Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 2/18/2006 8:07:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/18/2006 8:56:24 PM EDT by Bostonterrier97]
from:www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/12/wiran112.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/02/12/ixnewstop.html


Pentagon plans to derail Iranian atomic bomb test
Philip Sherwell in Washington
(Filed: 12/02/2006)

Iran has drawn up designs for a deep underground tunnel with remote-controlled heat and pressure sensors as part of what Western intelligence officials believe are preparations for a secret atomic test.


The plans, which American and British intelligence conclude are genuine after studying them on a laptop computer smuggled out of Iran by a defector, appear to be the latest evidence that Teheran is conducting a clandestine nuclear weapons programme.


The Natanz enrichment facility

The existence of the sophisticated sketches for a 400-metre long subterranean test shaft was made public last week in The Washington Post. The welter of documents and disclosures provides what Western governments believe is an overwhelming circumstantial case that Iran is seeking an "Islamic bomb".

Washington and London won International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) support last weekend for Iran to be reported to the United Nations Security Council, after the clerical regime resumed banned centrifuge research work at its Natanz uranium-enrichment plant.

Publicly, even American hawks such as Vice-President Dick Cheney are backing the diplomatic track to resolve the showdown over Iran's nuclear programme, which Teheran claims is for peaceful energy purposes. But the Sunday Telegraph has learnt from a senior Pentagon adviser that, as the crisis deepened in recent months, military strategists have been updating plans for "last-resort" military strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. The raids would be ordered if President George W Bush is advised that they are the only remaining option to prevent the Islamic republic from acquiring atomic weapons.

Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, has consistently made clear that Britain opposes a military solution. He fears that even the threat of bombing will sabotage any hope of securing a united international diplomatic front against Teheran - as well as again splitting the Labour Party. British diplomats highlight the chaos that Iran, if attacked, could unleash in the region through its Shia surrogates in Iraq, Hizbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Palestinian territories.

A high-powered British diplomatic delegation visited Washington last week to discuss tactics with Nicholas Burns, the State Department's number three. They want to increase co-operation with Iranian exiles and make better use of satellite television channels and the internet to spread the message inside Iran that the West's opposition to Teheran's nuclear programme is not an imperialist anti-Islamic plot, as the mullahs claim.

Britain is hoping that the threat of action by the Security Council, including possible financial sanctions, will expose differences within the regime on how far to push its game of nuclear brinkmanship. But there is a growing belief in Washington that it will be impossible to win the required Chinese and Russian support at the UN for any significant measures that might inhibit Iran's nuclear ambitions.

The review of the Pentagon's contingency plans follows the stream of recent discoveries of Iran's secret nuclear operations and the virulent rhetoric of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad since he was elected last year. Iran is still thought to be anywhere between three and 10 years away from physically producing a nuclear weapon. But the West and Israel believe the "point of no return" - when Iran's scientists acquire the technological know-how and experience to make an atomic bomb - could be reached much sooner.

The Pentagon adviser told the this newspaper: "We will have reached the point of no return in the next couple of years. If diplomacy hasn't worked by then, Iran will be a long way down the line to acquiring a nuclear weapon. We're talking about choosing the least bad of a series of bad options. President Bush will also be nearing the end of his term and have to decide if he trusts this issue to another administration or wants to use the B2s." In a separate interview, Richard Perle, a senior defence official at the time of the Iraq war and who maintains close links to the military, said that 12 B2 bombers, each carrying dozens of precision-guided weapons, could deliver a serious blow to Iran's nuclear ambitions.

"If the President were faced with the choice between Iran crossing the line to become a nuclear weapon state and using force to destroy or significantly delay that prospect, then I believe he would use force," Mr Perle said. "That decision will be made at the last moment but there is certainly strong contingency planning for that. I think the decision-making elite in Washington would back Mr Bush if that was seen to be his only choice."

Iran has been preparing by strengthening air defence systems and building tunnels intended to hide atomic material and facilities from a bombing campaign, Jane's Defence Weekly reported this month.

The regime has spread its nuclear programme across several sites, some of them underground, after drawing lessons from the 1981 Israeli air strike that wiped out Saddam Hussein's efforts to produce an Iraqi plutonium bomb at Osirak. But United States military strategists believe that by targeting certain key "bottleneck" facilities - probably the Natanz uranium-enrichment site, the Isfahan conversion plant and the Arak heavy water reactor - they could hobble the whole programme for years.

"There may well be secret sites out there but a nuclear programme is not that easy to hide," said Dan Goure, a Pentagon consultant and vice-president of the Lexington Institute defence think-tank. "You need large sites for uranium enrichment and manufacturing plutonium. It's not like a biological or chemical warfare programme: you cannot conduct research in a Petri dish."

Mr Perle and Dr Goure believe that America is better equipped to carry out the attacks than Israel, whose F15s and F16s would encounter refuelling problems. In a further signal that if strikes were required the US would prefer to carry them out, Mr Bush said last week that America would "rise to Israel's defence" if Iran threatened it.

Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:10:38 PM EDT
It's time to play Tom Clancy....

We need to set off a nuke at that site and make it look like an accident of their making.

