Fears grow over Syria uranium stockpile

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:45 PM
link   
What next Guys how much more can they say to get us in there? This year seems to be a deeper early start of Fearing the masses

www.jpost.com...

'Financial Times' reports that up to 50 tons of enriched uranium may be in Syria, a stockpile large enough for five atomic bombs.

Concern is heightening over the possible existence of up to 50 tons of enriched uranium in Syria, the Financial Times reported Tuesday, a stockpile large enough for the production of five atomic bombs.

To date, governments have largely focused on the fate of Syria’s chemical weapons, and preventing their seizure by Islamic militants spearheading the ongoing uprising against President Bashar Assad's rule.




posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ANDERSON23
 


enriched to what level? You need upwards of 80% enrichment to make a usable nuclear device, but any level of enrichment could still pose a threat as a dirty bomb....

Why would Iran be trying to get Uranium from Syria while they already have their own, and the ability to enrich it themselves?

for those who didn't read the linked article....

The reactor Syria had built, and subsequently bombed by Israel, would have taken around 50 tons of "natural uranium" to operate. After it was bombed, and inspected, only traces of Uranium were found, leaving them wondering if the Uranium was relocated.


Natural uranium (NU) refers to refined uranium with the same isotopic ratio as found in nature. It contains 0.7% uranium-235, 99.3% uranium-238, and a trace of uranium-234 by weight. In terms of the amount of radioactivity, approximately 2.2% comes from uranium-235, 48.6% uranium-238, and 49.2% uranium-234.

Natural uranium can be used to fuel both low- and high-power reactors. Historically, graphite moderated reactors and heavy water moderated reactors have been fueled with natural uranium in the pure metal (U) or uranium dioxide (UO2) ceramic forms, however experimental fuelings with uranium trioxide (UO3) and triuranium octaoxide, (U3O8) have shown promise.[1]

The 0.72% U-235 is not sufficient to produce a self-sustaining critical chain reaction in light water reactors or nuclear weapons; these applications must use enriched uranium. In rare occasions, earlier in geologic history when U-235 was more abundant, uranium ore was found to have naturally engaged in fission, forming natural nuclear fission reactors.


Source
edit on 9-1-2013 by phishyblankwaters because: (no reason given)


So let's recap the article and the truth...

Article states 50 tons of enriched Uranium might be missing
Reality states that only 50 tons of NATURAL Uranium would have been at the site.
edit on 9-1-2013 by phishyblankwaters because: (no reason given)


now this much I know. Converting Uranium to enriched Uranium, specifically highly enriched (80% or above) takes time, plenty of equipment, and lots of energy, depending on the method.

but here's what I don't know, how much weight is lost during the enrichment process? You are seperating Isotopes to try to raise the levels uf u235 or 233 to make it usable, but during this process, how much Uranium is wasted?

Does 50 tons of Natural Uranium produce 50 tons of highly enriched? I'd think not, but I'm not a nuclear scientist.

What I do know is this seems to be fear mongering, and another pathetic attempt to tie anything nefarious on earth with Iran.

edit on 9-1-2013 by phishyblankwaters because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


I don't think they had a chance to find out what level enrichment was at due to the place being bombed and all still on top of that 50 tonnes is more then enough for some crude devices, Considering Assad and the way he has handle the current situation in his country I can't see any Uranium being passed to terrorists and I dare say if he still had any it would of either been shipped out of the country Iran maybe or even Russia maybe even Venezuela who knows, Or its sat tight bunkered down ?



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Well, if true, it's not a reason to push for seeing MORE happen in taking out Assad. It's reason to turn this damn thing OFF. The West created the FSA by the ongoing and wide support along with Qatar and Saudi of course, but the U.S. supplies them so the difference is academic.

Israel did destroy what reports seemed to suggest was a nuclear facility of some sort in the desert well before all the current unrest and uprising across that region began. It wouldn't shock me if material is there. Assad and his family have ruled the nation with STABILITY for 30+ years though...so IF it holds any truth, lets see about stopping the radical jihadis tearing up everything in their path to get to all this.....and not the national government KNOWN to have not done stupid things up to this point. Just me suggesting a Captain Obvious moment. lol



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:10 PM
link   
I must make clear I'm not trying to portray this info as the truth, But to make people aware of what is being thrown at us all and the average everyday person wouldn't Question as much as we do.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by ANDERSON23
 





I don't think they had a chance to find out what level enrichment was at due to the place being bombed and all still on top of that 50 tonnes is more then enough for some crude devices,


Clearly you didn't read your own article, they knew the reactor requires 50 tons of Natural Uranium to operate, and was about ready to go live.

50 tons, unless it's enriched past 20% is useless for anything other than maybe radiation poisoning, it doesn't contain enough fissile material to maintain a chain reaction.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by ANDERSON23
 





I must make clear I'm not trying to portray this info as the truth, But to make people aware of what is being thrown at us all and the average everyday person wouldn't Question as much as we do.


Don't take my pulling at strings as an indication of my blaming you or putting the onus of the articles veracity on you.

The fears are real, but the article is misleading from the get go. 50 tons of natural uranium is possibly missing, not 50 tons of enriched uranium. And again, Iran has the ability to enrich their own stockpiles, so if we are to believe they are secretly doing just that, why go on the open market trying to buy it?

Niger? Yellow cake anyone?



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


I did read the Article, and the point of the Article here is the basis of terrorists gaining material for a dirty bomb like you said Uranium at that level would only be useful as a radioactive agent a firework with the components of an X-ray machine can be designated as a Dirty Bomb.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


I appreciate your input its hard to tell a persons intent via a computer lol

thank you for the contribution I enjoy others contributing as it helps me out with my knowledge



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 11:44 PM
link   
So because Assad has done the right thing in moving his Chemical weapons to safer places where they cannot be taken by terrorists, they are turning their attention to enriched uranium? I think the people making these accusations need a bullet themselves. They will try anything to get people rooting for them. I think this is more propaganda, sorry.
edit on 9-1-2013 by DarknStormy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


I agree completely thats the point I was making and what I meant by the average person would be susceptible to this as they don't like to question what may or may not be true no need to be sorry by the way





new topics
top topics
 
0

log in

join