/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Iran under Shah:Nuclear approved



Zulkiflim
09-30-2006, 02:41 AM
Salaam,

For those westerner who say that Iran has no right to nuclear technology then do read this..

[PIE]Chronology of Iran's Nuclear Programme


1957 The United States and Iran sign a civil nuclear co-operation agreement as part of the US Atoms for Peace program.

1957 The Institute of Nuclear Science, under the auspices of the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO), moves from Baghdad to Tehran, and the Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, takes a personal interest in nuclear energy.

1959 The Shah orders the establishment of a nuclear research centre at Tehran University.

1960 Iran arranges to establish a 5MW research centre at Tehran University. The United States is supplying a research reactor, it also sells Iran many hot cells.

11 February 1961 The US Joint Chiefs of Staff suggested to place nuclear weapons in Iran as part of its close links with Iran.

1964 During his visit to the United States the Shah decides to start an ambitious plan for nuclear power.

September 1967 The United States supplies 5.545kg of enriched uranium, of which 5.165kg contain fissile isotopes, to Iran for fuel in a research reactor. The United States also supplies 112kg of plutonium, of which 104kg are fissile isotopes, for use as "start-up sources for research reactor."

November 1967 The 5MWt pool-type, water-moderated research reactor supplied to Iran by GA Technologies of the United States goes critical, using 5.585kg of 93% enriched uranium supplied by the United Nuclear Corporation to the United States.

1 July 1968 Iran signs the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) on the day it is opened for signature. Iran ratifies NPT on 2 February 1970.

March 1974 The Shah announces that Iran intends to generate 23,000MWe at nuclear power plants "as soon as possible." The first reactor in Bushehr nearly completed by 1978.

11 April 1974 US State Department says the United States considers co-operation with Iran in the field of nuclear energy as an alternative means for energy production to be a suitable area for joint collaboration and co-operation. The majority of reactors are to be built by the United States.

June 1974 The Shah says that Iran will have nuclear weapons, "without a doubt and sooner than one would think." ("The Shah Meets the Press," Kayhan International)

June 1974 Atomic Energy Organization of Iran Chairman Akbar Etemad and the Shah travel to Paris, where France and Iran ratify a preliminary agreement for France to supply five 1,000MWe reactors, uranium, and a nuclear research centre to Iran.

June 1974 The United States and Iran reach a provisional agreement for the United States to supply two nuclear power reactors and enriched uranium fuel.

20 October 1974 A State Department document says the United States and Iran are preparing to negotiate an agreement that would permit the sale of nuclear reactors as well as enriched fuel "at levels desired by the Shah." The United States also notifies the Shah of their support for Iran's proposal to buy up to 25% interest in a commercial uranium enrichment plant.

November 1974 Iran signs agreements to purchase two 1200MWe pressurised water reactors (PWRs) from the German firm Kraftwerk Union (KWU) to be installed at Bushehr and two 900 MWe reactors from Framatome of France to be installed at Bandar Abbas. Under the contracts, France and Germany will provide enriched uranium for the initial loading and ten years' worth of reloads. The French reactors are to be built under license from Westinghouse of the United States.

January 1975 US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and Iranian Finance Minster Hushang Ansari sign a broad trade agreement that calls for the purchase of eight reactors valued at $6.4 billion. The US Atomic Energy Commission agrees to supply Iran with fuel for two 1,200MWe light water reactors and signs a provisional agreement to supply fuel for as many as six additional reactors with a total power capacity of 8,000MWe.[/PIE]

From above you can see that the US wanted to support Iran nuclear research and propogation...

But there is a diffrence,it was under their Installed DICTATOR...

the Shah

What happen after the POPULAR UPRISING against the Shah oppresive rule..

Continue below..

http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.u...chronology.htm
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...articleId=3096

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

http://www.patriotdaily.com/bm/blog/...pporter-.shtml

Of course there are more article if you google for it.

So the US wnat to give power to those under it thumb but not to those whom are not.Or those it cannot coerce or force eg NK or China.

So Hyprocrisy.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Woodrow
09-30-2006, 04:03 AM
I'll agree with you on this
Reply

Keltoi
09-30-2006, 04:48 AM
It is not hypocrisy to support nuclear technology for a friendly government and oppose it to an unfriendly one. It is simply politics.
Reply

KAding
09-30-2006, 12:26 PM
Kinda proves the point that it isn't about keeping down Muslims, but rather about keeping down regimes that are hostile towards the US.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Zulkiflim
09-30-2006, 04:27 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by KAding
Kinda proves the point that it isn't about keeping down Muslims, but rather about keeping down regimes that are hostile towards the US.

