Israel attacked Iran, using disarmament of Iran’s nuclear program as an excuse. But this attack isn’t about enrichment. It’s about regime change. And there can only be one winner.
I find the analysis flawed, if only Iran had given up nuclear enrichment and any capability to do so they would be fine. What weapons of mass destruction capability did Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Lebanon, Syria have? The US and Israel cannot be trusted to honour their agreements, and after nuclear enrichment the cassus belli would no doubt move to ballistic missile capability and support for allies in the region until total subservience to hegemonic interests of these two states. This was inevitable but not due to Iran but the US/Israeli instigators
Bring it on! I like your final assessment and advice to Iran. I also would not be sad if Russia and China joined the fray. If we are going to party, let's party. That the Jewish State has been allowed to metastasize into an almost global tyranny and unleash what are ultimately Ukraine-like tyranny and destruction across the planet must be stopped at any cost. If we wait we will all be treated like Palestinians as their talmudo-satanism instructs we should be. This is not just existential for non-Jews, it is metaphysical.
Such an interesting take that only Scott could come up with. I can't say he's right or wrong about whether or not Iran has made the wrong choice by enriching to 60%. Others suggest they were just trying to be taken seriously.
If they hadn't followed that course, then Israel would never have attacked and we couldn't be cheering on True Promise 3.
I'm all for the complete destruction of Israel, so I think Iran may have made the right choice to bring on the retaliation Israel is about to be greeted with. Seems kind of twisted though doesn't it.
For me it is not so much the destruction of Israel about which I do not give a shit - it is about the emancipation of the Palestinian Semites from their almost century of bondage under the Nazi Jews.
Who thinks this is Israel against Iran, think again.
Scott's analyses is well written and he knows a great deal of stuff that I have no clue about.
In this case though, I miss the implications that this brings not to the US alone but to the other Gulf-states, China, Russia and all the other powers that are developing and want stability before all else.
Will those states allow another regime change by force?
The whole nuclear talking is just to divert the eye from the true goal, subjugating and loathing a BRICS country without fearing an answer - as I see it. The ultimate show of US power to the rest of BRICS and the changing world at this stage of development.
As a second thought it comes to mind that the 'overstretching Russia' doctrine plays into it as well, since Russia has itself committed to support of Iran in the treaty they made between each other recently.
I fear that the effects are not oversee able at this moment, it is almost depressing to watch things unfold - again with the support of the USA, no matter what they say, since no sane person should and could trust the US government.
I found myself grinding my teeth while reading Scott's analysis. A typical reaction whenever Israel's self-serving acts are involved.
Many thanks for your analysis Scott, it has supplied much to think about. In my imagination is Lindsey Graham striding an A-bomb dropping over Iran like Slim Pickens in the movie Dr. Strangelove
I would prefer to see Iran develop unmolested, with a nuclear energy program. Apparently Iran committed to sticking to peaceful nuclear energy but then enriched uranium to near-bomb purity. So, it's not entirely without justification that Isael reacted. As Ritter points out, Iran had the opportunity to lock in a verifiable nuclear energy but not weapons program and blew it.
Why does Ritter think Israel would allow itself to be nearly destroyed by missiles and not resort to nuclear weapons? Iran would be better off to ask President Trump to broker a deal whereby Iran forgoes attacking either Israel or the US facilities in return for an iron-clad inspection of enrichment for nuclear energy only. This would leave Iran humiliated but intact. They blew one chance for a deal. They should salvage this one. Offer full international inspection of all facilities and refrain from retaliation in return for a cessation of attacks and the ability for peaceful enhancement.
How did Iran blow their one chance for a deal? My understanding was that Witkoff at first sought a deal whereby Iran would not enrich uranium beyond a certain level, and Iran would permit IEAE inspection of all nuclear facilities, and Iran was agreeable to that. But then Warhawks pressed Witkoff to add additional limitations--no nuclear enrichment whatsoever and no ballistic missile program whatsoever, and that's what Iran refused to agree to. Can someone in this community please lay out the sequence of events, please, including at what point Iran blew it?
The US never wanted a deal to begin with, it's brainwashing us idiots to think they would.
