Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
United States Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: So Iran just pursues peaceful nuclear energy?
Hamilcar    11/5/2009 10:18:42 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/05/iran-tested-nuclear-warhead-design Quote: Iran tested advanced nuclear warhead design – secret report Exclusive: Watchdog fears Tehran has key component to put bombs in missiles. The UN's nuclear watchdog has asked Iran to explain evidence suggesting that Iranian scientists have experimented with an advanced nuclear warhead design, the Guardian has learned. The very existence of the technology, known as a "two-point implosion" device, is officially secret in both the US and Britain, but according to previously unpublished documentation in a dossier compiled by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iranian scientists may have tested high-explosive components of the design. The development was today described by nuclear experts as "breathtaking" and has added urgency to the effort to find a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear crisis. The sophisticated technology, once mastered, allows for the production of smaller and simpler warheads than older models. It reduces the diameter of a warhead and makes it easier to put a nuclear warhead on a missile. Documentation referring to experiments testing a two-point detonation design are part of the evidence of nuclear weaponisation gathered by the IAEA and presented to Iran for its response. The dossier, titled "Possible Military Dimensions of Iran's Nuclear Program", is drawn in part from reports submitted to it by western intelligence agencies. The agency has in the past treated such reports with scepticism, particularly after the Iraq war. But its director general, Mohamed ElBaradei, has said the evidence of Iranian weaponisation "appears to have been derived from multiple sources over different periods of time, appears to be generally consistent, and is sufficiently comprehensive and detailed that it needs to be addressed by Iran". Extracts from the dossier have been published previously, but it was not previously known that it included documentation on such an advanced warhead. "It is breathtaking that Iran could be working on this sort of material," said a European government adviser on nuclear issues. James Acton, a British nuclear weapons expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said: "It's remarkable that, before perfecting step one, they are going straight to step four or five ... To start with more sophisticated designs speaks of level of technical ambition that is surprising." Another western specialist with extensive knowledge of the Iranian programme said: "It raises the question of who supplied this to them. Did AQ Khan [a Pakistani scientist who confessed in 2004 to running a nuclear smuggling ring] have access to this, or is it another player?" The revelation of the documents comes at a time of growing tension. Tehran has so far rejected a deal that would remove most of its enriched uranium stockpile for a year and replace it with nuclear fuel rods which would be much harder to turn into weapons. The Iranian government has also balked at negotiations, which were due to begin last week, over its continued enrichment of uranium, in defiance of UN security council resolutions. There are fears in Washington and London that if no deal is reached to at least temporarily defuse tensions by the end of December, Israel could set in motion plans to take military action aimed at setting back the Iranian programme by force, with incalculable consequences for the Middle East. Iran has rejected most of the IAEA material on weaponisation as forgeries, but has admitted carrying out tests on multiple high-explosive detonations synchronised to within a microsecond. Tehran has told the agency that there is a civilian application for such tests, but has so far not provided any evidence for them. Western weapons experts say there are no such civilian applications, but the use of co-ordinated detonations in nuclear warheads is well known. They compress the fissile core, or pit, of the warhead until it reaches critical mass. A US national intelligence estimate two years ago said that Iran had explored nuclear warhead design for several years but had probably stopped in 2003. British, French and German officials have said they believe weaponisation continued after that date and may still be continuing. In September, a German court found a German-Iranian businessman, Mohsen Vanaki, guilty of brokering the sale of dual-use equipment with possible applications in developing nuclear weapons. The equipment included specialised high-speed cameras, of the sort used to develop implosion devices, as well as radiation detectors. According to a report by the Institute for Science and International Security, the German foreign intelligence service, the Bundesnachrichtendienst, testified at the trial that there was evidence that Iran's weapons development was continuing. The IAEA is seeking to find out what the scientists and the institutions involved in th
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4   NEXT
DarthAmerica    @sentinel   11/6/2009 4:07:43 AM

One more thing. Russia if they are actively involved with any weapons research will not allow the Iranians to actually complete development. Russia and Iran have not always been on good terms. Also, the Russians have incentive to draw this out and keep the DoD forces tied up in the GWOT as long as possible so they can make moves in the former Soviet states. 

Russia would be smart not to help the Iranians at all.  It wasn't that long ago that they were the Lesser Satan, and if Iran could give a workable nuke to someone like Hezbollah, it's not that much of a stretch that Chechens could end up with one too. 

