Iran's nuclear ambitions

1« Previous thread | Next thread »
- osmanthus
- Cave dwelling
- Pub Regular
- Fingerer of piglets
- offline
Iran's nuclear ambitions
OP - November 21, 2011, 08:18 AM

From a recent report: Briefing: Iran's nuclear ambitions

Quote
The International Atomic Energy Agency says Iran has been secretly developing nuclear weapons. New Scientist takes closer look at its major new report

What did the International Atomic Energy Agency find?

Through various clandestine projects, it appears that Iran made concerted attempts between 1998 and 2003 to develop a nuclear bomb, says the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in a major report published on 8 November.

Could the IAEA have been pressured to produce a report that could be used to justify military strikes against Iran?

That is possible, but unlikely. Expert commentators say that if anything the report exposes Iran's lack of progress towards making a bomb, reducing any possible justification for attacks. The US Arms Control Association based in Washington DC says that "talk of military strikes against Iranian nuclear and military targets is unhelpful and counterproductive". Much more productive, it says in its analysis, would be "pursuit of a negotiated agreement" to discourage any nuclear ambitions that Iran still has.

How many of the other technologies vital for producing bombs has Iran been engaged in?

The IAEA found considerable evidence that Iran was developing components which could be applied in nuclear weapons. These include the sophisticated detonators needed for nuclear bombs, and "multipoint initiation systems" that refine detonation waves to produce a perfectly uniform compression of the nuclear material. The IAEA also found evidence of the high-speed cameras needed to monitor the shock waves produced by these devices.

Couldn't all these technologies be applied to civilian uses?

Possibly, but what makes the IAEA's evidence damning is that the dimensions of the hemispheres and detonators that Iran tested exactly matched those of the payload chamber of Iran's Shahab 3 missile system, which could be used to deliver a bomb.

Was there anything in the programme that could only be aimed at nuclear weapon development?

One aim of Project 111 was to develop a prototype firing system that would enable a bomb to explode in the air instead of on impact. Experts the IAEA consulted said that the only likely application for this would be for a nuclear weapon rather than a chemical weapon or other type.

Most of the other projects could, at a stretch, be applied to conventional weaponry. But the combination of research on so many devices essential for nuclear weapons leads the agency to express "concerns about possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear programme".

So where does this leave Iran's stand-off with other countries?

Despite the intense activity a decade ago, the message is that if Iran does have military nuclear ambitions, they've been considerably blunted since 2003, and are still at a very rudimentary stage. "There's no indication in the IAEA report that Iran mastered the various processes involved in weapons design and manufacture," says Fitzpatrick of the IISS. That opens the door for increased international pressure and negotiation to resolve the stand-off. "The White House has appropriately underscored that the US continues to focus on using diplomatic channels to pressure Iran to abandon its sensitive nuclear activities," according to a statement from the US Arms Control Association.

So it looks like the Iranian claims that they were only interested in civilian application are false. However, there is currently no real threat.

Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West.
- posthuman
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #1 - November 21, 2011, 12:55 PM

The truth is, the USA and Israel don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon because they never want the option of NOT going to war with Iran. The idea that Iran gets nuclear weapons, then uses them on Israel via terrorists is absurd. They have hundreds of thousands of regular multi-tonnage bombs that could level city blocks, if they arm Hezbollah then they are VERY stingy.

Before Jesus was, I AM.
- Hallakuf
- Pastafarian
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #2 - November 21, 2011, 04:52 PM

^true, and a nuclear Iran will know that it cannot use a nuclear weapon for warfare. It would be suicide.

Religion is organized superstition
- osmanthus
- Cave dwelling
- Pub Regular
- Fingerer of piglets
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #3 - November 21, 2011, 07:50 PM

Given how crazy the Iranian government is, I would still prefer that they did not have nuclear weapons.

Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West.
- Abdillahi
- Ex-Muslim
- Home Sweet Home
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #4 - November 21, 2011, 08:08 PM

To them (Iran) it will be worth it has they will be chilling with 72 virgin drinking from rivers of milk, coca-cola, ice tea..ect while the kuffair roast in hell.

Sounds like a good deal...LOL

Through Logic, truth can be ascertained.
- Cato
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #5 - December 03, 2011, 09:01 PM

Quote from: osmanthus on November 21, 2011, 07:50 PM
Given how crazy the Iranian government is, I would still prefer that they did not have nuclear weapons.

Ditto

"I'm standing here like an asshole holding my Charles Dickens"

"No theory,No ready made system,no book that has ever been written to save the world. i cleave to no system.."-Bakunin
- Colonel Q-Daffi
- White Trash Sand Wigga
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #6 - December 03, 2011, 09:10 PM

Quote from: osmanthus on November 21, 2011, 07:50 PM
Given how crazy the Iranian government is, I would still prefer that they did not have nuclear weapons.

Agreed, but the US, with the largest nuclear stockpile in the world, is not exactly in a moral position to make such demands. With the Cold War gone, the US is in a position to unilaterally disarm itself of nuclear weapons and the rest of the world will follow our example, much like with chemical and biological weapons under the Nixon Administration. There will still be rogue states attempting to acquire them, sure, but the fewer legit stockpiles there are out there reduces the likelihood of proliferation, as most of the expertise is imported from the existing nuclear powers.

fuck you
- Crunchy Cds
- Pub Regular
- The artist
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #7 - December 03, 2011, 09:22 PM

I was reading a comment once about an Indian who believed in prophecies, said in the future 3/4 of the Arab would will be destroyed in a nuclear fallout that will have global effects. Only America and Europe will survive because of their technology to adapt. Hmmm somehow I don't find that all too outrageous... Of a claim.

***~Church is where bad people go to hide~***
- osmanthus
- Cave dwelling
- Pub Regular
- Fingerer of piglets
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #8 - December 03, 2011, 10:07 PM

Quote from: Colonel Q-Daffi on December 03, 2011, 09:10 PM
Agreed, but the US, with the largest nuclear stockpile in the world, is not exactly in a moral position to make such demands.

Not exactly, no. However, we still agree that it would be preferable for Iran not to have nuclear weapons, regardless of anyone else's hypocrisy on the matter.

Quote
With the Cold War gone, the US is in a position to unilaterally disarm itself of nuclear weapons and the rest of the world will follow our example, much like with chemical and biological weapons under the Nixon Administration. There will still be rogue states attempting to acquire them, sure, but the fewer legit stockpiles there are out there reduces the likelihood of proliferation, as most of the expertise is imported from the existing nuclear powers.

Ok, but you could just as well argue that with the Cold War gone, the rest of the world could disarm and then the US would be looking stupid if they didn't.

Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West.
- Absurdist
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #9 - December 03, 2011, 10:23 PM

Quote from: osmanthus on December 03, 2011, 10:07 PM
Not exactly, no. However, we still agree that it would be preferable for Iran not to have nuclear weapons, regardless of anyone else's hypocrisy on the matter.

no. if israel had nuclear weapons (which, let's admit it, it does), iran should have nuclear weapons too. it has nothing to do with how crazy iran is, it creates some sort of stability in the region. if israel was the only nuclear and military power in the middle east (and the US, of course), we'd be screwed.

that's not to say i support iran's nuclear ambitions, but israel and the US need to dismantle their nuclear weapons. we can't just point the finger at iran. and that has nothing to do with moral hypocrisy, having a unipolar region is just dangerous and unstable.
- Crunchy Cds
- Pub Regular
- The artist
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #10 - December 03, 2011, 10:43 PM

Telling the US and Israel to dismantle their weapons is like being caught in a gun fight and telling the person with a gun pointed at you, put down yours and I'll put down mine. Further more this guy pointing the gun towards you is unstable and has already threatened to fire. Are you willing to take that risk? Better to be armed and not use it, than be caught without it and suffer the consequences. America and Europe doesn't bother other countries who have nuclear programs because they know they aren't dumb enough to use it irrationally. Even America and Russia made a deal to cut down their nuclear stock,

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/01/us-usa-russia-start-idUSTRE7104SI20110201 the fact that Iran cannot and does not want to cooperate is inexcusable. It's not about who has nuclear weapons and how much, it's who can be trusted. If Iran was stable country, with high favor globally I'm sure the US would not even care they had a nuclear program and this would be a non-issue.