All they want is subjugating Iran, a regime change and hurting the BRICS.
Who in it's right mind is buying even a word that's said by the US government anymore?
Lying, cheating, stealing, we even have classes to teach this (Pompeo)
Plus in "Which way to Persia" it's spelled out, written down and now brought into action, right along that playbook, inclusive US-negotiation scam and all.
I'm getting a lot of my information from Ritter. Here's what Ritter had to say about the matter:
"Iran had one opportunity to prevent this inevitable, and predictable, outcome—to negotiate a new nuclear deal with the United States that verifiably eliminated Iran’s status as a nuclear weapons threshold state.
Rather than locking the US into a deal, however, Iran allowed the process to be dragged out, thereby allowing itself to be trapped by a process that was never intended to produce a finalized deal, but always to buy time for Israel to be able to deliver its knockout blow."
Thanks. I heard Ritter explain, on Judge Nap this morning, how he believes Israel was able to disable or take out much of Iran's air defense system--using launchers prepositioned inside Iran, much like happened in the MI6/CIA/Ukr attack on Russian bases 2 weeks ago. .
All nice and well but who gave the USA the authority to decide who is bound by the nonproliferation and who's not?
That's where Scott, in my opinion has it wrong, the US is not to decide the rules on this world anymore by danger of their own destruction in keeping doing it until they are isolated and a pariah like Israel is already. In my circle, people despising the USA to a degree at this moment that even I find myself in the situation to remind them to distinct between the government and the people.
But then when it comes to the argument that the US population keeps voting those political criminals into power over and over again - I just better shut up.
I agree with most of Scott Ritter's opinion. Iran doesn't need to respond in kind immediately. Israel is living on borrowed time. Their military operations in Gaza, Lebannon, Syria, with the support of the US, slowly drain the country of global goodwill. It is very likely that Israel will make a crucial mistake that will result in the destruction of their country.
There is only one possible positive in this Zionist manufactured horror: that Israel may be destroyed in retaliation. Israel is a criminal entity built on fairy tale lunacies; Iran is an ancient culture and nation which is not and has not been an aggressor in two thousand years.
Israel, the murder state, the annihilator of the weak, is a cancer that must be excised from the world.
Peace and prosperity generally go hand in hand. Big picture, in any conflict, we have winners and losers. Ideally each side looks for a net gain to itself, but in a war of attrition, by definition, each side loses, but the side that loses least wins.
In a war of attrition the side with the greater force can often afford to lose at a 1:1 ratio because the other side will eventually lose much more as the ratio of firepower increases and it may increase exponentially. As for manoeuvre, firepower restrains manoeuvre, so the superior side can manoeuvre even better as its ratio of firepower increases over its adversary, which can also increase firepower. Bring ISR into it and there are increases in accuracy which means pure volume of firepower may become secondary.
Gilbert Doctorow recently commented on Ukrainian expertise in drone warfare and now that reminds me of the claim that Ukrainian drone operators were employed in Syria to destroy the armour and forces of the Syrian Army of Assad. It’s like Ukraine had men to spare to support the Takfiri proxy extremists of the west to overthrow Assad, and apparently the Syrian Army had no facilities, equipment, training or Russian assets to oppose them. A drone would show up and kill armour, artillery or personnel almost at will is my conjecture based on some reports, so retreat was the only option.
In fact Doctorow’s most exciting surmise is that Ukrainian ISR by drones could replace the satellite surveillance by the USA for frontline ISR, being even more accurate than satellite precision ISR because of close geographical proximity to the battlefield.
The most grievous thing about war is all the lying. The truth will make us free. Knowledge is power. Cybernetics is feedback, action, reaction, feedback, and so on. It’s like the OODA loop as Scott has taught us.
The winners may be laughing at their adversaries but they keep it to themselves, because public laughter is almost a public admission of deceit. But where the bullies see cause for boasting, the deeply deceitful remain silent.
Proverbs 26:17-19 (KJV) 17 He that passeth by, [and] meddleth with strife [belonging] not to him, [is like] one that taketh a dog by the ears. 18 As a mad [man] who casteth firebrands, arrows, and death, 19 So [is] the man [that] deceiveth his neighbour, and saith, Am not I in sport?
We live in a world of deceit. There’s the deceitfulness of riches and the world rulers of the darkness of this age, especially if there’s money in it. That’s where everybody loses when it comes to war. People become afraid to share the truth. Truth is fallen in the street.
Matthew 13:22 (KJV)
He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.
Mark 4:19 (KJV)
And the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful.
Ephesians 6:12 (KJV)
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high [places].
If you’re not with us, you’re against us, was a common neoconservative and Zionist talking point, used to justify everybody joining the war in Iraq. Maybe that applies to gangster violence but when it comes to healing and casting out devils, it’s also whoever is not against us is on our part. That’s the real foundational truth behind peaceful and civilized society. It’s a world of devils but there’s hope in Jesus Christ.
Bob Dylan - The Times They Are A-Changin' (Official Audio)
He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
Luke 11:23 (KJV)
He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.
Luke 14:31 (KJV)
Or what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand?
Mark 9:38-41 (KJV) 38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us. 39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. 40 For he that is not against us is on our part. 41 For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.
Jesus understood war as an extension of politics, and he understood political solutions, as did Solomon.
Psalm 37:11 (KJV)
But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace.
Psalm 37:37 (KJV)
Mark the perfect [man], and behold the upright: for the end of [that] man [is] peace.
Psalm 85:10 (KJV)
Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed [each other].
Psalm 119:165 (KJV)
Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them.
Psalm 120:6 (KJV)
My soul hath long dwelt with him that hateth peace.
Psalm 120:7 (KJV)
I [am for] peace: but when I speak, they [are] for war.
Psalm 122:8 (KJV)
For my brethren and companions' sakes, I will now say, Peace [be] within thee.
Proverbs 12:20 (KJV)
Deceit [is] in the heart of them that imagine evil: but to the counsellors of peace [is] joy.
Proverbs 16:7 (KJV)
When a man's ways please the LORD, he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him.
Ecclesiastes 3:8 (KJV)
A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.
But Jesus also gave the common people a vision of God’s glory, revealed to man, in his word, in spite of war, or despite war.
Proverbs 29:7 (KJV) The righteous considereth the cause of the poor: [but] the wicked regardeth not to know [it].
Nuclear power will be absolutely a necessary adjunct of carbon free energy to fighting global warming. If all they want it for is desalinating water, and we kill them for it, without investigation and discretion, how will mankind ever develop beyond the eternal cycles of life and death?
Mark 3:29 (KJV)
But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:
“We are currently in contact with the Iranian nuclear safety authorities to ascertain the status of relevant nuclear facilities and to assess any wider impacts on nuclear safety and security. At present, the competent Iranian authorities have confirmed that the Natanz enrichment site has been impacted and that there are no elevated radiation levels. They have also reported that at present the Esfahan and Fordow sites have not been impacted.
This development is deeply concerning. I have repeatedly stated that nuclear facilities must never be attacked, regardless of the context or circumstances, as it could harm both people and the environment. Such attacks have serious implications for nuclear safety, security and safeguards, as well as regional and international peace and security.”
33m- morality, Iran/Iraq war, Marandi Iran/Iraq war veteran, immorality of chemical weapons, nuclear weapons, oil and gas narratives against Iran, Iranian nuclear science and nuclear power,
37m30s - Iran doesn’t need a nuclear weapon but they want the technology, self sufficiency in energy,
37m50s - gasoline heavily subsidized, Price of gasoline in Iran 1 to 2 cents a litre
39m8s we want to build a number of nuclear power plants because we want to desalinate water
I find the analysis flawed, if only Iran had given up nuclear enrichment and any capability to do so they would be fine. What weapons of mass destruction capability did Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Lebanon, Syria have? The US and Israel cannot be trusted to honour their agreements, and after nuclear enrichment the cassus belli would no doubt move to ballistic missile capability and support for allies in the region until total subservience to hegemonic interests of these two states. This was inevitable but not due to Iran but the US/Israeli instigators
Bring it on! I like your final assessment and advice to Iran. I also would not be sad if Russia and China joined the fray. If we are going to party, let's party. That the Jewish State has been allowed to metastasize into an almost global tyranny and unleash what are ultimately Ukraine-like tyranny and destruction across the planet must be stopped at any cost. If we wait we will all be treated like Palestinians as their talmudo-satanism instructs we should be. This is not just existential for non-Jews, it is metaphysical.
