Bitcoin Forum

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia plans to sign a contract with Iran this year to build two more nuclear reactors at its Bushehr power plant as part of a broader deal for up to eight reactors in the Islamic state, a source close to the negotiations told Reuters on Thursday.
Related Stories

It was not immediately clear how this might affect six global powers' talks with Iran addressing disputed aspects of its nuclear program. Iran has resisted demands for cuts in its uranium enrichment capacity, pointing to plans for a future network of nuclear power stations.

Western powers want any lasting agreement with Iran to put to rest suspicions that it could develop nuclear weapons-making ability through enrichment. Iran denies any such intent.

The talks ended last week with little progress; they are to resume in Vienna in June.

Russia, one of the six powers, built Iran's only operating nuclear power reactor, at Bushehr.

"Russia and Iran may sign an intergovernmental agreement this year on building from four to eight nuclear reactors, and, under the deal, the contract for the construction of the first two reactors as additions to Bushehr," the source said.


Russian state nuclear corporation Rosatom said earlier it was in talks with Iran on the potential construction of more reactors there but revealed no details. Rosatom officials could not immediately be reached for comment on Thursday.

Longstanding Western fears that the Bushehr project could yield spent fuel of use in nuclear weapons - something it denies it is seeking to do - receded after Iran promised to send the material back to Russia.

Moscow voted for four rounds of U.N. Security Council sanctions against Iran over its contested nuclear activity but has sharply criticized additional measures imposed by the United States and European Union, calling them a hindrance to diplomacy in search of a permanent settlement with Tehran.

Video from Reuters @ http://news.yahoo.com/russia-may-build-eight-nuclear-reactors-iran-134635604.html (http://news.yahoo.com/russia-may-build-eight-nuclear-reactors-iran-134635604.html)
I know the western freak show over Iran going nuclear is way overblown but it is sure used as a boogyman by neocons (the war on terror was yesteryear's boogy) to maintain support w/i the republican party by pretending to be defense hawks which shrouds their whoring for MIC profits. Anyone remember the clip of Obama whispering to Putin prior to his reelection saying that afterwards he'd have more leeway in foreign affairs.. I wouldn't be surprised if this Ukraine stuff and this nuclear biz is all meant to keep money flowing to weapons and tech innovation for all related top world companies as sort of a shell cold war 2.0 game. It's obvious to anyone w/ any semblance of intelligence that the US has already sold the farm and there's no financial way out besides inflation and war games to provide cover and shift domestic tension elsewhere the best they can. Think of the way North Korea plays their cards.

"Russia, one of the six powers, built Iran's only operating nuclear power reactor, at Bushehr."
This is the sort of disinformation that misleads the American public. Russia didn't "build" that nuclear power reactor. Russia "completed" the nuclear power reactor project that was abandoned by Germany following the 1979 Revolution. That project was the brain child of the US espoused by then US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, in his "atoms for peace" initiative. It supported the idea of building nuclear power plants in Iran to meet domestic energy demands in order to free up the extra hydrocarbons for export. Also, in the 60s/70s, it had been projected that Iran's oil reserves would have been exhausted by 2010 and the general consensus among the Western nations was that Iran needed nuclear power to secure its energy supply.
Today, the West pretends as if the idea of Iran wanting nuclear energy for domestic use is completely absurd.

Oke and you guys Iran will make Nuclear bombs with that?
I mean Only thing I heard is they want to make Nuclear energy not bombs.
Only people telling us Iran wants to bomb us are the Western goverments, and media.
And I dont believe them, Only they can have N-bombs they are like the bully only they can have the toys.

Oke and you guys Iran will make Nuclear bombs with that?
I mean Only thing I heard is they want to make Nuclear energy not bombs.
Only people telling us Iran wants to bomb us are the Western goverments, and media.
And I dont believe them, Only they can have N-bombs they are like the bully only they can have the toys.

A new deal with iran and one with china as well. boy we are just having a good old time here in the USA annoying every one of our global enemies instead of trying to fix what's broken about our own country.