Am I nuts?
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:10:40 PM EDT
If Iran gets nukes, there will be a hell of a lot of people that will need to lose their job
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:12:16 PM EDT
But they only want it for power.
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:12:23 PM EDT
oh boy
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:20:49 PM EDT
This situation is beginning to reach its own critical mass!

I hope our guys in the sandbox are ready for anything that shakes out of this.
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:23:38 PM EDT
They are just begging for a spanking.
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:32:12 PM EDT
If they're testing, then they're probably developing a implosion-type plutonium bomb, which is the AQ Khan/Chinese design. With the gun-type U-235 bombs, testing is optional. They're kind of fool-proof if you've got scientists and engineers building it.
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:32:56 PM EDT
Get your papers in orders, head for the hills. WW III is going up another notch.
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:34:23 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:35:31 PM EDT
Damn these Iranians.

They are going to make my life a little more difficult.
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:38:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By raven:
If they're testing, then they're probably developing a implosion-type plutonium bomb, which is the AQ Khan/Chinese design. With the gun-type U-235 bombs, testing is optional. They're kind of fool-proof if you've got scientists and engineers building it.



Why go the hard way, bigger yield?
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:38:37 PM EDT
good! i'll have somene to drop bombs on when I get on active duty!


Warheads on Foreheads
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:44:19 PM EDT

Commentary
from:www.nationalreview.com/ledeen/ledeen200602170951.asp

A Mullah’s-Eye View of the World
Iran is acting on its assessment of the West’s strength and resolve.


by Michael Ledeen

Sometime in late November or early December, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei gathered his top advisers for an overall strategic review. The atmosphere was highly charged, because Khamenei’s doctors have diagnosed a serious cancer, and do not expect the Supreme Leader to live much more than a year. A succession struggle is already under way, with the apparently unsinkable Hashemi Rafsanjani in the thick of it, even though Khamenei, and his increasingly powerful son Mushtaba, is opposed to the perennial candidate-for-whatever.

Despite this disquieting news, the overall tone of the conversation was upbeat, because the Iranians believe they see many positive developments, above all, the declaration that "it has been promised that by 8 April, we will be in a position to show the entire world that 'we are members of the club.'" This presumably refers to nuclear weapons. Against this cheery background, the assessment of the Iranian leaders continued:

The weakness of the Bush administration is notable. Recent public opinion polls show the country seriously divided, and the top Iranian experts on North America have concluded that the president is paralyzed, unable to make any tough decision (and hence unable to order an attack against Iran);
2006 is an election year, and even some Republicans are distancing themselves from Bush, weakening the White House even further;

Israel is facing the darkest moment in its history (remember that this conversation took place before Sharon’s stroke). Likud is divided, Netanyahu is openly against Sharon, and the Labor party has lost its old guard. No strong government is possible (and hence Israel is similarly unable to order an attack against Iran). Therefore this is a moment for Iran to take maximum advantage;

Iranian power and prestige is at an all-time high among the Palestinian terrorist groups, from Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Fatah, to secular, even Communist groups. Terrorists who in the past had rejected Iranian approaches now travel to Tehran for support;

The Syrians have given Iran final say over the activities of Sunni terrorist groups in their country;

Iran now exercises effective control over groups ranging from Hezbollah, Ansar al-Islam, al Qaeda, Jaish-e-Muhammad, Jaish-e-Mahdi, and Jaish-e-Huti (Yemen) to the Joint Shi’ite Army of Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Syria, and part of Saudi Arabia, as well as Islamic movements in Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia;

In the four and a half months since Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has become president, he has brought the extremist group led by Mezbah Yazdi under control, and, notably, he has forced Syria to resist all pressure from the United States;

The Europeans are no longer necessary for the Iranian strategy, and can now be "thrown out of our game." They are in no position to do any damage because they are too busy fighting with one another;

Khamenei called for two urgent missions. The first was to do everything possible to drive up oil prices by an additional 30 percent by the first week in April. The second was to intensify the propaganda war against the West in the same period. He stressed that it was important to compel the United States to face at least three crises by the April 8.

In short, the Iranians at the highest levels of the regime believe they have good reason for behaving quite feisty, and if you look at the events that have taken place since then, you will see that the mullahs are acting consistently with the analysis presented to (and in part by) Khamenei. The propaganda war — lately and dramatically in the form of the cartoon crusades — has indeed been intensified. The Europeans have been systematically dissed, and more: their embassies in Tehran have been stoned, Iranian diplomats have insulted them with regularity, and the regime slapped a trade embargo on all goods coming from the infidel Europeans. When the French announced that the Iranian nuclear program was undoubtedly designed to produce weapons, Tehran demanded an apology. Above all, there is no longer any pretense of cooperation with the Big Three negotiators on the nuclear program.

This suggests that the mullahs do indeed believe they have acquired nuclear weapons, and there is no longer any need to play stalling games with the Germans, French, and Brits. Nor is there any reason to feign humanity in the treatment of their own people. The repression of any and all groups which might conceivably organize an anti-mullah revolution looks to reach the historic levels of the immediate post-revolutionary period, when hanging judges routinely ordered the execution of thousands of citizens for often-fabricated crimes. Of late, the regime has beaten, tortured, and incarcerated thousands of Tehran bus drivers, Bahais, Sufis, and Ahwaz Arabs, and they have even threatened the families of political prisoners, saying that the whole lot of dissidents will be killed if the U.N. votes for sanctions.

