Slashdot Mirror
Iran To 'Remove Fuel' From Bushehr Nuclear Plant
mangu writes "Iran said on Saturday it is removing the fuel from the reactor of a Russian-built nuclear power plant, a move seen as a big blow to its controversial nuclear program. The plant was first launched by the shah using contractors from Siemens. It was shelved after the Islamic revolution and it lay unfinished through the 1980s. In the early 1990s, Iran sought help for the project after being turned away by Siemens over nuclear proliferation concerns. In 1994, Russia agreed to complete the plant and provide the fuel, with the supply deal committing Iran to returning the spent fuel. The plant has faced hiccups even after its physical launch, with officials blaming the delays in generating electricity on a range of factors, including Bushehr's 'severe weather.' But they deny it was hit by the malicious Stuxent computer worm which struck industrial computers in Iran, although they acknowledge that the personal computers of some personnel at Bushehr were infected with it."
israel needs to dismantle them and provide a reason for iran to not want them. They cannot have it both ways
Awful, rambling summary. Why is removing fuel from Bushehr "seen as a big blow to its controversial nuclear program"?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf12nHhz5XM
This is what he's talking about. ... It's oddly interesting, but I prefer this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jC8JIjW2cw (this one is special for it does something few other videos do).
i don't care about israel. israel doesn't matter: iran shouldn't have nukes because it is a theocracy. it believes in power invested in some grumpy old men who are believed to have a sort of monopoly on the interpretation of the will of god. this is not the kind of person i want with a nuclear weapon
this is the constitution of iran:
http://www.iranonline.com/iran/iran-info/government/constitution-1.html
you want a government who believes these things in possession of a nuclear weapon?
and please, don't get me wrong: i don't have any problems with islam. if this document was centered on christianity or judaism i would have the same repulsion. i have problem with religious power structures, period. some religious kooks who think some invisible mahdi dude will reappear at armageddeon, with freaking NUCLEAR BOMB?! self-fulfilling prophecy? hello?
no, no fucking thanks, no nuke for iran
again: i don't care about israel. i have no problem with islam. i simply have a major serious problem with religious kooks possessing a nuclear bomb. NO THANK YOU
and please, i don't want any asshole lecturing me about false equivalency: that it's the same as pakistan, or israel, or the usa, or whatever: no, it isn't really the same. iran is EXPLICITLY a theocracy. A THEOCRACY. do you understand that? it really is different than saying "well gw bush is religious". yeah, good for him. but the fucking government he is part of isn't based on the fucking pope or some rabbi holding all ultimate power. that difference is real
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
First of all attacking the computers of an operating nucreal power plant is quite dangerous as it might cause a meltdown if they don't act fast enough, and if there is an explosion or fire then the radioactive debris can be swept by the wind and blow into the face of the israelis and neighboring countries.
The computers that Stuxnet affected were controlling centrifuges that were attempting to enrich uranium, not in an operating nuclear power plant. In fact I don't think this nuclear power plant has ever been 'operational'.
... and so far only once country has used them on one occasion. I doubt we'll be able to make that same claim once everybody has them.
Buying time is important. If enough time passes that some form of 'peace' can be established in the Middle East then Iran (and others) may not want/need to pursue nuclear weapons. If that never happens then buying time means using up Iran's limited resources which slows the process even more. Believe it or not there are already enough nuclear weapons in the world
kettle, pot. pot, kettle.
It's not about fate, it's about character.
there be no shelter here, the frontline is everywhere!
the usa is not a theocracy. compare the us constitution's statements on religion with that of iran's. no matter what eisenhower decided to add to our currency in the 1950s, this little brainfart doesn't alter the reality of longstanding constitutional separations between church and state
but this is just intellectual charity at this point. to call the usa a theocracy is just loudly announcing how ignorant you are
i don't really understand you false equivalency morons
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Running a critical machine on a general purpose computer is a terrible idea no matter what OS you have. But it's also extremely common practice.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
Civilian nuclear plants are not optimized for the production of weapons grade plutonium. The most economically efficient way to produce power creates Pu-239 (the bomb stuff) and Pu-240, which will result in predetonation in an implosion nuclear weapon. (It is totally impractical to isotopically separate Pu-239 from Pu-240 because they're sufficiently radioactive)
However, if you remove the nuclear fuel in a civilian plant prematurely, such as what Iran is doing, then less of the Pu-239 being produced will be turned in to Pu-240 (just a small amount poisons the reactor). And it can be used to make weapons, though a purpose-designed plant to make weapons grade plutonium is more economically efficient (e.g. graphite instead of water moderated).
This premature removal of fuel rods (and likely reprocessing) along with Iran's other actions show a renewed committment to producing nuclear weaponry.
True. How's this for equivalency? My little country has nukes, and an unelected Head of State who is constitutionally head of a nationally-sponsored religion. Nobody seems very frightened of us, nowadays.
If these facilities were for civilian energy needs (perfectly legitimate IMHO) then why bury them and hide them from IAEA inspection
To make it harder for Israel to drop a bomb on them, perhaps? You know, like it's been threatening to do for years, has gone so far as to plan out in detail and try and get US permission for, and has done before to Syria.
I've written software for CNC machines that use either Fanuc or Seimens controllers. The controller part of the system talks to another Linux system on the machine that is in charge of executing G-code and interfacing directly with the machine. All the controller really does is create the program and pass it off to the Linux system. It's easy to understand though why this software is written for Windows. The first controllers had completely custom software, then switched to DOS because it was easier, then Windows because it was a natural step from DOS. With machines like this, there is often a few different pieces of software an operator will run to cut different types of parts.
For the same reason that Saddam was refusing to allow weapons inspectors in. Iran is surrounded by hostile neighbours. It's a persian state, with mostly arabic neighbours. Actually using nuclear weapons would be a political impossibility for Iran - not least because it shares a border with all of the potential targets and the fallout would be as bad for them as for the enemy. However, appearing to have the capability to launch a nuclear strike is a pretty good deterrent against an attack - they probably won't use it, but you can't be completely sure. If they actually had demonstrable nuclear weapons, they'd be hit by international sanctions and risk invasion from the USA, but if they just hide something and don't let anyone see what it is, then their neighbours will assume it's something dangerous. Unfortunately for Saddam, people like Tony Blair and George W. Bush took his boasts seriously (or at least pretended to) and so it didn't work out so well for him. Iran has to be even more careful - trying to look to their neighbours as if they have a nuclear capability, but not look the same way to the rest of the world. If they give the rest of the world a definitive negative, then their local credibility goes. It's a difficult diplomatic balancing act.
The other aspect of this is the need to keep periodically threatening Israel. Iran is like the kid hanging out with a group of bullies and loudly taunting the kid that they all pick on. Hating Israel is about the only thing that Iran has in common with the Arabic countries, so they have to play up this aspect.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Stuxnet was created by some very determined people aiming at a very specific target. I'm sure they would have found a way in, no matter what OS they were running.