Iran deal could start nuclear fuel race - Saudi Arabia

[bananas]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-31901961

Iran deal could start nuclear fuel race - Saudi Arabia
By Barbara Plett Usher
BBC News, Riyadh
16 March 2015

A senior member of the Saudi royal family has warned that a deal on Iran's nuclear programme could prompt other regional states to develop atomic fuel.

Prince Turki al-Faisal told the BBC that Saudi Arabia would then seek the same right, as would other nations.

Six world powers are negotiating an agreement aimed at limiting Iran's nuclear activity but not ending it.

Critics have argued this would trigger a nuclear arms race in the region spurred on by Saudi-Iran rivalry.

<snip>

[bananas]

1. The Iran deal is going to create a whole new set of problems. nt

[truebluegreen]

2. A nuclear fuel race is not exactly the same as a nuclear arms race.

Or even close. Interesting conflation though...I assume Saudi Arabia is trying to scare the woefully fearful U.S. of A.

[bananas]

3. Actually, it is.

He's saying SA and other countries will want one-year breakout ability.

[truebluegreen]

5. Actually, it isn't.

From the article:

"I've always said whatever comes out of these talks, we will want the same," said the prince, Saudi Arabia's former intelligence chief.

"So if Iran has the ability to enrich uranium to whatever level, it's not just Saudi Arabia that's going to ask for that.

[bananas]

10. Actually, it is.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/US-Iran-cite-progress-in-nuke-talks-though-deal-is-unclear/articleshow/46649618.cms

The Obama administration is seeking a deal that stretches the time Tehran would need to make a nuclear weapon from the present two to three months to at least a year.

[truebluegreen]

11. "Times of India" ...."deal is unclear" nt

[bananas]

13. That's an AP article which was on the front page of google news today.

It was on the front page of http://news.google.com when I turned on my browser,
so I posted it to LBN: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141045655

Times of India is a mainstream newspaper in India, and they carrry AP articles like many mainstream news sites do:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Times_of_India

The Times of India (TOI) is an Indian English-language daily newspaper. It is the third-largest newspaper in India by circulation and largest selling English-language daily in the world according to Audit Bureau of Circulations (India).[2][3] According to the Indian Readership Survey (IRS) 2012, the Times of India is the most widely read English newspaper in India with a readership of 7.643 million. This ranks the Times of India as the top English daily in India by readership.[4]

<snip>

The Times of India issued its first edition 3 November 1838 as The Bombay Times and Journal of Commerce.[7][8] The paper published Wednesdays and Saturdays under the direction of Raobahadur Narayan Dinanath Velkar, a Maharashtrian Reformist, and contained news from Britain and the world, as well as the Indian Subcontinent. In 1850, it began to publish daily editions.

<snip>

AP is a non-profit unionized news organization:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associated_Press

The Associated Press (AP) is an American multinational nonprofit news agency headquartered in New York City. The AP is owned by its contributing newspapers, radio, and television stations in the United States, all of which contribute stories to the AP and use material written by its staff journalists. The AP staff is represented by the Newspaper Guild, which operates under the Communication Workers Union, which operates under the AFL-CIO.

As of 2007, news collected by the AP was published and republished by more than 1,700 newspapers, in addition to more than 5,000 television and radio broadcasters. The photograph library of the AP consists of over 10 million images. The AP operates 243 news bureaus in 120 countries. It also operates the AP Radio Network, which provides newscasts twice hourly for broadcast and satellite radio and television stations. Many newspapers and broadcasters outside the United States are AP subscribers, paying a fee to use AP material without being contributing members of the cooperative. As part of their cooperative agreement with the AP, most member news organizations grant automatic permission for the AP to distribute their local news reports. The AP employs the "inverted pyramid" formula for writing that enables the news outlets to edit a story to fit its available publication area without losing the story's essentials.

<snip>

[truebluegreen]

14. Actually, it doesn't matter who reported what the Saudis are trying to gin up,

it is still the Saudis trying to get someone else to take out their rival for them. I'm not biting, and neither should any of us.

[Jefferson23]

16. +1 n/t

[Fred Sanders]

6. They can have it if they are prepared to be bombed to the Stone Age in that year.

The fear of Peace Deal is driving them, and Bibi, and Republicans....mad with rage...and propaganda.

Do not buy in.

[leveymg]

7. KSA got its bomb when Pakistan did. Decades ago.

What utter horse shit this OP.

[bananas]

15. KSA doesn't have any bombs.

They have an agreement with Pakistan, but all of Pakistans nukes are tracked by the US, so whether they ever get delivered is questionable.

The unfortunate fact is that the situation is continuing to escalate.

[leveymg]

17. They don't have to, because Pakistan is their proxy nuclear force.

And, no, we don't have to take delivery. The country that's targeted will take delivery. But, really it's about deterrence of anyone who might consider targeting the Saudis or putting a move on their oil fields. There is no escalation, just mutual deterrence. That has been the established status quo for many years. Nothing that Iran does is going to disturb that.

[bananas]

21. "Possession is 9/10 of the law" - SA possesses shit.

edit to add:

For those who haven't been closely following this issue...

Saudi Arabia funded Pakistan's nuclear weapons development, with the agreement that Pakistan would give Saudi Arabia nuclear weapons on demand.

Yeah right, good luck collecting on that debt.

If Pakistan doesn't deliver, what is Saudi Arabia gonna do, sue them in World Court?

It's like a bookie trying to collect on a kidney - by suing.

It's bullshit, especially since the US has been monitoring Pakistan nukes since at least 2007.


Some references, for those from the show-me state:

Britain's BBC: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24823846

Iran's Press TV: http://www.presstv.com/detail/2013/12/10/339309/us-allowing-pakistan-to-keep-nukes/

[Fred Sanders]

4. Nuclear fuel is not nuclear fuel for weapons...Dictatorship and oppressive Saudi wants war....too bad for them.

[bananas]

8. Exactly what do you think these negotiations have been about?

The negotiations are primarily over Iran's enrichment facilities.
Enrichment facilities can turn reactor grade fuel into weapons grade fuel.

[Fred Sanders]

9. I know exactly what uranium enrichment entails, how long it takes, what it takes, and the various grades....do you?

Don't you think the experts negotiating know it even much better than you or I? Do you not think the best in the world, from 5 nations, know?

I trust the experts and scientists, you can trust who you like.

[truebluegreen]

12. He/she trusts the Saudis, apparently....

of all people.

[Bluenorthwest]

18. Yeah, if you review Fred's posts you will find he's been all over the map with the Saudis

Snowmen and lashed bloggers:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014986754

[truebluegreen]

19. Wasn't talking about Fred. nt

[Fred Sanders]

22. Apparently so do Israelis!

[bananas]

20. Frankly, I don't think you understand it at all.

If you did understand that the key issue is enrichment, you wouldn't have made the inane comment you did in post #4, because the only difference between fuel-grade and weapon-grade is enrichment level.

Duh.