launches a missile during a drill Sunday in the sea of Oman.
(Full-size photo)
TEHRAN, Iran – Iran said Sunday that its scientists had produced the country’s first nuclear fuel rod and its navy had test-fired a new medium-range surface-to-air missile, announcements that were likely to heighten concerns about the country’s disputed uranium-enrichment program.
The Islamic Republic News Agency reported that the nuclear fuel rod had “passed all physical and dimensional tests” and had been inserted into the core of Tehran’s research reactor.
Iran had said that it would be forced to manufacture the rods because it is barred from buying them on foreign markets. The tubes contain pellets of enriched uranium that provide fuel for nuclear reactors.
Tension has been growing between Iran and the West since a report by the United Nations nuclear inspection agency in November expressed serious concerns about a possible military dimension to the country’s nuclear program.
The United States and its allies accuse Iran of trying to develop nuclear payloads for missiles. Tehran denies the charge, saying it needs the technology to generate electricity and produce radioisotopes to treat cancer patients.
The State Department had no immediate comment Sunday on the Iranians’ statement that they had produced a fuel rod.
A physicist who tracks nuclear defense issues, Edwin Lyman, said the claim had “no direct relationship to weapons development” by the Iranians. However, he added, “it does say something generally about their increasing sophistication in nuclear fabrication.”
The ability to manufacture fuel rods, if true, reveals that Iran has “expertise that could be transferred to weapons development,” said Lyman, senior scientist for the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington.
On Saturday, President Barack Obama signed a defense bill that includes new penalties against financial institutions that do business with the Islamic Republic’s central bank, an attempt to hamper Tehran’s ability to fund the program. The head of Iran’s Chamber of Commerce, Mohammad Nahavandian, dismissed the move Sunday.
“The Iranian nation and those involved in trade and economic activities will find other alternatives,” Nahavandian was quoted as saying by the semiofficial Iranian Students News Agency.
The European Union is also considering additional measures that could include an embargo on Iranian oil imports, a vital source of hard currency for Tehran.
Iranian officials threatened to retaliate by closing the strategic Strait of Hormuz to oil tanker traffic, although they later appeared to back down by saying the country would not do so for now.
On Saturday, Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, said the country had proposed a new round of talks with the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany, according to the Islamic Republic News Agency.
The last negotiations between Iran and the group – the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany – were held last January in Istanbul, Turkey.
State TV reported that the new missile was tested during military exercises in international waters near the Strait of Hormuz.
“It’s equipped with state-of-the-art technology and a built-in system that enables it to thwart jammers,” spokesman Rear Adm. Mahmoud Mousavi was quoted as saying.
A prominent Iranian lawmaker, Ismail Kowsari, told the semiofficial Fars News Agency that the 10-day drill was part of preparations to block the channel if sanctions were imposed. But Mousavi reiterated that there were no plans to do so.
“We won’t disrupt traffic through the Strait of Hormuz,” the Iranian Students News Agency quoted Mousavi as saying. “We are not after this.”
Salmonella linked to chicken handling 
polistra on January 02 at 3:38 a.m.
We’re worried about this because a non-nuclear Persia is a great target for our mindless saber-rattling and wild rhetoric.
When Persia has nukes, we’ll have to treat them with respect, and that’s a horrible prospect for American rulers. It means one less excuse for infinitely increasing military budgets, one less country that we can casually invade and occupy.
Diana on January 02 at 7:25 a.m.
Or we could bomb them into kingdom come, as Rick Santorum suggested, but he’ll never have the opportunity to do that, thank goodness. America has a huge appetite for another war in the Middle East, amirite?
It would probably just be easier to send a check directly to Halliburton and forget the whole thing.
The_Seer on January 02 at 10:30 a.m.
Iran is correct and fully within their rights as a sovereign nation to pursue a nuclear weapons program.
The U.S. never picks on someone who can respond in kind and Iran knows that. We like wars against countries who don’t even have a military.
And still lose.
valleyman on January 02 at 1:56 p.m.
