Home » That Parchin side deal: what’s it about?

Comments

That Parchin side deal: what’s it about? — 15 Comments

  1. It’s now obvious that Kerry, Sherman, Zubin, and all those other administration toadies were lying when they said this is the toughest inspection regime in history, since, by their own admission, THEY DON’T KNOW WHAT IT IS! (Except Sherman, possibly, who testified that she had at least seen a draft — but was not allowed to copy it. Of course, drafts can be changed. Maybe our crack negotiators didn’t know that.)

    Lying to Congress is a crime. Don’t hold your breath until we see indictments, though.

  2. It rends my heart that I have lost trust in our government. I can not see a way to a free and civil society with what has become.

  3. Please do not think the IAEA is a pristine, always-virtuous entity. It is an arm of the UN, for heaven’s sake. 164 of the 193 UN member states are IAEA members.
    Neo- I do not think we here are “long inured” to hardly anything. We are impotent but not inured.

  4. Why the surprised shock? There is no natural limit to the perfidy of this administration because they are committed to the demise of America as a force for good in the world. A perfectly natural goal when you share George Soros’ belief that, “The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.”

    Obama’s motivation in this ‘deal’ is political cover, to gain the time he needs in order to do nothing.

    Obama could care less if Iran has nukes, he could care less if it leads to nuclear proliferation. And when Israel and America suffer nuclear attacks, that will just be our “chickens coming home to roost”, perfect karma for an inherently racist and evil country. Whites must suffer for their sins and Obama’s mission is to make sure that we do.

  5. But what will it take for more than two Dem Senators to vote against this?

    Party over country.

  6. Text of draft agreement between IAEA, Iran on inspections at Parchin military site:

    Two officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed to The Associated Press that this draft does not differ from the final, confidential agreement between the IAEA and Iran. The AP was not allowed to have a copy of the draft but was allowed to transcribe the entire text, and it appears here:
    ___

    Separate arrangement II agreed by the Islamic State of Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency on 11 July 2015, regarding the Road-map, Paragraph 5

    Iran and the Agency agreed on the following sequential arrangement with regard to the Parchin issue:

    1. Iran will provide to the Agency photos of the locations, including those identified in paragraph 3 below, which would be mutually agreed between Iran and the Agency, taking into account military concerns.

    1. Iran will provide to the Agency videos of the locations, including those identified in paragraph 3 below, which would be mutually agreed between Iran and the Agency, taking into account military concerns.

    1. Iran will provide to the Agency 7 environmental samples taken from points inside one building already identified by the Agency and agreed by Iran, and 2 points outside of the Parchin complex which would be agreed between Iran and the Agency.

    1. The Agency will ensure the technical authenticity of the activities referred to in paragraphs 1-3 above. Activities will be carried out using Iran’s authenticated equipment, consistent with technical specifications provided by the Agency, and the Agency’s containers and seals.

    1. The above mentioned measures would be followed, as a courtesy by Iran, by a public visit of the Director General, as a dignitary guest of the Government of Iran, accompanied by his deputy for safeguards.

    6.Iran and the Agency will organize a one-day technical roundtable on issues relevant to Parchin.

  7. “Then it overestimated his [Saddam’s] program in 2003”

    “… and went to war to stop a nonexistent WMD program.”

    The 1st part is correct.

    Senator Menendez is incorrect on the 2nd part.

    He really needs to stop highlighting his opposition to OIF when he argues for his opposition to Obama’s Iran deal. Menendez’s call for a UNSCR 687-type of disarmament for Iran is contradicted by his opposition to the enforcement of UNSCR 687 for Iraq.

    The UNMOVIC finding of “about 100 unresolved disarmament issues” confirmed Iraq’s material breach and thereby triggered OIF. If Iraq had been subsequently found clean, the decision for OIF was still justified by Iraq’s failure to meet its burden of proof, ie, material breach of the terms of ceasefire, especially UNSCR 687.

    He is correct that the US intelligence on Iraq was off the mark. But the intel was irrelevant to enforcement decisions like Operations Desert Fox and Iraqi Freedom because the “governing standard of Iraqi compliance” (UNSCR 1441) for disarmament was set to UNSCR 687, not the intelligence.

    That being said, Menendez’s statement is also wrong on its face.

    The ISG post hoc fact findings, while irrelevant to the President’s decision for OIF, are in fact rife with Iraqi violations of UNSCR 687. Although the post hoc findings poorly matched the pre-war intelligence estimates, ISG reported an active WMD program in violation of UNSCR 687 and confirmed Saddam intended to ramp it up fully once the US-led enforcement of UNSCR 687 was neutralized. The Iraqi Perspectives Project also reported findings that confirm Iraq violated UNSCR 687.

    The point that Senator Menendez is trying to make, but undermines by endorsing the false narrative of OIF, is that there can be no baked in reliance on US intelligence to demonstrate Iran is in violation. For disarmament to be effective, the burden of proof must be fully on Iran – as it was on Iraq – to prove it is disarmed according to a strict standard of compliance.

    Again, Menendez is calling for a UNSCR 687-type disarmament standard for Iran.

    However, while he is ostensibly arguing for substantially the same standard of compliance for Iran that was applied to Iraq with UNSCR 687, Menendez implicitly justifies Obama’s Iran deal whenever he reiterates his opposition to the US-led enforcement of UNSCR 687.