This brutal and open use of the mailed fist bespeaks utter contempt for the West; Khamenei & Co. do not think we will respond, do not fear Western action, and believe this is a historic movement for the advance of their vision of clerical fascism. But it also bespeaks a chilling recognition of their nemesis: the Iranian people. President Ahmadinejad recently canceled most foreign travel by regime officials, for example, which is not the sign of a confident mullahcracy; quite the contrary, in their heart of hearts, they know that they are walking a fragile tightrope, and their incessant preventive actions against normal Iranians look very much like Mickey Mouse in , racing frantically to stop an army of bucket-carrying brooms from drowning him.

Moreover, the runaway optimism (which in many clerical minds goes hand in hand with the conviction that the Shiite Messiah, the 12th Imam, is about to reappear, thereby ushering in the End of Days) is not as solidly grounded as the mullahs might wish. For starters, oil prices are headed south, not toward the 30-percent increase ordered by the supreme leader. And the analysis of the perceived “paralysis” of the United States is nothing more than a replay of the usual blunder committed by our enemies, who look at us and see fractious politics, widespread self-indulgence, and an unwillingness or inability to face up to real war. In this, as in so many other ways, the mullahs of the Islamic Republic are emulating failed tyrants, from the German Kaiser and Führer to the Italian Duce, the Iraqi dictator, and the Soviet Communist first secretaries, all of whom learned, to their ruin, that free societies are quite capable of turning on a dime and defending their interests and values with unanticipated ferocity.

And indeed, after years of dithering, we now have the first encouraging signs that this administration is inclined to support revolution in Iran. Secretary of State Rice, after her laudable reform of the Foreign Service, has now asked Congress for an additional $75 million to advance the cause of freedom in Iran. This is good news indeed, especially since there were hints in her testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday that we have already begun supporting Iranian trade unions, and even training some of their leaders. To be sure, the bulk of the money — $50 million — will go to the bureaucratic, and thus far utterly uninspiring, group running radio and TV Farda for the State Department, and the profoundly disappointing and feckless National Endowment for Democracy and the Democratic and Republic Institutes, but at least some money is promised for independent Farsi language broadcasters. Even with these shortcomings, we should celebrate Rice’s embrace of the cause of Iranian freedom so concretely.

On the other hand, there is no reason for joy at the news that assistant secretary Steve Rademacher seems to have gratuitously and foolishly promised that we will not use military power against Iran’s nuclear facilities. There is every reason to leave such stratagems in the haze of uncertainty, even if — as I have long argued — you believe it would not be a good idea, at least at this moment. Such declarations will reinforce the mullahs’ conviction that they have nothing to fear from us, and encourage them to race ahead with their murderous actions.

Even the world at large is beginning to bestir itself. Wednesday was a day of support for the Iranian bus drivers all across the civilized world. The AFL-CIO, driven by Teamsters’ President James Hoffa, in tandem with Senator Rick Santorum, has been leading the charge, now joined by unions in France, Britain, Spain, Austria, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Canada, Japan, Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, and Bermuda. The appeasers in the Italian trade unions, like their opportunistic bosses, sat it out. Still, it’s an impressive list.

It’s a small and long overdue step forward, to be sure, but great journeys sometimes begin slowly and uncertainly. The great thing is that, after years of empty rhetoric, stalled internal debates, and the paralysis so dear to Khamenei’s heart, we have finally gotten started. Will it succeed? Do the tens of millions of Iranians who rightly hate their rulers have the stomach, the imagination, and the discipline to organize the downfall of the regime?

Nobody knows, perhaps not even the revolutionaries themselves. But America has moved, and when America moves, even gingerly, there will be ripples throughout Iran and throughout the region. The key imperative is that, now that we are in, we must persist and prevail. So far, so good: in the State of the Union the president spoke eloquently of our respect for the Iranian people and our determination to help them if they show the will and the capacity to act effectively. That was exactly the right note. And the secretary of State was similarly and appropriately modest in her rhetoric, speaking of our desire to support freedom — not announcing a national crusade, and not threatening dramatic action. It is for the Iranians to liberate their country. If they are willing to fight for freedom, we should stand with them.

Now, finally, they know we will. And the cry of "faster, please" must quickly go out to them.

Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:46:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Bostonterrier97:

Pentagon plans to derail Iranian atomic bomb test
Philip Sherwell in Washington
(Filed: 12/02/2006)

Iran has drawn up designs for a deep underground tunnel with remote-controlled heat and pressure sensors as part of what Western intelligence officials believe are preparations for a secret atomic test.





Forget about Iran, these guys found out a way to get news FROM THE FUTURE!

GREAT SCOT!
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:47:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/18/2006 8:49:48 PM EDT by raven]

Originally Posted By NoHarmNoFAL-01:

Originally Posted By raven:
If they're testing, then they're probably developing a implosion-type plutonium bomb, which is the AQ Khan/Chinese design. With the gun-type U-235 bombs, testing is optional. They're kind of fool-proof if you've got scientists and engineers building it.



