Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
United States Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: So Iran just pursues peaceful nuclear energy?
Hamilcar    11/5/2009 10:18:42 PM
link 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known as a "two-point implosion" device, is officially secret in both the US and Britain, but according to previously unpublished documentation in a dossier compiled by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iranian scientists may have tested high-explosive components of the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

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4
DarthAmerica    @yellichink   11/10/2009 1:59:47 PM
What's important to watch is the support we are getting from France, Germany and the UK. The UK had a very high level meeting with the Russians for the first time in a long time. Germany is also going to lobby the Russians. Based on Russia statements they are suggesting that they may be willing to sell Iran out for a fat enough economic incentive. Also, the Israeli's were just here and they seem to be in lock step with the USG on the current plan for diplomacy. Iran will probably continue to stall until sanctions take effect. If the Russians are on board then this ends there. If not then things will heat up rather quickly...

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a       11/10/2009 2:15:57 PM
Well, DA, it looks like we can agree on something, after all.  The problem I have with Obama waiting (and I had the same problem with Bush) is that he may wait too long.  Bush at least was willing to go to war if it became necessary, and the Iranians understood that.  Obama seems to want to talk a problem to death and not realize that he's just empowering the Iranians, not weakening them. 
 
Maybe he'll turn out to be okay on this, but I have little to no confidence in the man, based on his past mistakes and his continued dithering over Afghanistan.  Yes, I'd rather have him take his time and do things right--and maybe that's what he's doing--but if we're going to start quoting Sun Tzu, I can find a couple of quotes about dithering and waiting too long.  Obama has acquired a reputation, deserved or not, as a weakling.  He can come back from that--Kennedy did in a big way--but Obama could also as easily become a second Carter, who made the country a laughingstock worldwide. 
 
We'll just have to agree to disagree about Obama for now.  If he makes up his mind on Afghanistan, and stands firm against Iran, he'll have my support for that, at least.
 
Russia selling out Iran for economic assistance?  That I can believe.  And agree with.  Putin is a turd, but even Nixon had to deal with Mao...
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       11/10/2009 3:10:57 PM
Obama is only perceived as weak by the American right wing. The rest of the world understands the power of his personality cult and that he has a huge amount of political capital built up. If your opinion is different than mine then I respect that and agree to disagree. Moving on...

...I'd be interested to here your Sun Tzu quotes. I think there are always more than one way to handle a situation. I don't think Obama is "dithering" any more than other Presidents. America has a history of waiting until the last moment to initiate hostilities. I see this the same way. But that's only because we have a range of other options that would be more preferable. 

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       11/10/2009 3:14:37 PM

What's important to watch is the support we are getting from France, Germany and the UK. The UK had a very high level meeting with the Russians for the first time in a long time. Germany is also going to lobby the Russians. Based on Russia statements they are suggesting that they may be willing to sell Iran out for a fat enough economic incentive. Also, the Israeli's were just here and they seem to be in lock step with the USG on the current plan for diplomacy. Iran will probably continue to stall until sanctions take effect. If the Russians are on board then this ends there. If not then things will heat up rather quickly...

 

Russia's President Dmitry Medvedev speaks with German journalists Sunday at the Gorki residence outside Moscow. Sanctions against Iran should not be ruled out if it fails to agree to restrictions on its nuclear program, Medvedev told the German weekly magazine Der Spiegel.
Mikhail Klimentyev/REUTERS

Is Russia playing both sides on Iran nukes?

Russia signals that it is open to tougher sanctions on Iran, which has failed to respond to an international uranium deal. But rogue scientists in Russia may be continuing to help Iran pursue a nuclear program.

By Howard LaFranchi... | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

from the November 10, 2009 edition

Washington - Iran's failure to respond to an international offer to enrich much of its uranium stockpile outside the country ? for use in a Tehran medical research facility ? is again raising the prospect of tougher sanctions.

Much of the focus of the sanctions debate is falling on Russia, which has blown hot and cold on additional punitive measures on Iran over its nuclear program ? but which is sounding open to the idea once again. The attention is reviving lingering questions about Russian assistance ? either official or unauthorized ? to Iran's nuclear program and weapons research.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and French President Nicolas Sarkozy issued a statement Monday warning Iran that "the international community's patience is not infinite." The two leaders, in Berlin for the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, said they "do not rule out" another round of sanctions aimed at the Iranian leadership and its advancing nuclear program.

Those words followed comments by President Medvedev over the weekend to German journalists, when he suggested that Russia could support additional sanctions if Iran fails to take the opportunity to cooperate with world powers in its nuclear program. Noting the offers now before the Iranian leadership, Medvedev told Germany's Der Spiegel magazine, "I wouldn't like to see all that ending in the introduction of international sanctions ? but if there is no movement forward, no one is excluding such a scenario."