Tell me again how Israel got hold of uranium and nuclear technology
Scott I don't think this is about Iran' Nuclear program. Isn't this about Isreal distracting from the
Gaza Genicide and saving BiBi's But!
Such an interesting take that only Scott could come up with. I can't say he's right or wrong about whether or not Iran has made the wrong choice by enriching to 60%. Others suggest they were just trying to be taken seriously.
If they hadn't followed that course, then Israel would never have attacked and we couldn't be cheering on True Promise 3.
I'm all for the complete destruction of Israel, so I think Iran may have made the right choice to bring on the retaliation Israel is about to be greeted with. Seems kind of twisted though doesn't it.
For me it is not so much the destruction of Israel about which I do not give a shit - it is about the emancipation of the Palestinian Semites from their almost century of bondage under the Nazi Jews.
Who thinks this is Israel against Iran, think again.
Scott's analyses is well written and he knows a great deal of stuff that I have no clue about.
In this case though, I miss the implications that this brings not to the US alone but to the other Gulf-states, China, Russia and all the other powers that are developing and want stability before all else.
Will those states allow another regime change by force?
The whole nuclear talking is just to divert the eye from the true goal, subjugating and loathing a BRICS country without fearing an answer - as I see it. The ultimate show of US power to the rest of BRICS and the changing world at this stage of development.
As a second thought it comes to mind that the 'overstretching Russia' doctrine plays into it as well, since Russia has itself committed to support of Iran in the treaty they made between each other recently.
I fear that the effects are not oversee able at this moment, it is almost depressing to watch things unfold - again with the support of the USA, no matter what they say, since no sane person should and could trust the US government.
I found myself grinding my teeth while reading Scott's analysis. A typical reaction whenever Israel's self-serving acts are involved.
Many thanks for your analysis Scott, it has supplied much to think about. In my imagination is Lindsey Graham striding an A-bomb dropping over Iran like Slim Pickens in the movie Dr. Strangelove
Thanks Scott for sharing your insights. But I have to say the options you present for Iran seem grim. I wish them well.
This is the only chance to stop Israel's fascist police state and Iran won't take it.
Too bad for the world.
I would prefer to see Iran develop unmolested, with a nuclear energy program. Apparently Iran committed to sticking to peaceful nuclear energy but then enriched uranium to near-bomb purity. So, it's not entirely without justification that Isael reacted. As Ritter points out, Iran had the opportunity to lock in a verifiable nuclear energy but not weapons program and blew it.
Why does Ritter think Israel would allow itself to be nearly destroyed by missiles and not resort to nuclear weapons? Iran would be better off to ask President Trump to broker a deal whereby Iran forgoes attacking either Israel or the US facilities in return for an iron-clad inspection of enrichment for nuclear energy only. This would leave Iran humiliated but intact. They blew one chance for a deal. They should salvage this one. Offer full international inspection of all facilities and refrain from retaliation in return for a cessation of attacks and the ability for peaceful enhancement.
How did Iran blow their one chance for a deal? My understanding was that Witkoff at first sought a deal whereby Iran would not enrich uranium beyond a certain level, and Iran would permit IEAE inspection of all nuclear facilities, and Iran was agreeable to that. But then Warhawks pressed Witkoff to add additional limitations--no nuclear enrichment whatsoever and no ballistic missile program whatsoever, and that's what Iran refused to agree to. Can someone in this community please lay out the sequence of events, please, including at what point Iran blew it?
The US never wanted a deal to begin with, it's brainwashing us idiots to think they would.
All they want is subjugating Iran, a regime change and hurting the BRICS.
Who in it's right mind is buying even a word that's said by the US government anymore?
Lying, cheating, stealing, we even have classes to teach this (Pompeo)
Plus in "Which way to Persia" it's spelled out, written down and now brought into action, right along that playbook, inclusive US-negotiation scam and all.