Why go the hard way, bigger yield?



Because the implosion-type plutonium approach to a fission device is the exact, perfectly engineered plan the Pakistanis got from the Chinese that their rogue nuclear program chief Dr. AQ Khan then went on to sell to anyone willing to give him $10m or so. The implosion route is harder, especially if you develop it on your own, but with the AQ Khan plans, you have a proven, tested route to a fission device. He also sold instructions for gas-diffusion approachment to uranium enrichment.

I dont know the effective difference between a bomb that uses the implosion route or the gun route. The USA took the Arfcom philosophy and "Got both" for nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Fat Man was a plutonium bomb, Little Boy was a uranium bomb.
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:48:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By OBird:

Originally Posted By Bostonterrier97:

Pentagon plans to derail Iranian atomic bomb test
Philip Sherwell in Washington
(Filed: 12/02/2006)

Iran has drawn up designs for a deep underground tunnel with remote-controlled heat and pressure sensors as part of what Western intelligence officials believe are preparations for a secret atomic test.





Forget about Iran, these guys found out a way to get news FROM THE FUTURE!

GREAT SCOT!



that's the british way of writing dates.... look at the URL. it's from the London Telegraph
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:55:10 PM EDT
from:www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/19/wiran19.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/02/19/ixportal.html


Iranian fatwa approves use of nuclear weapons
By Colin Freeman and Philip Sherwell in Washington
(Filed: 19/02/2006)


Iran's hardline spiritual leaders have issued an unprecedented new fatwa, or holy order, sanctioning the use of atomic weapons against its enemies.

In yet another sign of Teheran's stiffening resolve on the nuclear issue, influential Muslim clerics have for the first time questioned the theocracy's traditional stance that Sharia law forbade the use of nuclear weapons.



Missiles beside a portrait of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei

One senior mullah has now said it is "only natural" to have nuclear bombs as a "countermeasure" against other nuclear powers, thought to be a reference to America and Israel.

The pronouncement is particularly worrying because it has come from Mohsen Gharavian, a disciple of the ultra-conservative Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah-Yazdi, who is widely regarded as the cleric closest to Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Nicknamed "Professor Crocodile" because of his harsh conservatism, Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi's group opposes virtually any kind of rapprochement with the West and is believed to have influenced President Ahmadinejad's refusal to negotiate over Iran's nuclear programme.

The comments, which are the first public statement by the Yazdi clerical cabal on the nuclear issue, will be seen as an attempt by the country's religious hardliners to begin preparing a theological justification for the ownership - and if necessary the use - of atomic bombs.

They appeared on Rooz, an internet newspaper run by members of Iran's fractured reformist movement, which picked them up from remarks by Mohsen Gharavian reported on the media agency IraNews.

Rooz reported that Mohsen Gharavian, a lecturer based in a religious school in the holy city of Qom, had declared "for the first time that the use of nuclear weapons may not constitute a problem, according to Sharia."

He also said: "When the entire world is armed with nuclear weapons, it is permissible to use these weapons as a counter-measure. According to Sharia too, only the goal is important."

Mohsen Gharavian did not specify what kinds of "goals" would justify a nuclear strike, but it is thought that any military intervention by the United States would be considered sufficient grounds. Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi has previously justified use of suicide bombers against "enemies of Islam" and believes that America is bent on destroying the Islamic republic and its values. The latest insight into the theocracy's thinking comes as the US signals a change in strategy on Iran, after the decision earlier this month to report it to the United Nations Security Council for its resumption of banned nuclear research.

While Washington has made it clear that military strikes on Iran's nuclear sites would be a "last resort", White House officials are also targeting change from within by funding Iranian opposition groups.

The secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, said the Bush administration would seek an extra $75 million (£43 million) from Congress to help to support Iran's fractured pro-democracy movement and fund Farsi-language satellite broadcasts.

The announcement is the clearest public indication that Washington has adopted a two-track approach to Iran, combining the diplomatic search for a united international condemnation of its illicit nuclear programme with efforts to undermine the regime's status.

The new tactic amounts to the pursuit of regime change by peaceful means, although that phrase is still not stated as official US policy. Washington hopes that a dedicated satellite channel beamed into Iran will encourage domestic dissent, such as the current strike by bus drivers - the most significant display of organised opposition since the 1999 and 2003 student protests.

Ms Rice unveiled the change of tactics a week after a visit to Washington by a senior British delegation that pressed for a co-ordinated Western policy on using satellite television and the internet to bolster internal opposition. The State Department had previously been wary of the two-track strategy.

As the Sunday Telegraph reported last week, Pentagon strategists have been updating plans for a another policy of "last resort" - blitzing Iranian nuclear sites in an effort to stop the regime gaining the atomic bomb.

The bus strike, which has led to the jailing of more than 1,000 drivers, was originally sparked by an industrial dispute over unpaid wages benefits. But the robustness of the state response has indicated the nervousness of the Ahmadinejad regime over any internal dissent.

Reports from Iran say that Massoud Osanlou, the leader of the bus drivers' union, was arrested at his home by members of the Basij, the pro-regime militia, and had part of his tongue cut out as a warning to be quiet.