  8. Ann: I see that reading comprehension is another of John Kerry and his minions’ deficiencies:

    “The U.S. State Department said on Thursday the IAEA would “in no way” hand over responsibility for nuclear inspections to Iran. “That is not how the IAEA does business,” State Department spokesman John Kirby said in a statement.”

  9. Parchin was NEVER discovered by Mossad, CIA, or any satellite imaging.

    It was revealed by Iranian FINKS.

    The fink aspect of Parchin caused the mullahs to entirely disband the crew there — as they knew that until they SHUT UP the fink(s) the joint was leaking taboo nuclear tech like a sieve.

    THAT”S what ‘shut down’ Parchin.

    Parchin was revealed as being the BOMB DESIGN LAB.

    It was NOT dealing with radio active elements. Instead, it was performing all of the other tech development required to detonate a Fat Man style plutonium bomb — enhanced to 1959 tech standards.

    The Iranians are NOT aiming at a bunch of Little Boys.

    That’s a notion that the administration keeps running up the flagpole. It’s wholly false. Little Boys use too many neutrons — the limiting resource for any budding atomic power.

    Neutron scarcity — it’s the bottleneck — that bedeviled both America and Russia during the first phase of the Cold War.

    Parchin is reputed to have an ultra-deep shaft that is a clone of America’s. ( Whoops, right there. )

    They way it worked was that you’d set off a test detonation deep down in the ultra-well — with the blast energy permitted to shoot skyward. The fantastic depth meant that by the time the blast reached the surface — it was nothing much — and would never show up on satellite imagery.

    The test detonations are needed to establish the perfect geometry for the implosion — which uses strictly non-nuclear chemistry.

    This was what Los Alamos was working on all the way through from 1943 through 1945. NOTHING ELSE.

    Los Alamos was not much concerned about manufacturing the explosive — that was Hanford’s job. It was not concerned with plutonium metallurgy — that was Chicago’s job. ( Met-lab )

    In sum: Parchin was LOS ALAMOS.

    DING DING DING DING.

    It’s no surprise that the Iranian Los Alamos was but a jaunt down the road from Tehran. That permitted a bare-bones lab set up. Whereas Los Alamos ended up being a little city.

    The Parchin = Los Alamos connection is still not appreciated by the outside world, as the average Joe knows diddly about how the Manhattan Project built the bomb.

    The ENDLESS non-atomic implosion tests are NEVER emphasized in the film treatments of the A bomb. The viewing public is led to believe that the technicians couldn’t figure out the fundamentals.

    ALL of the headaches revolved around the implosion — how to trigger it — perfectly. That’s where the money went. The basic physics of the implosion device were obvious from the outset. The puzzle was how to get a solid hunk of very dense and heavy metal (plutonium) to become even more dense // compressed.

    The raw calculations showed that once the metal was past a certain density, it would flip into an exponential chain-reaction in less than the blink of an eye. So the reaction period would be EXTREMELY sharp — so much so that early atomic fissions would not cause the plutonium to blow out before a decent fraction had absorbed a thermal neutron.

    Little Boy was known to work exactly the other way. It’d start cooking off at ordinary pressures// density — and ought to begin to blow out long before a high fraction absorbed a neutron.

    Hiroshima and Nagasaki proved that Little Boy was ten times as expensive — if not more — than Fat Man.

    Which is relevant when you turn the numbers over WRT Iran’s atomic stockpile.

    Just multiply ALL estimates by ten when comparing bomb production of plutonium versus uranium.

    8 uranium bombs == >> 80 plutonium bombs.

    The mullahs don’t want Parchin ‘tossed’ as it would reveal that Iran has ALL of the technical results — and their implosion bomb design is deemed complete.

    ( Computer simulations in the 21st Century are so fast and cheap vs 1944 slide rules.)

    All of the above is why Israel — and America — have concentrated on ruining the Iranian weapons grade explosive generation complex — that and their ICBM program.

    The latter is solely needed to go after America. All other targets are within range of their IRBMs. (Russia, Europe, Israel, China, India, KSA, — only America remains too far away. BHO is making sure that America is as vulnerable as everybody else.)

    Perfect.

  10. The latest Dem talking point is that Obama is like Reagan since Reagan did a nuke deal with the Soviets. Uh huh, right.

    Like saying that Chamberlain’s deal with Hitler was just like MacArthur’s deal with Japan since both of them purported to avoid further war.

  11. In 17 months, when Obama is gone, Iran will have a new, advanced air defense system, a lot more arms, and will be supplying Hezbollah/Hamas with much better rockets to launch against Israel. That is what the new President will be facing. If it’s Hillary or some other prog, Israel will be in mortal danger for the entire time.

    If it’s a Republican, the only way to stop the threat will be to partner with Israel to attack a much stronger, more dangerous Iran. This is the outcome of “smart” diplomacy. It is to weep.

  12. GB has eyes on the ball. Nitpicking the details distracts from seeing the big picture. The hate America boychild wants to reduce our country to a third world, deeply indebted nation cowering on the world stage. Chickens coming home to roost indeed.

  13. This has got to be the most stupid, outrageous, and despicable statement of support for the deal I’ve read thus far — it’s from Sen. Claire McCaskill:

    “This deal isn’t perfect and no one trusts Iran, but it has become clear to me that the world is united behind this agreement with the exception of the government of Israel”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>