It's official: Iran has nukes

Is it official? Show me the press conference and pictures then. You say: If true. How is that official.
Ok, to the HOAX section and ban 1 month. Thank you.

reply to post by jemoeder


Has Iran finally entered the austere club of nuclear armed nations or not then ???

What is certainly true is they will do at some point if they haven't already.Also when they do I wouldn't count on a double page announcement in The Times or Wall St Journal !!!

And what if they have,it doesn't mean the end of the world.If I was an Iranian I'd be generally uneasy knowing Israel had nuclear weapons and Iran didn't

.I mean,they're not exactly renowned for their humane and measured responses are they.That maybe with some reason initially,they're certainly infamous for the pre-emptive strike and a rather brutal,voilent foriegn policy.With a neighbour such as Israel I'd want my own nuclear deterrent aswell.

Also depite UN and US pressure I'm not wholly sure there's anything illegal in what Iran's doing,it just suits America and Israel that Israel is militarily the strongman in the Middle East but it's an inherently unbalanced state of affairs.Keeping the peace,what there is of it,in the whole region by having a strong nuclear armed Israel and maintaining everyone else as a lesser force is a truly artificial approach that common sense suggests is more dangerous than Iran having some parity with them.

And of all the nations in the last 67 years that have become nuclear how many have actually used them in anger.....??

Only one that I know of !!!

Even IF Iran had nukes....the U.S. would own the trigger. Statements were made, after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Besides that, everyone complies to the big boss. Whoever the "big boss" may be. Do you ever think we will get the game being played on us? It always starts with: DIVISION!

reply to post by Trajan


Most Ultra-Advanced U.S. Weapon Systems have been deamed Last Use.

The difference between a country that is developing Nukes and Irans attempt to do so is that Iran could not do so on it's own.

Iran had to sign the NPT which it has now broken in order to purchase the tech necessary to build a Nuke.

Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


Just like North Korea.

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Trajan

 

Most Ultra-Advanced U.S. Weapon Systems have been deamed Last Use.

The difference between a country that is developing Nukes and Irans attempt to do so is that Iran could not do so on it's own.

They got everything they needed from A.Q. Khan (technical materials/instructions, advice) they have also had covert assistance from North Korea, and from Russian scientists/weapons development professionals etc.

The ONLY thing Iran did not have until now was the highly enriched uranium needed for their bombs/warheads. and of course at least one practical small scale test. Which may not need to be done in Iran, in fact it could happen and may have already in either North Korea, or Pakistan.

The only question that really needs to be answered here is not will Iran have nukes, they already do and/or are so close that they are past the point of no return, so the questions are: Can Israel be restrained from launching unilateral preemptive strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities and weapons sites? and if so, for how long?

Good luck.

reply to post by ausername


Despite thoughts to the contrary...when it comes to Military action...Israel does what the U.S. allows it to do and many times actions that the U.S. has sanctioned has been carried out by an only too happy to do it Israel.

Israel takes the heat but make no mistake...such actions are always discussed with the U.S. If they were not it could place Multiple Billions in aid to Israel at risk.

Split Infinity

reply to post by superman2012


China has reigned in North Korea to a great deal. The North is totally untrustworthy.

Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


That leaves Israel with two choices, accept a nuclear armed Iran, or do something to eliminate a nuclear Iran.

Dangerous choices for them, neither is good.

Israel could go without US support alone, and expect that the USA would be drawn into it one way or another. They have no faith in diplomacy, and even less in the current US administration.

I suppose a damned if you do and damned if you don't position can make anything possible.

We'll just have to wait and see...

reply to post by ausername


The curent U.S. administration has a dismal record with dealing with Iran. Should Iran actually build a Nuke I think we would see U.S. Military action.

Split Infinity

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
Should Iran actually build a Nuke I think we would see U.S. Military action.

I'm sure there are many within the Iranian regime that would laugh really hard at that line.

reply to post by ausername


To allow Iran to break the NPT as well as building a Nuke would set a very dangerous precedent.

It would be less dangerous for the U.S. to take Military action that to allow this to fester.

Split Infinity

Originally posted by BSFC123
Ahmadinejad has stated publicly that Israel should be wiped off the map. That is not propaganda, those are his words.

Not saying the Iranian people want it. But the people in control sure do.

Ahmadinejad never said such a thing. It is propaganda! This is a lie that is repeated over and over, Hitler style. He was mistranslated, probably on purpose. What he was saying is that the Zionist regime would be wiped from the page of history. What this means is that the Zionists control in Israel will end. This means that Netanyahu and his ilk will lose their power. Zionists want to steal other people's lands and build settlements there. This is their ideology.

Iran according to all intelligence agencies has not built a nuclear weapon, is not going to build a nuclear weapon, and has not enriched uranium beyond 20%. Iran needs nuclear power to produce electricity. Iran cannot produce electricity from oil because they lack the refining capacity. The US has a lot of oil and uses nuclear plants. If Iran decided to build a nuclear weapon, they would have to enrich preferably to 99% which would take a long time. What would be the problem if Iran decided to build nuclear weapons anyway? Do you think they are suicidal and would use them immediately against another country that has them? I know a lot of people have been brainwashed to believe that. Iran has every right to nuclear weapons. The reason the US and Israel don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons is that its a deterrent. The US has never invaded a country that possessed weapons of mass destruction. In the case of Iraq they made sure that country was disarmed with years of inspections and sanctions. No attack on nuclear North Korea. No invasion of Syria yet; they still have chemical weapons, but the US is training Al Qaida to secure these weapons. If Iran possesses nuclear weapons the United States will not be able to invade that country and exploit its natural resources.

