Could Iran get away with handing off nukes to terrorists?

Studying the GOP Debates, as well as the rest of the pro-war-with-Iran rhetoric, I've observed that their entire argument rests on the notion that the Iranians could hand off 'nukes' to terrorists 'to do their dirty work and get away with it'.

I remember in that movie "Sum of all Fears" they semed to have a manual or a database that listed basically every bomb ever made. They were able to pinpoint the exact weapon and other data such as where the materials originated and so on, if I remember correctly. Does such a database exist in real life? Could the Iranians possibly make weapons grade materials / weapons and pass them off and get away with it?

Isn't there some sort of international / UN type of registry monitoring and tracking all of that sort of data? I'm not familiar enough in this teritory whatsoever to pinpoint these sorts of details, but it seems the case for war with Iran could be destroyed if the right details were applied to this potential argument.

[edit on 24-11-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Anything is possible, we have no way to inventory a closed countries stockpile.
I'm actually surprised that a dirty bomb hasn't been used by now. When you think if the disarray and confusion that went on during the fall of the Soviet Union I wonder if anything got away from them.

I think this is something that Iran would do just because of their history. It's their weapons going into Iraq that are already killing American soldiers.

Hmm, last I heard it was well documented tha tthe entire notion of dirty bombs was ludacrous, before dirty bombs were ever mentioned on TV post-911.

Interesting how US General claims they're helping stop killings:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
And how we're making the leap from IED's to nuclear weapons.

Anyways I hope we can get some sort of details on-topic before this turns into a derailed and emotional debate about the Iran situation in general.

Hopefully Tom Bedlam will pop in here and give a more thoughtful explanation, but until then suffice it to say that nuclear forensics is still a growing field, It has not yet reached the goal of 100% identification of the origin of all nuclear material.

Not to mention that the material could be stolen from another country, thus pointing toward the wrong country as the culprit.

ya iran is the boogie man, and so is iraq, and afghan, they got nukes! and iraq has WMD. fool me once shame on you , fool me twice....



saudi arabia is the most corrupt country over there, with the biggest ties to 9/11, yet people buy that we are trying to spread freedom and democracy thru "shock and awe".

we need saudi's investments in USA so bad that they get media silence while iran gets the bullseye and yet people can't see this.

It is absolutely possible.

Tracking nukes is not as easy as one might think. I see no reason that would stop anyone operating inside Iran or any other country from handing off a nuke.

There are probably many ways to try and track nuke movements but if you bury the thing inside enough metal and concrete it should be able to move undetected.

I don't think Iran would be so foolish. WOW how stupid would that be to allow a nuke out of Iran. Why?

If a nuke went of anywhere in the U.S. then it would be full scale retaliation against Iran. Bush has such an itchy trigger finger that there is no way he would resist the temptation to nuke Iran if something happened here.

I think Ama-what'shisname knows this. He'd be a suicidal fool to attack the U.S. either directly, or by proxy.

I think the odds of Iran posing a military threat to us are in the 0.01% or less range.

Yet, we will have to wait and see if anything gets done and who might be blamed.

I personally believe there will be too many people in the U.S. that would suspect the government itself if we got nuked for any supposed reason. Either as a false-flag operation, or simply neglecting the duty of closing our borders and maintaining security around them.

If we got nuked, the U.S. would look guilty from every angle. The people would blame the military and the bush administration for not protecting us HERE at our ports and borders, and instead wasting time, money, and men overseas while out back door of our country is wide open.

It's worth noting that just because a nuke "comes out of Iran" it doesn't mean the government of Iran was responsible for it.

The belief is that the Iranian Government or radical elements therein would be able to get control of a device, or the technology, or nuclear material and give them to one of the many groups which have relations (official or unofficial) with them.

Iran is rightly accused IMHO of sponsoring, supporting and orchestrating a great deal of mischief. Examples include the Iranian proxy, Hezbollah; the arming of Iraqi Shiite militias; President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's oft quoted dislike of Israel etc...

Iran should not have nukes and they should be stopped, but the best way to deal with these regimes is not to unleash the bombers because that will be the road to ruin.

Regards

Originally posted by anxietydisorder
I think this is something that Iran would do just because of their history. It's their weapons going into Iraq that are already killing American soldiers.

what are you talking about? there history? Iraq invaded using money and intel supplied by the USA in the 1980`s and weapons:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

US Army officers are selling the guns themselves to make a fast buck


and after talks:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by paraphi
The belief is that the Iranian Government or radical elements therein would be able to get control of a device, or the technology, or nuclear material and give them to one of the many groups which have relations (official or unofficial) with them.

any proof at all or just suposition?