I'm getting a lot of my information from Ritter. Here's what Ritter had to say about the matter:
"Iran had one opportunity to prevent this inevitable, and predictable, outcome—to negotiate a new nuclear deal with the United States that verifiably eliminated Iran’s status as a nuclear weapons threshold state.
Rather than locking the US into a deal, however, Iran allowed the process to be dragged out, thereby allowing itself to be trapped by a process that was never intended to produce a finalized deal, but always to buy time for Israel to be able to deliver its knockout blow."
Thanks. I heard Ritter explain, on Judge Nap this morning, how he believes Israel was able to disable or take out much of Iran's air defense system--using launchers prepositioned inside Iran, much like happened in the MI6/CIA/Ukr attack on Russian bases 2 weeks ago. .
All nice and well but who gave the USA the authority to decide who is bound by the nonproliferation and who's not?
That's where Scott, in my opinion has it wrong, the US is not to decide the rules on this world anymore by danger of their own destruction in keeping doing it until they are isolated and a pariah like Israel is already. In my circle, people despising the USA to a degree at this moment that even I find myself in the situation to remind them to distinct between the government and the people.
But then when it comes to the argument that the US population keeps voting those political criminals into power over and over again - I just better shut up.
I agree with most of Scott Ritter's opinion. Iran doesn't need to respond in kind immediately. Israel is living on borrowed time. Their military operations in Gaza, Lebannon, Syria, with the support of the US, slowly drain the country of global goodwill. It is very likely that Israel will make a crucial mistake that will result in the destruction of their country.
There is only one possible positive in this Zionist manufactured horror: that Israel may be destroyed in retaliation. Israel is a criminal entity built on fairy tale lunacies; Iran is an ancient culture and nation which is not and has not been an aggressor in two thousand years.
Israel, the murder state, the annihilator of the weak, is a cancer that must be excised from the world.
Let's talk about nukes in posession of the Zionist regime...
Peace and prosperity generally go hand in hand. Big picture, in any conflict, we have winners and losers. Ideally each side looks for a net gain to itself, but in a war of attrition, by definition, each side loses, but the side that loses least wins.
War of Attrition - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Attrition
In a war of attrition the side with the greater force can often afford to lose at a 1:1 ratio because the other side will eventually lose much more as the ratio of firepower increases and it may increase exponentially. As for manoeuvre, firepower restrains manoeuvre, so the superior side can manoeuvre even better as its ratio of firepower increases over its adversary, which can also increase firepower. Bring ISR into it and there are increases in accuracy which means pure volume of firepower may become secondary.
Gilbert Doctorow recently commented on Ukrainian expertise in drone warfare and now that reminds me of the claim that Ukrainian drone operators were employed in Syria to destroy the armour and forces of the Syrian Army of Assad. It’s like Ukraine had men to spare to support the Takfiri proxy extremists of the west to overthrow Assad, and apparently the Syrian Army had no facilities, equipment, training or Russian assets to oppose them. A drone would show up and kill armour, artillery or personnel almost at will is my conjecture based on some reports, so retreat was the only option.
In fact Doctorow’s most exciting surmise is that Ukrainian ISR by drones could replace the satellite surveillance by the USA for frontline ISR, being even more accurate than satellite precision ISR because of close geographical proximity to the battlefield.
The most grievous thing about war is all the lying. The truth will make us free. Knowledge is power. Cybernetics is feedback, action, reaction, feedback, and so on. It’s like the OODA loop as Scott has taught us.
The winners may be laughing at their adversaries but they keep it to themselves, because public laughter is almost a public admission of deceit. But where the bullies see cause for boasting, the deeply deceitful remain silent.
Proverbs 26:17-28 - BibleGateway.com
Proverbs 26:17-19 (KJV) 17 He that passeth by, [and] meddleth with strife [belonging] not to him, [is like] one that taketh a dog by the ears. 18 As a mad [man] who casteth firebrands, arrows, and death, 19 So [is] the man [that] deceiveth his neighbour, and saith, Am not I in sport?
https://biblehub.com/proverbs/26-19.htm
We live in a world of deceit. There’s the deceitfulness of riches and the world rulers of the darkness of this age, especially if there’s money in it. That’s where everybody loses when it comes to war. People become afraid to share the truth. Truth is fallen in the street.