***~Church is where bad people go to hide~***
- Absurdist
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #11 - December 03, 2011, 10:45 PM

the US is the only country that ever used nuclear weapons. your point is invalid.

also, i agree with you. the US and israel aren't going to disarm. so then iran has a right (in fact, i would even say responsibility) to develop nuclear weapons.
- osmanthus
- Cave dwelling
- Pub Regular
- Fingerer of piglets
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #12 - December 03, 2011, 11:05 PM

I honestly cannot see how Iran getting nuclear weapons is going to make the region less dangerous and more stable.

Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West.
- osmanthus
- Cave dwelling
- Pub Regular
- Fingerer of piglets
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #13 - December 03, 2011, 11:07 PM

Abood, your argument basically reduces to "if one country in the world has nuclear weapons, then every country in the word has a responsibility to acquire nuclear weapons".

Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West.
- Absurdist
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #14 - December 03, 2011, 11:22 PM

no it doesn't. i don't think multipolarity is a stable system. there needs to be a few opposing states with nuclear weapons so that they can predict each other's actions. as long as we have sovereign nation states and no world government, we need balancing of powers.
- Solara
- After the Fall
- Ex-Muslim
- Life goes on.
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #15 - December 04, 2011, 01:10 AM

According to Lewis Black, they're going to build a nuke and then 500 Iranians are going to throw it at us.

Life is what happens to you while you're staring at your smartphone.

Eternal Sunshine of the Religionless Mind
- Colonel Q-Daffi
- White Trash Sand Wigga
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #16 - December 04, 2011, 01:32 AM

Quote from: osmanthus on December 03, 2011, 10:07 PM
Ok, but you could just as well argue that with the Cold War gone, the rest of the world could disarm and then the US would be looking stupid if they didn't.

Except we don't give a flying fuck about looking stupid to the rest of the world.

Quote from: Sakura02 on December 03, 2011, 10:43 PM
Telling the US and Israel to dismantle their weapons is like being caught in a gun fight and telling the person with a gun pointed at you, put down yours and I'll put down mine. Further more this guy pointing the gun towards you is unstable and has already threatened to fire. Are you willing to take that risk? Better to be armed and not use it, than be caught without it and suffer the consequences.

If the US only had a few nukes, okay, but we've got way more than we need for a deterrent. The more appropriate analogy is someone has a single-action .22 revolver pointed at me and I have an M4 assault rifle pointed at them AND a sack full of dynamite. It's reasonable to put down the bag of explosives.

As far as Israel goes, well it's just plain retarded not to say boo about their nuke program while criticizing any other country that tries to acquire nukes.

fuck you
- Cato
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #17 - December 04, 2011, 01:33 AM

My worry about Iran acquiring nuclear weapon is that the likes of Al-qaeda and other Islamist groups are likely to get their hands on it.

"I'm standing here like an asshole holding my Charles Dickens"

"No theory,No ready made system,no book that has ever been written to save the world. i cleave to no system.."-Bakunin
- Solara
- After the Fall
- Ex-Muslim
- Life goes on.
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #18 - December 04, 2011, 02:09 AM

If that happens we're screwed.

Life is what happens to you while you're staring at your smartphone.

Eternal Sunshine of the Religionless Mind
- Colonel Q-Daffi
- White Trash Sand Wigga
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Iran's nuclear ambitions
Reply #19 - December 04, 2011, 02:14 AM

Nah

fuck you
1« Previous thread | Next thread »