But the dispute already risks disillusioning Mr Ahmadinejad's core of working class support - among them municipal workers - who voted him into power on his promises to improve the lot of Iran's poor.

Link Posted: 2/18/2006 8:55:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By USAF_Hop_N_Pop:

Originally Posted By OBird:

Originally Posted By Bostonterrier97:

Pentagon plans to derail Iranian atomic bomb test
Philip Sherwell in Washington
(Filed: 12/02/2006)

Iran has drawn up designs for a deep underground tunnel with remote-controlled heat and pressure sensors as part of what Western intelligence officials believe are preparations for a secret atomic test.





Forget about Iran, these guys found out a way to get news FROM THE FUTURE!

GREAT SCOT!



that's the british way of writing dates.... look at the URL. it's from the London Telegraph



LOL, yeah that's right. I completely forgot that they do it "backwards" in Europe...
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 9:16:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By NoHarmNoFAL-01:

Originally Posted By raven:
If they're testing, then they're probably developing a implosion-type plutonium bomb, which is the AQ Khan/Chinese design. With the gun-type U-235 bombs, testing is optional. They're kind of fool-proof if you've got scientists and engineers building it.



Why go the hard way, bigger yield?



Bigger yield, yes, and if you've got reactors going it's easier to make Plutionium than to extract U-235.
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 9:29:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
It's time to play Tom Clancy....

We need to set off a nuke at that site and make it look like an accident of their making.

Am I nuts?



Nah, not nuts at all, diabolically brilliant, but not nuts. Sunshine in a can!
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 9:35:07 PM EDT
A "Gun Bomb" fires a Uranium 235 "Bullet" into a subcritical mass of Uranium 235 creating a critical mass (Little boy used a surplus Howitzer Barrel....), an implosion bomb uses two halves of a sphere of Uruanium 235, or more commonly Plutonium 239, or "pie slices" of a sphere that when fused togethor would form a critical mass, the sphere is fused togethor with high explosives that surround it (like TNT....) that when detonated fuse the sphere togethor to do this the explosives are in a shaped charge to direct all the explosive force inwards twards the core, and detonators are placed evenly accross the entire surface of the bomb set to detonate simultaniously (Fat man used a 1 inch placement as I recall....) the key is the shape of the blast plates that make up the outer core to form the shaped charge so that the blast is directed evenly inwards, obviously the gun type is simpler but the implosion type has a higher yield as far as I know only one gun type has ever been used little boy on August 6, 1945 on Hiroshima Japan (the Trinity test was an implosion bomb....)....
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 9:42:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TheSneak:

Originally Posted By NoHarmNoFAL-01:

Originally Posted By raven:
If they're testing, then they're probably developing a implosion-type plutonium bomb, which is the AQ Khan/Chinese design. With the gun-type U-235 bombs, testing is optional. They're kind of fool-proof if you've got scientists and engineers building it.



Why go the hard way, bigger yield?



Bigger yield, yes, and if you've got reactors going it's easier to make Plutionium than to extract U-235.



I also believe the more complicated design is usually smaller and lighter.
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 9:54:26 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 10:32:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
It's time to play Tom Clancy....

We need to set off a nuke at that site and make it look like an accident of their making.

Am I nuts?




Yes. You ARE nuts. But I had the same thought myself.



-K
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 10:35:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By raven:

Originally Posted By NoHarmNoFAL-01:

Originally Posted By raven:
If they're testing, then they're probably developing a implosion-type plutonium bomb, which is the AQ Khan/Chinese design. With the gun-type U-235 bombs, testing is optional. They're kind of fool-proof if you've got scientists and engineers building it.



Why go the hard way, bigger yield?



Because the implosion-type plutonium approach to a fission device is the exact, perfectly engineered plan the Pakistanis got from the Chinese that their rogue nuclear program chief Dr. AQ Khan then went on to sell to anyone willing to give him $10m or so. The implosion route is harder, especially if you develop it on your own, but with the AQ Khan plans, you have a proven, tested route to a fission device. He also sold instructions for gas-diffusion approachment to uranium enrichment.

I dont know the effective difference between a bomb that uses the implosion route or the gun route. The USA took the Arfcom philosophy and "Got both" for nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Fat Man was a plutonium bomb, Little Boy was a uranium bomb.



One difference according to what I have read is that the gun barrel type bomb takes 100 lbs of enriched weapons grade material. Implosion type takes far less but much harder to built.Hiroshima was leveled by a gun barrel type weapon. Also implosion bomb is much more compact. Sourcewww.amazon.com/gp/reader/0805078525/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-2417190-5321434#reader-link
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 10:37:29 PM EDT
Why am I reading about this shit?
Sounds lke some fucker is leaking clasified info to the press....

There are some things we don't need to know until it is time to party
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 10:40:02 PM EDT
fish in a barrel
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 11:11:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By pv74:
Why am I reading about this shit?
Sounds lke some fucker is leaking clasified info to the press....

There are some things we don't need to know until it is time to party




A court in the 70's actually blocked the US government from stopping the publishing of blue prints for a H-Bomb. Our judicial system at work.
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 12:21:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/19/2006 12:24:03 AM EDT by A_Free_Man]

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
It's time to play Tom Clancy....

We need to set off a nuke at that site and make it look like an accident of their making.