Matthew 13:22 (KJV)
He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.
Mark 4:19 (KJV)
And the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful.
Ephesians 6:12 (KJV)
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high [places].
If you’re not with us, you’re against us, was a common neoconservative and Zionist talking point, used to justify everybody joining the war in Iraq. Maybe that applies to gangster violence but when it comes to healing and casting out devils, it’s also whoever is not against us is on our part. That’s the real foundational truth behind peaceful and civilized society. It’s a world of devils but there’s hope in Jesus Christ.
Bob Dylan - The Times They Are A-Changin' (Official Audio)
https://youtu.be/90WD_ats6eE
Matthew 12:30 (KJV)
He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
Luke 11:23 (KJV)
He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.
Luke 14:31 (KJV)
Or what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand?
Mark 9:38-41 (KJV) 38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us. 39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. 40 For he that is not against us is on our part. 41 For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.
Jesus understood war as an extension of politics, and he understood political solutions, as did Solomon.
Psalm 37:11 (KJV)
But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace.
Psalm 37:37 (KJV)
Mark the perfect [man], and behold the upright: for the end of [that] man [is] peace.
Psalm 85:10 (KJV)
Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed [each other].
Psalm 119:165 (KJV)
Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them.
Psalm 120:6 (KJV)
My soul hath long dwelt with him that hateth peace.
Psalm 120:7 (KJV)
I [am for] peace: but when I speak, they [are] for war.
Psalm 122:8 (KJV)
For my brethren and companions' sakes, I will now say, Peace [be] within thee.
Proverbs 12:20 (KJV)
Deceit [is] in the heart of them that imagine evil: but to the counsellors of peace [is] joy.
Proverbs 16:7 (KJV)
When a man's ways please the LORD, he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him.
Ecclesiastes 3:8 (KJV)
A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.
But Jesus also gave the common people a vision of God’s glory, revealed to man, in his word, in spite of war, or despite war.
Proverbs 29:7 (KJV) The righteous considereth the cause of the poor: [but] the wicked regardeth not to know [it].
Nuclear power will be absolutely a necessary adjunct of carbon free energy to fighting global warming. If all they want it for is desalinating water, and we kill them for it, without investigation and discretion, how will mankind ever develop beyond the eternal cycles of life and death?
Mark 3:29 (KJV)
But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:
“We are currently in contact with the Iranian nuclear safety authorities to ascertain the status of relevant nuclear facilities and to assess any wider impacts on nuclear safety and security. At present, the competent Iranian authorities have confirmed that the Natanz enrichment site has been impacted and that there are no elevated radiation levels. They have also reported that at present the Esfahan and Fordow sites have not been impacted.
This development is deeply concerning. I have repeatedly stated that nuclear facilities must never be attacked, regardless of the context or circumstances, as it could harm both people and the environment. Such attacks have serious implications for nuclear safety, security and safeguards, as well as regional and international peace and security.”
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/statements/statement-on-the-situation-in-iran
Also Search
desalination site:iaea.org
But Professor Marandi in conversation with Nima let slip that the price of gasoline in Iran was only a couple of cents a litre.
From
Dialogue Works- Mohammed Marandi: Iran Draws Its BRIGHTEST Red Line Yet — Trump Says NO Enrichment!
https://youtu.be/xy0QVVjImH8&t=39m8s
33m- morality, Iran/Iraq war, Marandi Iran/Iraq war veteran, immorality of chemical weapons, nuclear weapons, oil and gas narratives against Iran, Iranian nuclear science and nuclear power,
37m30s - Iran doesn’t need a nuclear weapon but they want the technology, self sufficiency in energy,
37m50s - gasoline heavily subsidized, Price of gasoline in Iran 1 to 2 cents a litre
39m8s we want to build a number of nuclear power plants because we want to desalinate water
4 Non Blondes - What's Up (Official Music Video)
https://youtu.be/6NXnxTNIWkc