8 thoughts on “Saudi Arabian Nuclear Reactor Nears Completion, Bringing Prospect of Saudi WMD – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

    1. @Lemonade: How interesting that the WashPo’s Glenn Kessler has become an expert on Shiite theology–enough to judge the theological status and validity of the Ayatollah’s fatwa. That’s the first problem with this source. The second: he relies most heavily in discounting the fatwa on a “scholar” from the Aipac think-tank, WINEP. It is an intellectual propaganda outlet for the Israel Lobby. One of its purposes is to churn out anti-Iran propaganda. So you characteristically (as with Jewish Virtual Library) have cherry-picked the very lowest hanging hasbara fruit for your comment.

      Oh and another thing about the “Iranian scholar,” Khalaji, relied on for the most negative views of the fatwa. Why do you think Khalaji left Iran? Because his wife stole billions, was exposed, and fled to Canada. That’s the ‘source’ Kessler relies on for the unvarnished facts about Iran.

      I note as well that nowhere does Kessler say that the fatwa is invalid or non-credible. He dances around the issue but never says this outright. So you may have rolled on the floor laughing prematurely. I’d actually do some reading before linking to be sure the propaganda you’re offering really does the job for you. This doesn’t.

      You also might want to stew on this for a while. In this passage, Gareth Porter recounts an interview he conducted with the founder of the IRG, who presented Ayatollah Khomeni with a plan to develop chemical and nuclear weapons in 1984, during the Iran-Iraq War. Here is Porter’s account:

      Rafighdoost prepared a report on all the specialized groups he had formed and went to discuss it with Khomeini, hoping to get his approval for work on chemical and nuclear weapons. The supreme leader met him accompanied only by his son, Ahmad, who served as chief of staff, according to Rafighdoost. “When Khomeini read the report, he reacted to the chemical-biological-nuclear team by asking, ‘What is this?’” Rafighdoost recalled.

      Khomeini ruled out development of chemical and biological weapons as inconsistent with Islam. “Imam told me that, instead of producing chemical or biological weapons, we should produce defensive protection for our troops, like gas masks and atropine,” Rafighdoost said.

      Rafighdoost also told Khomeini that the group had “a plan to produce nuclear weapons.” That could only have been a distant goal in 1984, given the rudimentary state of Iran’s nuclear program. At that point, Iranian nuclear specialists had no knowledge of how to enrich uranium and had no technology with which to do it. But in any case, Khomeini closed the door to such a program. “We don’t want to produce nuclear weapons,” Rafighdoost recalls the supreme leader telling him.

      …The supreme leader was unmoved by the new danger presented by the Iraqi gas attacks on civilians. “It doesn’t matter whether it is on the battlefield or in cities; we are against this,” he told Rafighdoost. “It is haram [forbidden] to produce such weapons. You are only allowed to produce protection.”

      …Rafighdoost recalls Khomeini asking rhetorically, “If we produce chemical weapons, what is the difference between me and Saddam?”

      So who are we to believe? Glenn Kessler and an Israeli hasbarist? Or the founder of the IRG who tried twice and in person to get the Supreme Leader to approve developing nuclear weapons, and failed each time? Gee, that’s a tough call…

      Finally, the fatwa was not a key part of my argument. Actually, Iran’s actions speak louder than any fatwa. In fact, it has not developed nuclear weapons. Fact: it has not threatened to use nuclear weapons. Fact, Israel has nuclear weapons. Fact: it has not only threatened to use them, it has threatened to use them against Iran. Fact: no Israeli rabbi has ever renounced nuclear weapons or said that their use is forbidden as the Ayatollah has. So on that score, I’d say it’s Ayatollah 1-Rabbis 0.

      You are done in this thread.

  1. What is the Iranian nuclear program then?
    Are they throwing away billions in infrastructure and suffer all sort of economic difficulties for “science”? Or pride?

    1. @ Carmel Yativ: A “nuclear program” is just that. A program. A “nuclear weapons program” is entirely different. The CIA has determined that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003. You may want to substitute your opinions for the view of the CIA based on massive intelligence data and expert evaluation. I don’t.

      We might also stop to ask why Israel is “throwing away billions in infrastructure” via its own garrison state which includes a massive WMD arsenal unmonitored by NPT or any international body. I’d say what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

  2. A “nuclear program” is just that.

    You need to be extremely naive to believe a country would go to this length and suffer these sanctions for anything that is not strategic. The report doesn’t even say it was stopped in 2003 but that “there was no conclusive evidence that Iran has made any attempt to produce nuclear weapons since 2003”. Very different.

    The tremendous efforts and money Iran invested in placing the program in deep bunkers is the only proof one need to understand what program this is.

    You quote Ronen Bergman when it suits you. Why won’t you quote him on that?

    1. @ Carmel yativ: Take a look at scores of media reports saying that Iran has no nuclear weapons program and stopped the one it had in 2003: https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=iran+ended+nuclear+weapons+program+2003

      Every major media source listed in that Google search says the nuclear weapons program ended in 2003:

      In 2007, the United States National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) stated that Iran halted an alleged active nuclear weapons program in fall 2003.

      As for Bergman: he’s become little more than a mouthpiece for the Mossad. Why should I quote him?

      Your hypocrisy is outrageous. Israel has 200 nuclear warheads, refuses IAEA inspections, has stolen key components of its own nuclear weapons program from foreign countries including the U.S., and had senior leaders actually advocate using WMD against Arab states during past wars. And you focus on Iran as the “bad guy.” Ridiculous!

      You are done in this thread.

  3. Question. Will SA have refinement capacity or is it just a generator? If they have refinement then yeah they could makr a nuke though from my understanding is that the stuff that makes power is fairly low grade and would have to be refined

  4. hmm seems like the main reason for the plants is for water supply. and it also seems that its a regional thing with SA teaming up with Jordan and UAE.

    From the looks of it there is going to be a low power research station and they are looking to make local production for refinement with the cooperation of the USA.

    So yeah you are mostlikely correct in that SA will be an eventual nuclear power…


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link