The US, Russia, and France last month negotiated a deal with Iranian officials to remove almost three-quarters of Iran's slightly-enriched uranium stockpile to Russia and France for further enrichment to a level needed for a research reactor. Removal of the uranium would ease international concerns about Iran's nuclear intentions and allow for what the Obama administration hopes would be fruitful negotiations with Iran on a range of issues.

But Iranian state media reports and statements from some Iranian lawmakers suggest the government will reject the deal ? perhaps offering to buy the uranium it needs for its reactor and moving its uranium stockpile to a domestic location for international surveillance instead.

Eyes have turned to Russia because, as a veto-wielding member of the UN Security Council, it could squelch any move to impose additional sanctions through the council. China also holds veto power in the Security Council and has discouraged talk of a new sanctions resolution, but som

 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a       11/10/2009 3:49:29 PM
DA, personality cults are bad.  I'm surprised you admit Obama has one.  Personality cults are at best what we have with celebrities.  At worst you get Kim Jong-il and Stalin.  None of those things we want in a President of a free republic like the US.  Saying that the world underestimates the power of Obama's personality cult implies that Obama has an army of fanatics ready to be unleashed upon an enemy of America.  One, that's not true, and two, fanatics are not what this country needs, on either side of the political spectrum.
 
It's not just right-wingers or conservatives like myself who perceive Obama as weak.  Chavez is rattling sabers against Colombia, the Iranians are rejecting any proposals out of hand, and Russia is pushing harder than they ever did during Bush's administration.  There's a lot of people out there who percieve Obama as weak, and many of them are not even Americans, let alone conservatives.  They (and we) might be wrong about Obama, but that is the perception.  A tough stand on Afghanistan and Iran would go a long way towards reducing that perception; I think if Obama tells Chavez to back off in no uncertain terms, that tinpot coward will back down.
 
I'll dig up those Sun Tzu quotes for you, but it may be awhile--that sounds like a cop-out, but I've got 200 midterms to grade.
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    @sentinel   11/10/2009 5:06:02 PM

DA, personality cults are bad.  I'm surprised you admit Obama has one.  Personality cults are at best what we have with celebrities.  At worst you get Kim Jong-il and Stalin.  None of those things we want in a President of a free republic like the US.  Saying that the world underestimates the power of Obama's personality cult implies that Obama has an army of fanatics ready to be unleashed upon an enemy of America.  One, that's not true, and two, fanatics are not what this country needs, on either side of the political spectrum.

 No they aren't bad. Especially for a person who's success has a lot to do with how well received he/she is. Obama's power isn't from "fanatics", it's from his influence. When he goes out and endorses a course of action, or inaction, it carries a lot of weight around the world by virtue of the power of the Presidency. Also, of course I admit it. It's obvious!

It's not just right-wingers or conservatives like myself who perceive Obama as weak.  Chavez is rattling sabers against Colombia, the Iranians are rejecting any proposals out of hand, and Russia is pushing harder than they ever did during Bush's administration.  There's a lot of people out there who percieve Obama as weak, and many of them are not even Americans, let alone conservatives.  They (and we) might be wrong about Obama, but that is the perception.  A tough stand on Afghanistan and Iran would go a long way towards reducing that perception; I think if Obama tells Chavez to back off in no uncertain terms, that tinpot coward will back down.

 Chavez has always rattled sabers and the target audience isn't Obama or you. It's for internal consumption. And who cares what some insignificant South American dictator rants about? If Obama or any POTUS dignified that nonsense with a response it would be beneath the office. If you study the geography and Venezuela's capability, it would become very clear Chavez is just blowing hot air. The Russians are pushing hard because of the timing. Has nothing to do with Obama. In fact, they invaded Georgia WHILE BUSH WAS POTUS. Why do I keep having to repeat this to you? Again, a tough stand on Afghanistan may mean a weaker stand against a country like IRAN or RUSSIA. More Sun Tzu is necessary:

17. For should the enemy strengthen his van, he will weaken his rear;
should he strengthen his rear, he will weaken his van;
should he strengthen his left, he will weaken his right;
should he strengthen his right, he will weaken his left.
If he sends reinforcements everywhere, he will everywhere be weak.
18. Numerical weakness comes from having to prepare against possible attacks; numerical strength, from compelling our adversary to make these preparations against us.
19. Knowing the place and the time of the coming battle, we may concentrate from the greatest distances in order to fight.
20. But if neither time nor place be known, then the left wing will be impotent to succor the right, the right equally impotent to succor the left, the van unable to relieve the rear, or the rear to support the van. How much more so if the furthest portions of the army are anything under a hundred LI apart, and even the nearest are separated by several LI!
21. Though according to my estimate the soldiers of Yueh exceed our own in number, that shall advantage them nothing in the matter of victory. I say then that victory can be achieved.
22. Though the enemy be stronger in numbers, we may prevent him from fighting. Scheme so as to discover his plans and the likelihood of their success.
23. Rouse him, and learn the principle of his activity or inactivity. Force him to reveal himself, so as to find out his vulnerable spots.
24. Carefully compare the opposing arm
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy