Iran is One Year away from the bomb!

[AL_DA_GREAT]

with my limited experiance with projects I am pretty certain it will be more, nothing ever works.

 

[Bucephalus]

The idea that Iran would nuke Israel is completely ludicrous. Israel has nuclear weapons and lots of them. Are we really supposed to believe the mullahs are so mad and irresponsible to launch a suicidal nuclear war?

There's nothing new about a suicide bombing, it's just a question of scale.

 

[Kozmos]

I had a splendid idea now, nuclear suicide bombers. Just make them the size of the American Davy Crockett warhead and strap it to a crazy fundamentalist.

 

[Irish Caesar]

Yes, quite useful when you can make one bomb per year under optimal conditions.

 

[Kozmos]

Clearly they need more centrifuges then

 

[Tannertu]

There is no evidence whatsoever that Iran has a nuclear weapons program. None.

Uranium enrichment is not evidence of such a program, but with the benefit of hindsight it should be subject to greater restriction within the NPT.

Iranian nuclear capability is not an inevitability unless WE BOMB THEM NOW.

As a NPT signatory they are subject to IAEA inspections. If the inspectors found evidence of a breach of conditions, or faced obstructions, Iran would be faced with international sanctions. A very powerful disincentive. Let’s not forget, it worked for Iraq (contrary to what we were told).

But the “Iran problem” has nothing to do with reality has it? It’s a game of “let’s find a pretext for attacking Iran”. After Iraq that shows an astonishing level of chutzpah!

At least the MSM having had their credibility severely dented last time around are less inclined to slavishly relay pronouncements from Dick Cheney’s Department of Truth, and there seems to be an acceptance by the cheerleaders for war brigade that the old WMD’s are gonna kill us all wont swing it this time.

No, the “next war” will be sold in terms of Iraq. Iran is responsible for the insurgency in Iraq. This absolves Bush from the mess in Iraq and justifies military action against Iran. Iraqi Freedom phase 2. Nice – two for one

 

[The Yankee]

Hasn't Iran been one year from the bomb for the last decade?

No, I don't trust Iran to have such weapons, but as long as someone can still exert some kind of pressure, maybe we can get through it without too much of a problem. Luckily, there isn't yet a nuclear race across the Middle East and unfortunately, this will shift the balance of power in the region even closer to Iran's position.

It's certainly worth continued monitoring and pressuring.

But, after all, we've already accepted the fact of Pakistani and Indian bombs....

 

[Ecofarm]

armchair warriors, assemble!

Roger, we are a go for land invasion.

I think we should accept that Iran is going to have nuclear weapons. It's not good, but there isn't much anyone can do right now.

Neither I, nor Israel, will accept it (see above).

Agreed. It's time to move on and start focusing on some other aspects of Iran. For eg, thier human rights record....

They deny access to human rights organizations. What makes you think when they have the bomb things will change (or become easier)?

 

[Kozmos]

Neither I, nor Israel, will accept it (see above).

What are they going to do? Beg the yanks to bomb them? Do the airstrikes themselves? Paint a giant jihad us please sign on them?

 

[nivi]

What are they going to do? Beg the yanks to bomb them? Do the airstrikes themselves? Paint a giant jihad us please sign on them?

Yes.
Yes.
Already got one.

 

[Ecofarm]

What are they going to do? Beg the yanks to bomb them? Do the airstrikes themselves? Paint a giant jihad us please sign on them?

Same thing they did to Iraq (btw, thanks Israel), bomb the facilities.

Jihad us please? Need we ask? "Death to America" "Death to Israel"

 

[Figaro]

Frankly, Iran having the bomb or not doesn't make me feel one iota less safe. There are stacks of rogue states out there with bombs already (North Korea anyone?), not to mention the several THOUSAND nukes that have gone "missing" since the collapse of the Soviet union.

 

[Ecofarm]

Do you know how heavy a nuke is? Korea can fire a missile into the ocean (and Japan). There's a difference.

Do you have a source for nukes gone missing?

If Pakistan launched, the UN would support an Indian ground invasion. Please excuse the pre-emtive.