Oh really Seer? What was the COLD WAR?
And again… you teach our children. What a shame…
The reason this two-bit thug regime shouldn’t be allowed nuclear weapons is because they are A STATE SPONSOR OF TERROR!
My goodness, you people are crazy… Good old liberal put down the USA because you have a huge guilt complex…
nslopeofw on January 02 at 2:06 p.m.
A big thank you goes out to Barry for the great leadership and defense of our nation. We are so glad to have a leader who cares about the security of our nation first, and has held Iran’s feet to the fire over their need for nukes…………oh wait…………….sorry, it was the last leader that cared about our security, this one cares about mandatory health care for all.
Never mind! Sorry.
ManleyPointer on January 02 at 2:13 p.m.
Seer, you REALLY think that the US “picks on” poor, innocent nations, like a schoolyard bully picking on the class sissy? Wow.
detroitdude on January 02 at 2:33 p.m.
What’s getting really annoying is all the saber rattling about this. They want nukes, as a country they can pursue whatever they want. I’m sure there are plenty of nations in the middle east and Europe that don’t like it, let them put the pressure on, we seriously need to remove ourselves from this armpit of the world.
“The reason this two-bit thug regime shouldn’t be allowed nuclear weapons is because they are A STATE SPONSOR OF TERROR!”
Funny, I bet your run of the mill Afghan or Iraqi thinks the same about this country.
“We are so glad to have a leader who cares about the security of our nation first, and has held Iran’s feet to the fire over their need for nukes…………oh wait…………….sorry, it was the last leader that cared about our security, this one cares about mandatory health care for all.”
LOL, seriously?
Terrorist attacks on America under GWB:1
Terrorist attacks on America under BHO: 0
Osama bin Laden’s killed by GWB:0
Osama bin Laden’s killed by BHO: 1
I think you got mixed up and were writing in reverse there, nslopeofw. Further, in terms of 9/11, calling it a “mistake” or that Bush “dropped the ball” on that one is being EXTREMELY generous in terms of criticism, considering the fact that he knew for a month ahead of time “Bin Laden determined to strike in US” and did nothing. Considering he then invaded a sovereign country that had nothing to do with it for no reason and got 4500 Americans killed, spent us into oblivion. Yeah what a great Prez, keep living in that little world :)
ManleyPointer on January 02 at 2:39 p.m.
Please, President Obama did nothing more than continue his predecessor’s policies, which resulted in our intelligence and military communities locating and taking out bin Laden. I gave credit to President Obama at the time for giving the military the green light to kill him, but that was the extent of his achievement in that matter. I still think that was a gutsy thing to do. But saying that President Obama “got” bin Laden mischaracterizes the situation.
The_Seer on January 02 at 2:49 p.m.
The “cold war” was a series of proxy battles where the U.S. engaged smaller nations who couldn’t defend themselves instead of directly confronting the Soviet Union. And lost mostly every time.
When was the last time the U.S. invaded a nation with nuclear capacities?
When was the last time Iran invaded another nation?
I’ve seen bellicosity in foreign policy and it’s been mainly from my own country trying to make the world safe for corporate imposed hegemony. If students in my classes come to that discovery as well, good for them. It will be much closer to the truth than what they receive in textbooks published by right-wing outfits that view U.S. history from a very uncritical perspective.
ManleyPointer on January 02 at 2:53 p.m.
Well, I guess you and I have very different views of history, seer. Good luck to you.
valleyman on January 02 at 3:20 p.m.
The problem is MP, he teaches our kids… Otherwise, I’f happily let him have his own revisionist liberal view…
Diana on January 02 at 4:34 p.m.
nslope, perhaps you should put on a uniform and get over there and join the fight.
nslopeofw on January 02 at 5:20 p.m.
Love too, Diana, but like you, i’m too old. They would never take my old, out of shape azz. Fairly certain there is an age cut off, and i’m past it.
i would go over there if i was allowed guns and the right to smoke those that hate America and all we stand for. We could go together, and you could show me your shooting and military skillz from when you were in.