« Nozette wanted $2 million for his secrets. | Main | NYU Conference on Counterinsurgency - 20 November, 2009 »

30 October 2009



Balint Somkuti



Mr. Silverman,

I disagree with your third item above. The facility is near Qom, not in Qom. It's located in a remote area about 20 miles north of the city. That distance is great enough that there is really no chance of damaging the academy or any religious shrines in the event of an attack. So, I seriously doubt the site was chosen for strategic reasons.


Babak Makkinejad

Mr. Silverman's statement: "...drag Iran and Iranians kicking and screaming to where we want them to be.." is factually wrong. The power to do what he describes does not exist in the international arena.




The Persians 'invented' the game of chess.


The statement that the Iranian nuclear facility is "built at Qom" is highly misleading. It is actually located about 20 miles from Qom. This essentially negates Cole's assertion that "attacking it will likely cause damage to the religious academy and shrines," at Qom thereby mobilizing every Twelver Shia." Yes, Iranian propaganda would claim that Qom was attacked, but they can hardly keep the religious community--safe and sound--from communicating with their faithful, thereby revealing the propaganda claims to be false.

I respect Cole and am disappointed is his misinformation.

William R. Cumming

And both Iranians and Russians dealing with "Court" politics in which those hoping to survive have to be highly skilled.




I'm left wonderin' which side seems to be more in a position of zugzwang, the iranians or the israelis & their American cohorts? Enlighten me, gentlemen.

Sidney O. Smith III





Strategically clever, perhaps.


Andy wrote: "it looks like Iran has rejected the negotiated plan and made a counter-offer, one that appears to be a non-starter for west."

That is pure dumb propaganda.

Iran had agreed on the fuel (19.75%) for fuel (3.5%) exchange deal "in principle" and the terms of when to exchange what were not agreed upon in the first meeting.

The CNN headline then was: Iran accepts draft nuke deal 'in principle'.


To say Iran "rejected the negotiated plan" is intentional misinformation i.e. propaganda.

Andy, who pays you to write such stuff?



To all, the Iranians could under the cover of an attack blow-up anything they want and blame it on the "Great Satan" or the "Little Satan".


I advise everyone to think of the price of OIL.

Cloned Poster


Didn't the USofA blow the shit out of Najaf in the pursuit of Al Sadr.


N. M. Salamon




It's one thing to point out a mistake. It's quite another to accuse someone you don't know of intentionally spreading falsehoods and propaganda for payment. Why you would make such assumptions instead of considering the alternative that I was wrong is anyone's guess. I've been reading and commenting here for a couple of years now, Col. Lang has my CV and knows I'm not a provocateur. In light of that history and in the interest of good manners, it would be nice if you didn't make assumptions about my intentions or make baseless and slanderous accusations.

Regardless, you are either incorrect or completely misunderstood what I wrote. There was a draft agreement which was not simply an "agreement of principles" but a complete proposal that included technical details and a timeline for the fuel transfer:



Iran did make clear that the draft agreement was just that - a draft since it represented a compromise proposal. Iran considered the agreement solid enough to send it to Tehran to see if the leadership would approve it as a final agreement. Iran ultimately rejected it. There is nothing factually inaccurate about that or what I said earlier.


man, this nuke bickering is getting ridic. I am imagining a scene where somebody's mother finally barge into IAEA conference room and yell "You two sit. and put down that uranium containers. You gonna poke somebody's eyes out with that. And nobody is going anywhere until this is settled, and no dessert tonite for you two."

first thing first. I don't understand what is the goal of Obama-zarkozy. The entire planet expect zarkozy to weasel out and confiscate the uranium. And all Iran and Russia have to do is making sure that happens to win a giant diplomatic position. (eg. Iran can certainly whisper to Russia: "psst, I am sending you only 30% of the gas amount, the rest is depleted. Then later call out france they are lying and cheating out of the deal when they figure out the uranium is missing. Who in the planet is going to believe france if they say they are missing some uranium? everybody just assumes they are running zionist scam to confiscate Iranian uranium." Seriously, it takes Russia and France to do 20% blend? WTF?


I am sure Iran can get this done before end of the year. It's a small processing plant.

then what?

Aside from that, somebody in Tehran oil exchange office is laughing and making boatload of money speculating on oil price by way of insider trading. It's the most lucrative uranium deal known to man for sure.




U 3/2H2 (g)→UH3




Sidney O. Smith III






R Whitman




@andy - well - maybe your comment wasn't propaganda just uninformed?

There is no such thing as an "draft agreement". There may be a draft FOR an agreement that will be discussed and modified until it hopefully ends up as an agreement.



Iran: One Cool Nuclear Negotiator



You are making it way more complicated than what it is. The patent essentially says "bake a chunk of uranium at 225C under 1mPa vacuum and run stream of pure hydrogen through it to get Uranium hydrate." (ie, you can change uranium metal to gas and inject the gas into the purification cycle again. Down blend or up blend...whatever.)

If you look at the owner of the patent, it's US gov. Essentially it's to protect domestic Uranium supplier from flood of cheap Soviet weapon grade uranium (Down blending it). Lawyers can hunt anybody who downgrade/reprocess uranium. (via this patent, it's de facto illegal.)

The patent above really is illegal/can't exist because basically it's patenting scientific fact. Temperature, pressure, and reaction condition (The rest is just mambo jumbo cover terminology like "reaction cell" (any vacuum chamber can be called 'reaction cell'. Your mom's pressure cooker is a 'reaction cell')



Buy used ultra high vacuum pump here


..the hardest part of this experiment:
- convincing your mom you can use her credit card to buy a vacuum chamber set up. heh...




Perceptions of French and Russian reliability are certainly true and are certainly one likely reason Iran ultimately rejected the agreement. I'm not sure how pointing out what Iran did - which was reject the agreement - is either uninformed or propaganda considering I was well aware of Iran's mistrust.

Finally, I read Pyruz and many others on Iran and read widely on a variety of other topics. You are, again, making false assumptions about what I read and my "take" on this subject and what my depth of knowledge is. Please quit making such wrong assumptions about what you think I believe/know. If you want my opinion, all you have to do is ask for it.

Sidney O. Smith III





The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

August 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          
Blog powered by Typepad