 The Russian aren't really "helping". More like using. Like moving pawns. As far as the Iranians go. They aren't going to turn a weapon over to a non state actor. Not only would they lose positive control, a non state actor would not be able to keep the weapon operational for long. 

I'm hoping the Russians are smart enough to realize this, but remember that Putin might not see war between Iran and the West as necessarily a bad thing.  Gas prices would skyrocket, and NATO would be further extended.  It's shortsighted, but it's not the first time the Russians made a deal with a racist nutbar, only to have things blow up in their face.  Hopefully not literally this time.

 Generally agree with this.

In all likelihood however the Iranians are ~5 to 10 years away from an operational weapon of any kind.
 
We hope.

 I was very careful in my choice of words.
-DA


 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       11/6/2009 12:53:01 PM

One more thing. Russia if they are actively involved with any weapons research will not allow the Iranians to actually complete development. Russia and Iran have not always been on good terms. Also, the Russians have incentive to draw this out and keep the DoD forces tied up in the GWOT as long as possible so they can make moves in the former Soviet states. 

Russia would be smart not to help the Iranians at all.  It wasn't that long ago that they were the Lesser Satan, and if Iran could give a workable nuke to someone like Hezbollah, it's not that much of a stretch that Chechens could end up with one too. 

 Russia doesn't think like the West. They see themselves as squeezed berween Ryrope and the PRC, but they see theor mortal enemy ads the Inited States. WE are the ones who can wipe them out in 30 minutes. The others can only hurt them after whuch Russua would stomp them flat or so they think. So Russia plays a long game an d tries to bleed America and exploit our central Asian mistakes. Thbat and they want revenge for Afghanistan.

I'm hoping the Russians are smart enough to realize this, but remember that Putin might not see war between Iran and the West as necessarily a bad thing.  Gas prices would skyrocket, and NATO would be further extended.  It's shortsighted, but it's not the first time the Russians made a deal with a racist nutbar, only to have things blow up in their face.  Hopefully not literally this time.

Stalin and Hitler. Paul and Frederick. The Russians tend to repeat their mistakes.  

In all likelihood however the Iranians are ~5 to 10 years away from an operational weapon of any kind.
 

We hope.

 That is a foolish hope. All they need is the pit. If they had taken the plutonium route, then they would already be bombed up. They have native sources of uranium so they chose that longer route. It will take them twice as long, but 5 years once and SINCE  they reach 12% HEU?  Not bloody likely.
 
To make a working missile warhead maybe it will take three to five years, though I would look at the RV bodies of their missiles to check that unfounded assumption. The RV will tell you how far along the Iranians are to developing a nuclear warhead bus. Has there been any photo-recon of rocket sled tests to test such RVs? Its a known test path to cheaply replicate missile lob profiles including expected vibration loads.  Another thing to check is actual falls of tested Iranian rockets. The steeper the fall angle, the more interesting to us. 
 
Unless AQ sold them a copy of the M-11 bomb version the Pakistanis use. This is OLD technology well understood and known to work. It would not be hard to detonate dry rounds reverse engineered for conventional explosive and driver plate tests.

And there is no proof that the development path is bomb first then missile warhead. It could be like India or Israel, Bomb  designed tested and proofed as missile warhead.
We run out of time. Hope is foolish when the alternative is nuclear war. Regime change comes before or after. Choose/
 
Quote    Reply

CJH       11/7/2009 10:28:11 AM
IIRC, one or more plutonium salts are fiissible.
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       11/8/2009 12:02:09 PM
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8346503.stm
 
[quote]
This "two-point implosion device", as it is known, is significant because it would allow for the production of a much smaller and less cumbersome nuclear warhead - one that experts believe could easily fit onto Iran's existing Shahab 3 missiles.
[unquote]
 
It seems more and more likely that Iran is actually pursuing plutonium route. This might be the signal that Bushehr reactor is going to be turned on soon. The Arak one may follow soon.
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       11/8/2009 12:20:25 PM

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8346503.stm

 

[quote]

This "two-point implosion device", as it is known, is significant because it would allow for the production of a much smaller and less cumbersome nuclear warhead - one that experts believe could easily fit onto Iran's existing Shahab 3 missiles.


[unquote]


 

It seems more and more likely that Iran is actually pursuing plutonium route. This might be the signal that Bushehr reactor is going to be turned on soon. The Arak one may follow soon.

You have to have HEU of at least 10% to pursue a plutonium fast breeder reactor route. AFAIK the ostentatious Bushehr reactors are not so configured.
 