Salaam,

You are correct keeping down regimes that are hostile towards the US ..

But these regimes are also hostile to ITS OWN PEOPLE....

So Hyprocrisy,democracy for US ,,,suffering and oppresion for the inhabitant of that land..

Is this democracy?Your desire ,your want,your wishes,,,at the cost of the lands inhabitants?
Reply

Annie
09-30-2006, 08:54 PM
Salams very intresting indeed
Reply

starfortress
09-30-2006, 11:51 PM
It is not hypocrisy to support nuclear technology for a friendly government and oppose it to an unfriendly one. It is simply politics.
Hi
Yes,it is simply politics,the word 'politics' comes from the Greek 'poly' meaning 'many', and 'tics' of course are bloodsucking parasites.Just for info.
Reply

therebbe
10-01-2006, 03:28 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Zulkiflim
Salaam,

You are correct keeping down regimes that are hostile towards the US ..

But these regimes are also hostile to ITS OWN PEOPLE....

So Hyprocrisy,democracy for US ,,,suffering and oppresion for the inhabitant of that land..

Is this democracy?Your desire ,your want,your wishes,,,at the cost of the lands inhabitants?
What is Democracy? Giving the people a choice to decide what they want. Now if they decide bad, then they pay for what they get.

It's very simple... your just in need of 1st grade vocab.
Reply

starfortress
10-01-2006, 09:02 AM
:sl:

Hi
The fact that the US is governed for the richest,big multinational corporation,the exploiters,the bankers etc.So all the decision which connected to foreign policy must be made to become friendly to the title that i mentioned above.And all of them are try to make a friendship with a few wealthy families who control the world natural resources.

And the real threat to US decision is nuclear power ownership by other country whose not aligned with them, because if every little country has a nuclear weapons it becomes very hard for the US to engage in military action,like what they just did to Iraq and Afghanistan.See how easy for them to bent down those both country.The worse part is,they also act like they already achieve the nation of ideal.Unfortunate for the US soldiers,citizen,workers and all for those whose died in war,they are actually die for some industrialist and profit seekers.

It is Hypocrisy,but not at the first place to me.Believe it or not all the action seems done by a blood sucking parasites.
Reply

Muezzin
10-01-2006, 09:47 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by therebbe
It's very simple... your just in need of 1st grade vocab.
I think everyone should restrain from making comments like this in the future. It's rude and the poster usually ends up making a grammatical error in some ironic twist of fate.
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
10-01-2006, 10:22 PM
how long do u think it will take for iran to get attacked?
Reply

starfortress
10-02-2006, 05:05 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Mazed
how long do u think it will take for iran to get attacked?
:sl:

If the US attacked Iran,the consequences would be catastrophic, including a possible American retreat under fire in Iraq.But they are not going to attack on Iran in the current situation,unlike Iraq the Iran regimes have more superiority in military power and not totally isolated from world.When i heard "Iran" another words also cross in my mind is Hezbollah and Iraqis shiite.There are also significance numbers of Iranian spread all around US.Of course Bush administration already knew this thing.

The only thing US have to do for now is waiting for a perfect condition.They also working hard from diplomatic table with intention to fluence and promote their agenda to other nations and security council.

Many people do not know,the Iran regimes is almost to achieve a self sufficiency in military stuff producing.They also produced from small to medium armed product like shoulder rocket launcher,man portable air defence system,mine layer and unguided artilery rocket system in large scale.We have seen it been used effectively against IDF by Hezbollah in asymmetrical war.



Another advantage for Iran is their Missiles System capability,and some of them could reach the european nations,thats not a good situation to start a war.The only safe way for US is to influence the security council in order to isolate Iran Regime totally from the world societies.The same tactics they had applied to Iraq after the 1st Gulf War.
Reply

Zulkiflim
10-02-2006, 06:22 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by therebbe
What is Democracy? Giving the people a choice to decide what they want. Now if they decide bad, then they pay for what they get.

It's very simple... your just in need of 1st grade vocab.

Salaam,,

You eman it is the people choice to install Shah who oppress them?

Wow,wonder why the Iranian made a popular uprising.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 56
    Last Post: 12-08-2007, 07:58 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-20-2007, 06:30 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-14-2007, 10:34 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-16-2006, 06:05 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-10-2006, 07:12 PM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!