Am I nuts?




+1000



ETA, +1000 to both.
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 12:25:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Triumph955i:
Damn these Iranians.

They are going to make my life a little more difficult.



Iran isnt gonna make your life more difficult... Marriage will!!!
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 3:23:23 AM EDT
tag for serious reading
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 3:44:06 AM EDT
Nice to see the U.S. papers running with these stories.
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 4:24:35 AM EDT
Well no matter what Pres Bush does it will be the wrong move accoeding to his opposition.
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 5:43:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
It's time to play Tom Clancy....

We need to set off a nuke at that site and make it look like an accident of their making.

Am I nuts?



Works for me.
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 5:53:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bostonterrier97:

Iran's hardline spiritual leaders have issued an unprecedented new fatwa, or holy order, sanctioning the use of atomic weapons against its enemies.

In yet another sign of Teheran's stiffening resolve on the nuclear issue, influential Muslim clerics have for the first time questioned the theocracy's traditional stance that Sharia law forbade the use of nuclear weapons.

One senior mullah has now said it is "only natural" to have nuclear bombs as a "countermeasure" against other nuclear powers, thought to be a reference to America and Israel.




You hear that sound?

It's the sound of the shit hitting the fan.

Are we going to do anything about it?
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 8:13:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Zaphod:

Originally Posted By Bostonterrier97:

Iran's hardline spiritual leaders have issued an unprecedented new fatwa, or holy order, sanctioning the use of atomic weapons against its enemies.

In yet another sign of Teheran's stiffening resolve on the nuclear issue, influential Muslim clerics have for the first time questioned the theocracy's traditional stance that Sharia law forbade the use of nuclear weapons.

One senior mullah has now said it is "only natural" to have nuclear bombs as a "countermeasure" against other nuclear powers, thought to be a reference to America and Israel.




You hear that sound?

It's the sound of the shit hitting the fan.

Are we going to do anything about it?



Damn if I know. I just post articles I see in the News.

All I know is that there are a lot of players in this game.

Europe is getting a little jittery over the idea of Iranians having Nukes, because Iran has the capability to build launch vehicles that can reach Europe.

China is heavily involved because of its dependence on Middle Eastern and African Oil.

Saudi Arabia is (naturally) worried about a Nuclear Armed Iran next door (the Saudis by the way have expressed an interest in nuclear technology and are keeping a very low profile)

My personal thoughts is that a Nuclear Armed Middle East which has missile technology is far too dangerous towards Europe and American interests given the volatility of Middle Eastern cultures and the intolerance of Islam towards non-muslims.

Link Posted: 2/19/2006 9:09:56 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Are we going to do anything about it?



Why yes, we are!........we will appoint a Congressional Committee to look into it......
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 9:11:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TUMOR:

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Are we going to do anything about it?



Why yes, we are!........we will appoint a Congressional Committee to look into it......



Oh, GOOD! I feel better already!

Link Posted: 2/19/2006 9:14:50 AM EDT
I get a kick out of these fatwas. Kind of "making it up as you go" type rulings by religious nutjobs.
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 9:27:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bostonterrier97:
Commentary
from:www.nationalreview.com/ledeen/ledeen200602170951.asp

A Mullah’s-Eye View of the World
Iran is acting on its assessment of the West’s strength and resolve.


by Michael Ledeen

Sometime in late November or early December, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei gathered his top advisers for an overall strategic review. The atmosphere was highly charged, because Khamenei’s doctors have diagnosed a serious cancer, and do not expect the Supreme Leader to live much more than a year. A succession struggle is already under way, with the apparently unsinkable Hashemi Rafsanjani in the thick of it, even though Khamenei, and his increasingly powerful son Mushtaba, is opposed to the perennial candidate-for-whatever.

Despite this disquieting news, the overall tone of the conversation was upbeat, because the Iranians believe they see many positive developments, above all, the declaration that "it has been promised that by 8 April, we will be in a position to show the entire world that 'we are members of the club.'" This presumably refers to nuclear weapons. Against this cheery background, the assessment of the Iranian leaders continued:

The weakness of the Bush administration is notable. Recent public opinion polls show the country seriously divided, and the top Iranian experts on North America have concluded that the president is paralyzed, unable to make any tough decision (and hence unable to order an attack against Iran);
2006 is an election year, and even some Republicans are distancing themselves from Bush, weakening the White House even further;

Israel is facing the darkest moment in its history (remember that this conversation took place before Sharon’s stroke). Likud is divided, Netanyahu is openly against Sharon, and the Labor party has lost its old guard. No strong government is possible (and hence Israel is similarly unable to order an attack against Iran). Therefore this is a moment for Iran to take maximum advantage;

Iranian power and prestige is at an all-time high among the Palestinian terrorist groups, from Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Fatah, to secular, even Communist groups. Terrorists who in the past had rejected Iranian approaches now travel to Tehran for support;

The Syrians have given Iran final say over the activities of Sunni terrorist groups in their country;

Iran now exercises effective control over groups ranging from Hezbollah, Ansar al-Islam, al Qaeda, Jaish-e-Muhammad, Jaish-e-Mahdi, and Jaish-e-Huti (Yemen) to the Joint Shi’ite Army of Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Syria, and part of Saudi Arabia, as well as Islamic movements in Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia;

In the four and a half months since Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has become president, he has brought the extremist group led by Mezbah Yazdi under control, and, notably, he has forced Syria to resist all pressure from the United States;

The Europeans are no longer necessary for the Iranian strategy, and can now be "thrown out of our game." They are in no position to do any damage because they are too busy fighting with one another;

Khamenei called for two urgent missions. The first was to do everything possible to drive up oil prices by an additional 30 percent by the first week in April. The second was to intensify the propaganda war against the West in the same period. He stressed that it was important to compel the United States to face at least three crises by the April 8.