This is retaliation for our undermining of the democratically elected government in Ukraine and then slapping on sanctions with the threat of more after Russia moved to secure its naval bases in the Crimea, which even an idiot could see Russia absolutely would have to do. This is power politics. We started it, they are retaliating. Its actually quite brilliant.

The West had no alternative to impose sanctions. USA, Russia and the UK signed an agreement in 1994 with Ukraine guarantying the Ukrainian borders, when Ukraine gave up their share of the soviet nuclear weapons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
If they did nothing, several NATO countries (Poland, Romania, Baltic countries, etc) would start asking is the alliance had any value. Like the 1994 agreement, the OTAN pact is just a scrap of paper.

Oke and you guys Iran will make Nuclear bombs with that?

This is the ideal choice for weapons grade fissile material.  A simple reprocessing of spent reactor fuel can easily be used to obtain enough material for an atomic weapon.    

The West had no alternative to impose sanctions. USA, Russia and the UK signed an agreement in 1994 with Ukraine guarantying the Ukrainian borders, when Ukraine gave up their share of the soviet nuclear weapons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
If they did nothing, several NATO countries (Poland, Romania, Baltic countries, etc) would start asking is the alliance had any value. Like the 1994 agreement, the OTAN pact is just a scrap of paper.

well that's pretty fucked. as psycho as russia is as a nation, they would probably have thought twice about invading the ukraine if they had nuclear weapons.

So going by that countries such as Libya and Iraq should have been armed with nuclear weapons, to prevent the Americans from invading them. And we should give nukes to North Korea as well.

Russia, Iran committed to expand cooperation

http://www.azernews.az/region/67394.html

More importantly, the Russian officials are looking in to the possibility of reviving the contract to supply Iran with five battalions of the S-300 air-defence systems, cancelled a few years ago by Putin.

So going by that countries such as Libya and Iraq should have been armed with nuclear weapons, to prevent the Americans from invading them. And we should give nukes to North Korea as well.

i'm not saying this country or that should be armed with nuclear weapons. but it does deter countries from invading your own. a nuclear weapon can be as much of a weapon as it is a defensive mechanism.

Having nuclear weapons is indeed a very good security insurance (I bet Ukraine wouldn't have the problems it has now with Russia, if it didn't give up the big nuclear arsenal in 1994, in exchange for paper assurances on its territorial integrity, including from Russia).

Possession of nuclear weapons don't guarantee anything. In addition to the nukes, you need sophisticated Intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), which can accurately target the enemy locations. As far as I know, Ukraine does not even possess a mid-range missile. Even if they get a few missiles from some other nation, the Russians will be able to shot down the missiles before they enter the Russian air-space, with their sophisticated S-300 and S-400 SAM batteries.

Even though north korea can't get their nukes very far, no one would even deign to invade their country.

After petroleum and natural gas, nuclear fuel is the most important source of foreign currency for Russia. So Russia might ignore the safety concerns in Iran, for the sake of additional revenue.

http://www.nucnet.org/all-the-news/2013/11/13/rosatom-s-foreign-portfolio-reaches-usd-66-5-billion

The only problem seems to be that its orientation guide is terrible. When the Koreans launch a missile to the Pacific, the Russians and Chinese better run for the bunkers.

It is clear there won't be any foreseeable reduction of nuclear weapons anywhere in the world after what is happening. On the contrary, more and more countries will try to build up their nuclear power to avoid being puppet nations which can be run over by the big powers.

There is a big difference between building a nuclear reactor and trying to build nuclear weapons. More and more countries are preferring nuclear energy, as it is the cleanest and cheapest form of energy available right now.

Of course it's a big difference, but I don't agree that it's the cleanest or cheapest kind of energy. When calculating the costs most of the time the price if disposing of the residues is overlooked. This might not be an immediate cost to assume but bear in mind that these residues have to be safely stored for centuries as they build up. On the long term it is a very high cost and has a very high environmental impact on  countries where uranium is extracted (just look at Niger and Chad around the areas where the French-managed uranium mines are located).