> Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, said that Tehran had received nearly 197 tons of of uranium concentrate powder needed for the enrichment process, in exchange for 11 tons of low enriched uranium (LEU).
> Salehi said that Iran had carried out the exchange with Russia in accordance with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s letter regarding compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Protocol of Action (JCPOA), which instructed that Iran first take delivery of the yellow cake before exporting the LEU.
This is really good news. Basically, yellow cake is "raw" uranium that takes months to turn into the enriched stuff they sent to Russia. While still classified as LEU, some of what they had was enriched to a higher grade than necessary for fuel use, indicating that it was likely intended for possible weapons use in the future. That's now gone.
Also importantly, this was one of the terms of the deal that some experts worried Iran would refuse to comply with.
More Jewish sources:
I've been extremely surprised how well the Iranians have managed to accomplish their goals. Not only did the sanctions get lifted, they still have the ability to develop nuclear weapons within a short amount of time. That's basically having a soft nuclear deterrent on you.
Take that along with the massive amount of influence they've been developing in Iraq (not sure how much they've gained in Syria), and Iran is sitting mighty happy as far as middle eastern geopolitics is concerned.
I doubt they could produce a nuclear weapon with relative ease like everybody expects. At least, a usable one. That shit's hard, and expensive. Still, the fact that everybody acts like they can makes it effective in scaring people like having the actual ability would.
You could actually with the material they have.
But it wouldn't be a conventional nuclear weapon as the nuclear material would not be part of the chain reaction that creates the explosion but rather to 'salt' a conventional weapon with adding radiation. This is known as a "dirty bomb".
Both the US and UK government believe it is very likely that this with happen before the end of this century.
A dirty bomb is more akin to a biological weapon than a nuke. Not many are going to die from the explosion it's the fall out that's going to get you. And frankly with all the missing yellow cake from when the USSR fell chances are if a dirty bomb goes off it won't be because of Iran.
Iran's supreme leader said " Israel won't exists in 25 years" wouldn't put it past them to indeed be suicidal. They want their damn 72 Virgins. http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/10/middleeast/iran-khamenei-israel-will-not-exist-25-years/
Iran's government is pretty schizophrenic.
Of the top of my head, this article is a pretty good showcase of how all-over-the-place its policies can be:
(You can also see the obvious bias and poor English in places, so do check sources and take a grain of salt before accepting anything written there as fact)
Bush and Cheney's advisers actually advised them against invading Iran because of their large conventional military that could have easily waged guerrilla warfare across the country which itself is pretty huge.
Militarily invading Iran would be the worst decision ever and would have bankrupted our country alot more then Iraq+Afghanistan and we would have seen tens of thousands of causalities in the first few months.
The US can't make Iran their puppet and there isn't any reason why we should anyway. Iran are the good guys of the middle east for the most part. Our allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar are the cause of most of the regions problems.
He didn't mean that in terms of Israel being nuked or whatever, he just meant that in 25 years there won't be a Jewish-state called "Israel" located in Palestine, essentially he was just implying there will be an arab state or a multi-ethnic and pluralist one there instead of a state that favors jews over arabs
Except if Iran were suicidal, we'd probably be suspecting a lot more clandestine support for jihadists than we actually do. Iran's policies have all been towards state-building, with who they fund outside of their nation, to how they develop within it. Even if the Ayatollah went nuts, there's enough state-building interests within that nation that it wouldn't last.
They need to seem really anti-West, so the religious leaders provide that rhetoric, while state organs operate in compliance. This way, they keep much of the more still revolutionary minded populace that they've built, satisfied that the government is indeed representing the interests of the 1979 revolution, while actually doing things necessary to build a functioning nation with the ability to project power. Support for the revolution still has quite a lot of strong supporters, despite even very conservative leaders (e.g. Ahmedinejad) making motions to weaken the Ayatollah's power in government.
But Iran has voiced their hate for Israel on multiple occasions. And correct me if I'm wrong, do they not support Hezbollah (spelling) a major terror organization in the region? Saying they're the good guys if the Middle East may be a bit extraneous.
Iran's leaders and most of its citizens are vocal in their disdain for the Israeli government but they still make it clear that they just don't like the government and its policies and its not that they don't like Jews, Iran has a large Jewish population and Iran's leaders are very respectful of Judaism and any Jews who aren't linked to the Israeli government.
They do support Hezbollah but its a large stretch to call Hezbollah terrorists, Hezbollah does not intentionally target civilians unprovoked like Al-Qaeda, they only launching rockets at civilian Israeli areas during the war as reprisals when Israel would drop tons of bombs on Lebanese civilians ares where Hezbollah wasn't operating. Hezbollah has been accused of involvment in the Marine Corps bombing and in the bombing of the Argentinian embassy but if you look past what the MSM will tell you about those the evidence for Hezbollah's involvement in those is actually really thin. Hezbollah also legitimately and legally participates in Lebanon's politics and hold seats in their parliament and treats civilians of all religions and ethnic groups fairly and never targets them except in retaliation during war like I mentioned so its not really fitting to call them "Terrorist" like we called Al-Qaeda.
Right now Iran has 20 times more then the US to fight ISIS because Iranian soldiers are on the ground fighting them now and have been for a long time. Iran also does not generally support groups that target America (like Al-Qaeda). Virtually all of the terrorist groups that threaten the US are funding mostly by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Kuwait.
Unlike Saudi Arabia or Qatar Iran also has a parliament and hold presidential elections and is one of the most democratic governments in the middle east, even though the presidential candidates have to be approved by the clerical establishment there is enough leeway given that a relatively liberal reformer was elected recently (Rouhani).
>they are anti-west because they NEED to be politically, not because the west has fucked up half the world, the middle east, and Iranian itself with their constant blundering, tone deaf interventions to preserve their business interests across the world <:^)
When will people from the US/Western world finally admit to themselves that the rest of the world has very good historical and contemporary reasons to hold the western world in contempt? Stop pretending your shit doesn't stink when you've been laying deuces around the globe without pause for 4+ centuries.