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by ausername

 

To allow Iran to break the NPT as well as building a Nuke would set a very dangerous precedent.

It would be less dangerous for the U.S. to take Military action that to allow this to fester.

Split Infinity

We have been over and over and over this. While you have shown that Iran has broken the NPT, I have shown you that no country has followed it to the letter. Also, the precedent has already been set with nuke building. Other countries have them, some that are not a part of the NPT and one that dropped out of the NPT Also, not one intelligence report from either side have stated that Iran is building a bomb. All you are talking about is the fear spouted on the MSM and conjecture on Iran's future plans (MSM thoughts) about what might be possible if they were to enrich to 85% or higher and build a missile that they could attach it to.
Enriching uranium does not = nuclear bombs...but they are counting on people not understanding that, just as they fooled all of us with Iraq's WMD.

reply to post by SplitInfinity

Should Iran actually build a Nuke I think we would see U.S. Military action.

Should aliens arrive and start skinning Americans for clothes I think we would see U.S. Military action as well.

reply to post by superman2012


You are right but out of all these countries we can count Iran, North Korea and Pakistan as three that are known to sell weapon systems to terrorist orgs.

This is the problem.

Split Infinity

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by superman2012

 

You are right but out of all these countries we can count Iran, North Korea and Pakistan as three that are known to sell weapon systems to terrorist orgs.

This is the problem.

Split Infinity

You need to add the USA to that list, infact, they should be your number 1.

P

reply to post by pheonix358


It is true that although Israel had both the Scientists and Knowledge to build their own Nuclear Reactors as well as be able to build a Nuclear Bomb...when almost the whole Arab World attempted to invade Israel and lost and then Egypt vowed to try again...the U.S. covertly supplied Israel with Weapons Grade Nuclear Fuel from the DOE's Oakridge Facility.

But other than this...the U.S. Policy is not to help any country obtain either Nuclear Tech. or Fuel.

Split Infinity

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by superman2012

 

Again North Korea has not signed the NPT. Iran did because if it did not it would not have been allowed to purchase Russian Nuclear Tech. and purchase Russian Reactor Fuel.

It signed then broke the NPT. There will be consequences.

IF...Iran decides to assemble an Old Style Fission Bomb...and it does have enough Weapons Grade Fuel now for one or two...and as I stated the tech. involved in the construction of say a Bullet style weapon...this is when a Fission Bomb uses a certain amount of Uranium and has inside it a barrel that shoots a Bullet of Uranium that once hits and enters the larger amount of Uranium creates critical mass and thus a reaction.

There are two other viable Fission Bomb designs and the two that use Plutonium are either designed with a ball of Uranium that is forced into implosion by surrounding this ball with tiles of explosive. This explosive tiles are all independently wired and in order for implosion to occur the tiles must all detonate at once which is tricky given different wire lengths mean different detonation times. Precise calculations must be used.

There is also a Fired Bullet of Plutonium very much like the Bullet of Uranium but because Plutonium is used instead of Uranium a Higher Velocity must be obtained by that Plutonium Bullet. Thus the Bomb must be long to accomidate a long Barrel to shoot and obtain a higher velocity by the Plutonium Bullet.

The U.S. in 1945 used a Uraniun Bullet and Barrel Design called Little Boy. The Plutonium Implosion Bomb was named Fat Man. The U.S. did not develop the Bullet Barrel Plutonium device as it would be too long for use in being dropped from a B-29.

My point is this is common knowledge of how such a weapon is to be designed and built...it is not all that difficult. The thing that is difficult is getting the Uranium or Plutonium at Weapons Grade Enrichment to place in the bombs. Iran has enough Weapons Grade Uranium to do this for one or two bombs.

This is why they broke the NPT in order to get this amount of Enriched Uranium...building the actual Bomb itself is an afterthought.

Split Infinity

There are a lot of problems with this post. First of all an atomic bomb IS hard to build. You have to have expertise in metallurgy to get the fissionable metal right after you have acquired it. Its not just about acquiring weapons grade. You have to have expertise with different kinds of explosives with different detonation velocities to make the explosive lenses for an implosion design. You have to have expertise in fast electronics to initiate the explosives properly. You have to insert a burst of neutrons precisely at maximum compression, achieved by either a Be Po urchin or a neutron gun. Polonium is made in reactors. Neutron guns require tritium I believe, also from reactors with relatively short half life. You want a fission primary to be boosted either with a DT gas or Lithium deuteride. Also you have to design the reflector and the tamper. You want safety features to prevent detonation. Neutron flux can affect electronics. You wouldn't want to build a gun-type design with plutonium. It would fissile because the reaction rate is too high. It blows itself apart before assembly. Actually its not firing a bullet at a mass. Its firing a ring onto a spike, like shooting a donut. You are not getting a lot of compression of the metal with gun-type, that's why you would have to use way more than a critical mass, four times the amount was used on little boy I believe, which was never tested before use.