Report Says Iran Has Data to Make a Nuclear Bomb

Here is some news.

20. Concerning the alleged work to design and build an EBW detonator and a suitable detonator
firing unit, Iran acknowledged that it had conducted simultaneous testing with two to three EBW
detonators with a time precision of about one microsecond. Iran said, however, that this was intended
for civil and conventional military applications. Iran further stated, inter alia, that there was no
evidence in the documents presented to it to link them to Iran.

A second aspect concerns the development and testing of high voltage detonator firing
equipment and exploding bridgewire (EBW) detonators including, inter alia, the simultaneous firing of
multiple EBW detonators; an underground testing arrangement (GOV/2008/4, para. 39); and the
testing of at least one full scale hemispherical, converging, explosively driven shock system that could
be applicable to an implosion-type nuclear device. A third aspect of the studies concerns development
work alleged to have been performed to redesign the inner cone of the Shahab-3 missile re-entry
vehicle to accommodate a nuclear warhead

.

This link actually tells the whole story.
www.iaea.org...

Here's something that's also interesting:

Brown and Sarkozy rowed with Obama over Iranian nuclear announcement

Gordon Brown and Nicolas Sarkozy had a behind-the-scenes row with Barack Obama over last week's announcement about a secret uranium enrichment plant in Iran.

The President is believed to have angered the European leaders by insisting on delaying a joint press conference until after he had chaired a meeting of the UN Security Council.

Mr Obama is said to have been worried the announcement would undermine the impact of his session on nuclear non-proliferation.

Details of the disagreement appeared to explain why Mr Brown and Mr Sarkozy, the French president, took a harder line on Iran than the American leader at the meeting

The Prime Minister said it was time "to draw a line in the sand" on Tehran's nuclear programme while the Frenchman mocked Mr Obama for the naivety of his "dreams" of eliminating nuclear weapons.

According to French officials, Mr Brown and particularly Mr Sarkozy wanted to make a declaration on Sep 24, either at the Security Council meeting chaired by the US president or just afterwards.

The Europeans considered that there was no better stage from which to tell the world that the three countries' intelligence services had worked together to uncover an underground uranium enrichment facility under construction at Qom.

But Mr Obama did not want to "spoil the image of success" of his disarmament session, which passed a resolution to work towards a nuclear-free world and a host of measures designed to control the spread of nuclear weapons and reduce existing stocks.

After much arm-twisting, Mr Brown and Mr Sarkozy were persuaded to delay the announcement until the opening of the G20 summit the next day in Pittsburgh.

Their joint appearance on Sep 25 overshadowed declarations about shifting the balance of power from the G8 to the G20 and launching a framework to rebalance economic growth.

News of the disagreement came as Mohammed ElBaradei, the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, was due to arrive in Tehran today [Sat].

He was expected to finalise a visit by inspectors to the enrichment facility within a fortnight, the allies have made progress in the prolonged impasse over Iran's nuclear programme.

Obama is on planet cuckoo-land, just like I've been saying, assuming this story is accurate.

reply to post by john124


John, are you a nuclear expert of engineer? You keep saying that it would take specialized training and experience to build a nuclear weapon without exposing yourself to radiation and other peril. I am curious how exactly you would know this, or is it simply your opinion from lay knowledge of nuclear weapons?

For the record, I studied history and science on college level from my entry into high school. I then went to college for a couple of semesters and continued my studies. During those 5-6 years, I learned not once, but at least three times the differant processes that are used to make nuclear weapons. In addition, the plans are available from the original patents.

Yes, there are challenging parts. 1) How to handle the radioactive material safely 2) How to shape the geometic charge to correctly implode the payload and 3) how to correctly detonate the shaped charge to create a balanced explosion.

These are real challenges, but they are all basic for military experts + nuclear engineers, both of which Iran has. Iran is no third world nation. They have advanced robotics and computers, just like the US. They are more than capable of building something like this, but it is not because they had nefarious schemes and planning. Its because it is not that hard to begin with. What you need specialists for is increasing yield and making specialty versions such as "dial-a-yield" nukes. If they were working on that, they would have at least tested a nuke already and there is ZERO evidence that they have.

Honestly, I don't see the issue. Based on the history of the 20th century, the U.S. is much more likely to abuse their power and weapons than Iran is. I am not very well briefed on the Iran/Iraq conflict, but from what I do know, it seems that Sadam - with the assistance of the CIA - was the one launching chemical weapons, not Iran.

[edit on 10-3-2009 by rogerstigers]