In short, the Iranians at the highest levels of the regime believe they have good reason for behaving quite feisty, and if you look at the events that have taken place since then, you will see that the mullahs are acting consistently with the analysis presented to (and in part by) Khamenei. The propaganda war — lately and dramatically in the form of the cartoon crusades — has indeed been intensified. The Europeans have been systematically dissed, and more: their embassies in Tehran have been stoned, Iranian diplomats have insulted them with regularity, and the regime slapped a trade embargo on all goods coming from the infidel Europeans. When the French announced that the Iranian nuclear program was undoubtedly designed to produce weapons, Tehran demanded an apology. Above all, there is no longer any pretense of cooperation with the Big Three negotiators on the nuclear program.

This suggests that the mullahs do indeed believe they have acquired nuclear weapons, and there is no longer any need to play stalling games with the Germans, French, and Brits. Nor is there any reason to feign humanity in the treatment of their own people. The repression of any and all groups which might conceivably organize an anti-mullah revolution looks to reach the historic levels of the immediate post-revolutionary period, when hanging judges routinely ordered the execution of thousands of citizens for often-fabricated crimes. Of late, the regime has beaten, tortured, and incarcerated thousands of Tehran bus drivers, Bahais, Sufis, and Ahwaz Arabs, and they have even threatened the families of political prisoners, saying that the whole lot of dissidents will be killed if the U.N. votes for sanctions.

This brutal and open use of the mailed fist bespeaks utter contempt for the West; Khamenei & Co. do not think we will respond, do not fear Western action, and believe this is a historic movement for the advance of their vision of clerical fascism. But it also bespeaks a chilling recognition of their nemesis: the Iranian people. President Ahmadinejad recently canceled most foreign travel by regime officials, for example, which is not the sign of a confident mullahcracy; quite the contrary, in their heart of hearts, they know that they are walking a fragile tightrope, and their incessant preventive actions against normal Iranians look very much like Mickey Mouse in , racing frantically to stop an army of bucket-carrying brooms from drowning him.

Moreover, the runaway optimism (which in many clerical minds goes hand in hand with the conviction that the Shiite Messiah, the 12th Imam, is about to reappear, thereby ushering in the End of Days) is not as solidly grounded as the mullahs might wish. For starters, oil prices are headed south, not toward the 30-percent increase ordered by the supreme leader. And the analysis of the perceived “paralysis” of the United States is nothing more than a replay of the usual blunder committed by our enemies, who look at us and see fractious politics, widespread self-indulgence, and an unwillingness or inability to face up to real war. In this, as in so many other ways, the mullahs of the Islamic Republic are emulating failed tyrants, from the German Kaiser and Führer to the Italian Duce, the Iraqi dictator, and the Soviet Communist first secretaries, all of whom learned, to their ruin, that free societies are quite capable of turning on a dime and defending their interests and values with unanticipated ferocity.

And indeed, after years of dithering, we now have the first encouraging signs that this administration is inclined to support revolution in Iran. Secretary of State Rice, after her laudable reform of the Foreign Service, has now asked Congress for an additional $75 million to advance the cause of freedom in Iran. This is good news indeed, especially since there were hints in her testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday that we have already begun supporting Iranian trade unions, and even training some of their leaders. To be sure, the bulk of the money — $50 million — will go to the bureaucratic, and thus far utterly uninspiring, group running radio and TV Farda for the State Department, and the profoundly disappointing and feckless National Endowment for Democracy and the Democratic and Republic Institutes, but at least some money is promised for independent Farsi language broadcasters. Even with these shortcomings, we should celebrate Rice’s embrace of the cause of Iranian freedom so concretely.

On the other hand, there is no reason for joy at the news that assistant secretary Steve Rademacher seems to have gratuitously and foolishly promised that we will not use military power against Iran’s nuclear facilities. There is every reason to leave such stratagems in the haze of uncertainty, even if — as I have long argued — you believe it would not be a good idea, at least at this moment. Such declarations will reinforce the mullahs’ conviction that they have nothing to fear from us, and encourage them to race ahead with their murderous actions.

Even the world at large is beginning to bestir itself. Wednesday was a day of support for the Iranian bus drivers all across the civilized world. The AFL-CIO, driven by Teamsters’ President James Hoffa, in tandem with Senator Rick Santorum, has been leading the charge, now joined by unions in France, Britain, Spain, Austria, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Canada, Japan, Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, and Bermuda. The appeasers in the Italian trade unions, like their opportunistic bosses, sat it out. Still, it’s an impressive list.