 

[Figaro]

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/9/17/155150.shtml
http://www.albionmonitor.com/9711b/suitcasebomb.html
http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=article&id=1086
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb1367/is_199709/ai_n6387009

Just type "Missing Nukes" into Google, you'll get a million sources. Governments don't tend to admit to it having happened (for obvious reasons), but it adds up - the sheer quantity of nukes they made in the Cold War runs into the many thousands. Some of the missing ones are so-called "suitcase bombs"; portable nuclear devices that wouldn't need a launching system, just for a bomber to walk into the middle of a city and set it off (he could even dump it in a rubbish bin and get away alive).

I suspect a fair few are in the hands of ex-soviet republics. The USSR certainly had launch sites in Kazakhstan and similar places, no doubt a few could have been smuggled out by the emerging governments in the breakup. Given the negative attention anyone who has nukes gets, it's not surprising that they might decide to keep mum about it.

Presumably the others were genuinely "lost" or found their way into the hands of arms dealers etc. - I'm sure however that if a terrorist group were able to make an attack with such a weapon they would have done so. Unless they're planning something really big. Anyway, in the face of all this, the thought that Iran might have a bomb doesn't really faze me all that much.

 

[StarWorms]

No-one seemed to care when it was North Korea. That's American media for you, and the sheep that follow it.

 

[woody60707]

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/9/17/155150.shtml
http://www.albionmonitor.com/9711b/suitcasebomb.html
http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=article&id=1086
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb1367/is_199709/ai_n6387009

Just type "Missing Nukes" into Google, you'll get a million sources. Governments don't tend to admit to it having happened (for obvious reasons), but it adds up - the sheer quantity of nukes they made in the Cold War runs into the many thousands. Some of the missing ones are so-called "suitcase bombs"; portable nuclear devices that wouldn't need a launching system, just for a bomber to walk into the middle of a city and set it off (he could even dump it in a rubbish bin and get away alive).

I suspect a fair few are in the hands of ex-soviet republics. The USSR certainly had launch sites in Kazakhstan and similar places, no doubt a few could have been smuggled out by the emerging governments in the breakup. Given the negative attention anyone who has nukes gets, it's not surprising that they might decide to keep mum about it.

Presumably the others were genuinely "lost" or found their way into the hands of arms dealers etc. - I'm sure however that if a terrorist group were able to make an attack with such a weapon they would have done so. Unless they're planning something really big. Anyway, in the face of all this, the thought that Iran might have a bomb doesn't really faze me all that much.

So why hasn't a one of these nukes bee used yet? And i just don't mean used on the US, but on anyone, by anyone.

 

[Kozmos]

"suitcase bombs"; portable nuclear devices that wouldn't need a launching system, just for a bomber to walk into the middle of a city and set it off (he could even dump it in a rubbish bin and get away alive).

If you had as you say an iota of knowledge about nuclear weapon systems you would know that even the smallest nuke is large as small fridge or a washing machine. (and that requires rather advanced technology)

They cant fit into suitcases. End of story.

 

[Galatian]

So why hasn't a one of these nukes bee used yet? And i just don't mean used on the US, but on anyone, by anyone.

Same reason why Iran would never fire the bomb even if they had one: retaliation from the entire western world.
No, I am not afraid about that. America has nuclear bombs, and so do other countries. What gives them the right? Who defines what is right and what is wrong? For many people the Iraq war was wrong and obviously many reasons were based on faked information (whatever happenend to those mobile laborities for biological agents I wonder...). Some might argue that American also acts like a rogue state.

 

[Figaro]

If you had as you say an iota of knowledge about nuclear weapon systems you would know that even the smallest nuke is large as small fridge or a washing machine. (and that requires rather advanced technology)

They cant fit into suitcases. End of story.

Nope, I know absolutely nothing about nuclear weapon systems. Isn't there a distinction though between an actual nuclear weapon and a so-called "dirty bomb" which merely uses conventional explosives to spread radioactive material over a wide area (as opposed to actually splitting atoms)? 'Cos these would be considered WMDs in the sense of them being Chemical, Biological or Radiological. Besides, my point stands that I don't feel any less safe in the knowledge that Iran (may) have the bomb, because I already know that loads of nations whose governments I trust no more CERTAINLY have nukes.

 

[dwaxe]

I'm not sure if this is uh-oh or who cares...