Iran is rightly accused IMHO of sponsoring, supporting and orchestrating a great deal of mischief. Examples include the Iranian proxy, Hezbollah; the arming of Iraqi Shiite militias; President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's oft quoted dislike of Israel etc...

a certain person who lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue (well the office not just the man there at present) is very much guilty of everything you state.

Iran should not have nukes and they should be stopped, but the best way to deal with these regimes is not to unleash the bombers because that will be the road to ruin.

Regards

They are allowed as an NPT signatory to have nuclear power - they allready have a working reactor anyway (of the same vintage as the Israelie reactor at Dimona) but want a commerical one.

they have jumped through the hoops that the USA want them to do - way beyond anyone else , and the IAEA are happy with them - its the USA and Israel which arn`t happy.

[edit on 24/11/07 by Harlequin]

Originally posted by Harlequin
any proof at all or just suposition?

I think it is widely reported that one of the worries with Iran having nuclear weapons is possibility that these weapons, materials or technologies would find their way into the hands of those with less respect for life and peace and harmony. Like everything around "possible futures" it is all hypothetical.

Originally posted by Harlequin
a certain person who lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue (well the office not just the man there at present) is very much guilty of everything you state.

I don't think the US Gov supports Hezbollah; the arming of Iraqi Shiite militias; or wiping Israel off the map. Don't let your anti-US Gov sentiments cloud reality.

Originally posted by Harlequin
They are allowed as an NPT signatory to have nuclear power - they allready have a working reactor anyway (of the same vintage as the Israelie reactor at Dimona) but want a commerical one.

they have jumped through the hoops that the USA want them to do - way beyond anyone else , and the IAEA are happy with them - its the USA and Israel which arn`t happy.

Sorry, but you should study what the IAEA have said. The IAEA are reviewing the latest Iranian response (there was a formal meet a couple of days ago). Also, you need to bear in mind that this is not just a US driven anti-Iranian nuclear programme because the EU has been collectively miffed with Iran too. The concern is not over allowing Iran to develop nuclear power - which they are entitled to do - the issue is that they should suspend the enrichment and open themselves to scrutiny.

Regards

If, and I mean 'if', Iran had a nuclear capability then it must be assumed that they, at least, could hand weapons to terroists. This is frghtning stuff, for Isreal at least.

Originally posted by paraphi

[ I don't think the US Gov supports Hezbollah; the arming of Iraqi Shiite militias; or wiping Israel off the map.

The US has been responsible for arming many groups at least as questionable as those (remember Afghanistan?). As for wiping Israel off the map, that one got debunked some time ago.

Would the US ever pass nuclear weapons to other groups, say those trying to overthrow a particular regime? If there was no other way of achieving the objective, I'm sure there are many who would argue that it was a necessary evil.

As for attribution of nuclear weapons (i.e. where the bomb came from)...who are you going to believe exactly?

reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss


in my honest opinion this topic is retarded (not the auther but the theory)
Iran has stock piles of Biological weapons which it could have easily given to extremiest just like the US could have done and do when it does what Iran does and arm proxy groups,

even Iran has limits to what weapons it going to give



also paraphi what planet you living on?
the United states arms more groups then most countries combined

Originally posted by bodrul
also paraphi what planet you living on?
the United states arms more groups then most countries combined

Planet Earth is where I live. I am struggling to think of a current terrorist group funded and supplied by the US. We are talking about the present.

reply to post by paraphi


saudi arabia,
the shia rulers if iraq
egypt
israel
ethiopia
sudan

and so on.

iran has no nukes as of yet,there is no proof they are trying to built nukes anywhere.what they are doing is enrichment,
en.wikipedia.org...

which many countries round the world do.

i dont like the extremist iranian regime,i might add.

you are not going to give such a powerfull weapon to people whom you cannot trust.

reply to post by welivefortheson


I think this is a generalization of sorts just because a there are terrorists coming from these countries does not mean they are terrorist regimes

Here in the states have had our share of home grown terrorism as well but if you use that ideology then we have to consider the U.S.A. a terrorist regime as well..

If you believe we are or not, well, that is up to you I choose to think that we make and have made many mistakes but are not just like most of the countries on the list presented..

Respectfully
GEO

Originally posted by welivefortheson
saudi arabia,
the shia rulers if iraq
egypt
israel
ethiopia
sudan

and so on.

With the greatest respect, which of these nations is a terrorist organisation? The Shia a group of people.

Just a collection from Google on terrorist organisations...

HM Home Office
State Watch
FAS dot Org

Regards