It’s a small and long overdue step forward, to be sure, but great journeys sometimes begin slowly and uncertainly. The great thing is that, after years of empty rhetoric, stalled internal debates, and the paralysis so dear to Khamenei’s heart, we have finally gotten started. Will it succeed? Do the tens of millions of Iranians who rightly hate their rulers have the stomach, the imagination, and the discipline to organize the downfall of the regime?

Nobody knows, perhaps not even the revolutionaries themselves. But America has moved, and when America moves, even gingerly, there will be ripples throughout Iran and throughout the region. The key imperative is that, now that we are in, we must persist and prevail. So far, so good: in the State of the Union the president spoke eloquently of our respect for the Iranian people and our determination to help them if they show the will and the capacity to act effectively. That was exactly the right note. And the secretary of State was similarly and appropriately modest in her rhetoric, speaking of our desire to support freedom — not announcing a national crusade, and not threatening dramatic action. It is for the Iranians to liberate their country. If they are willing to fight for freedom, we should stand with them.

Now, finally, they know we will. And the cry of "faster, please" must quickly go out to them.




Just more proof that the American left is the biggest enemy we face. Through their opposition of everything Bush does and all of the useful idiots out there helping their cause, they are effectively crippling our ability to protect this nation. Through their borderline traiterous behavior, they are sending a message to the rest of the world screaming "we are weak!"

You can bet your sweet ass that if America wasn't divided and was unified strongly (as we should be) in this War on Terror, Iran wouldn't be so cocky right now. But as usual, the democrats have created enough stink to make the rest of the world think we can be pushed around, thus, making the liklihood that we'll have to go to war much greater!

Folks, there is a reason why I always support our efforts in every war in which we fight. And I don't support our nation's wars merely for the immediate objective of winning that particular fight or the particular details of that mission. Other nations carefully watch how this stuff unfolds. If we show signs of weakness, that emboldens them and makes them believe they can hang with or defeat us. Osama bin Laden himself has stated numerous times that our withdrawing and running away from Vietnam, Beirut and Somalia led him to believe we were soft and unwilling to fight a long, bloody war against a guerilla enemy. And he's right, thanks to the leftist democrats.
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 9:35:41 AM EDT
You know what? FUCK 'EM! They want a fucking nuke? Let's give them one! Tell 'em it will be delivered promptly from 30,000 feet! They can have their nuke and test all at once! I am so fucking tired of these assholes. I just wish that they would open the season on these fuckers already. The have been a protected species for long enough!
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 9:54:12 AM EDT
Uh oh!
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 10:13:33 AM EDT

^^^^^My idea of negotiation
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 10:38:28 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Crappybob:
Nice to see the U.S. papers running with these stories.



Forget print media and Happy News (Television)

For the most part the US Media normally reports events or puts a spin on stories that promote the Agenda of the Left.

news.yahoo.com and news.google.com


are good sources to pull up news, in particular using their Search Function to look up certain news topics.

Yahoo tends to pull up more stuff than Google.
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 10:52:00 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 10:56:22 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 11:01:07 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 12:42:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By Bostonterrier97:
Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Originally Posted By Bostonterrier97:

Saudi Arabia is (naturally) worried about a Nuclear Armed Iran next door (the Saudis by the way have expressed an interest in nuclear technology and are keeping a very low profile)



There are persistant rumours that Saudi Arabia has an arrangement to be supplied warheads for it's IRBM's by Pakistan if Iran goes nuclear.

Agence France Presse March 27, 2002
Saudi Arabia secretly built large missiles base in desert: Israeli report
Saudi Arabia has secretly built a huge missile base in the heart of its desert, the Israeli daily Yediot Aharonot reported on Wednesday, with photos of what it said was the massive installation.

It said the pictures were taken "two weeks ago" for the paper by the satellite Ikonos, whose advanced technology allows for high definition. The missile base is located in the area of Al-Sulayil oasis, approximately 500 kilometres (300 miles) from the capital Riyadh, the paper said.

It houses fortified storage facilities and scores of Chinese CSS-2 missiles delivered since 1990 with a range of 2,500-3,500 kilometres (1,500-2,100 miles), the newspaper said.

It said the recent Saudi initiative to offer Israel normal ties in exchange for a return of Arab lands seized in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war "gave a moderate image of Saudi Arabia which is only one facet of its double game."

Israeli "intelligence officials are worried about these developments but silence is being kept because of strong US pressure," the paper added.

Yediot Aharonot published the document on the alleged secret Saudi missile base just hours before the opening of the Arab summit in Beirut, where Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah Bin Abdel Aziz was to present his peace plan.

Copyright 2002 Agence France Presse


www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2002/020327-saudi01.htm



What can I say Vito? The middle east is filled with people of violent culture, an intolerant religion, and there is a very strong push by middle eastern countries to get Nuke and Missile Technology.
It simply isn't enough to have huge oil reserves to use as a bargaining chip in International Politics anymore.

Islam: Gotta have Nukes to in order to express disastifaction with Western European as well as Christian Values.
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 12:48:08 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 12:50:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Brians_45:
members.cox.net/blarose1/nuketalks7wr.jpg
^^^^^My idea of negotiation



If only you had spelled "you're" correctly...
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top