 
 The Arak heavy water reactor IS.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       11/8/2009 1:21:58 PM

You have to have HEU of at least 10% to pursue a plutonium fast breeder reactor route. AFAIK the ostentatious Bushehr reactors are not so configured.


 The Arak heavy water reactor IS.


There are ways to produce plutonium in light water reactor. Heavy water is not the only way to slow neutrons down to increase absorption rate (or impact cross section). Actually, certain light water, commercial electric-generating reactors can produce plutonium, even though the production rate is not optimized. Plutonium is much easier to separate and enrich than uranium.
 
Thus, they might try to put some LEU in reactor and make some plutonium ASAP, while still conducting further enrichment.
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       11/8/2009 2:16:04 PM




You have to have HEU of at least 10% to pursue a plutonium fast breeder reactor route. AFAIK the ostentatious Bushehr reactors are not so configured.







 The Arak heavy water reactor IS.








There are ways to produce plutonium in light water reactor. Heavy water is not the only way to slow neutrons down to increase absorption rate (or impact cross section). Actually, certain light water, commercial electric-generating reactors can produce plutonium, even though the production rate is not optimized. Plutonium is much easier to separate and enrich than uranium.

 

Thus, they might try to put some LEU in reactor and make some plutonium ASAP, while still conducting further enrichment.

Sure, graphite moderated Russian  RBMK style reactors fit that mold, but Bushehr uses a WER 1000 pressurized water moderated design of best thermal efficiency at about 5% enriched 235/238 uranium fuel. This is clearly, at least to me, not the most likely route to Iranian plutonium production as the WER 1000, unlike the RBMK, has to shut down for a fuel core replacement operation and would thus red flag to the most stupid observer that a fuel core was being extracted for processing for something.  Its well out in the open and very ostentatious that way. The Arak reactor is inside an underground facility and shielded from detectors as well as from view. Why? 
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       11/9/2009 12:03:32 PM
So, Iran has rejected IAEA's recent proposal for processing uranium in Russia and France. They let out the message through Chinese Xinhua news agency, and I still don't read it on major news outlet in the West. Now what? What's next? We have been voiced that talks won't work, they want nukes. It's not too late to conduct subversive actions and physical sabotage via agents.
 
On other news, three stupid American college students are  going to be prosecuted for espionage by Tehran. I still don't get it that why some Americans still opt to go to places where obvious danger is present.
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    @yellichink   11/9/2009 12:59:31 PM
The Iranians haven't made a concrete rejection. Rather, they are stalling for time. This is actually something the Obama Administration will accept for now. The stalling will allow the admin to handle some of the other critical issues on it's plate and continue to try and get the Russians on board for sanctions. In parallel, preparations for military strikes will continue should that become necessary. 

Right now we have

Economic Crisis (Immediate)
GWOT (High)
Health Care (High)
US-Asia relations (Medium)
Russian Resurgence (High)
Iranian Nuclear program (Medium)
 
Lets say Immediate needs attention now, high in the next year, medium within 1-5 years. Low are things like abortion, gun control and gay rights ect. 

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       11/9/2009 1:38:37 PM

The Iranians haven't made a concrete rejection. Rather, they are stalling for time. This is actually something the Obama Administration will accept for now. The stalling will allow the admin to handle some of the other critical issues on it's plate and continue to try and get the Russians on board for sanctions. In parallel, preparations for military strikes will continue should that become necessary. 

Right now we have

Economic Crisis (Immediate)

GWOT (High)

Health Care (High)

US-Asia relations (Medium)

Russian Resurgence (High)

Iranian Nuclear program (Medium)
 
Lets say Immediate needs attention now, high in the next year, medium within 1-5 years. Low are things like abortion, gun control and gay rights ect. 

-DA 

So far I have not been a proponent for military action against Iran, but apparently Iran issue is more urgent than you listed above. When the Iranian nuclear problem is reaching maturity, it's already too late. They are testing the bomb design, and, once they are close to acquire enough fission material, you can't stop them without direct intervention, i.e., putting YOU on harms way. 
 
However, subversion and sabotage can delay or neutralize them if correctly executed with relatively little resources, and that's the best cards in US's hands. If the USG chooses not to play those cards, then you can already think Iran to be nuke armed. Under current progress, it will not be 5 to 10 years. Try 3-5. Iran will choose the right time to test their first, the time when multiple crisis blow up simultaneously.
 

 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics