Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

Iran and the bomb
Posted by: mcq on Thursday, April 13, 2006

If you were keeping up with the news yesterday, you're more than familiar with the recent news out of Iran that the country has successfully enriched uranium. That's step one in the "How to Build a Nuke" manual. Of course, to be fair, it is also step one in preparing fuel for a nuclear reactor.

Anyway, after doing so, they've been very modest about their accomplishment:
Speaking as Mr ElBaradei arrived in Tehran, Mr Ahmadinejad said: "Our answer to those who are angry about Iran obtaining the full nuclear cycle is one phrase, we say: Be angry and die of this anger."

"We will not hold talks with anyone about the Iranian nation's right [to enrichment] and no one has the right to step back, even one iota," he added, the official IRNA news agency reported.
Their conciliatory stance couched in careful diplomatic language certainly makes me look forward to the forthcoming negotiations with anticipation. Wouldn't it you?

And then there's this:
If Iran decided to develop highly enriched uranium, it could take between three and five years to make enough for a single nuclear bomb, assuming that it mastered the technology, the International Institute of Strategic Studies reports.

But the IISS also says it could take as long as 10-15 years, depending on Iranian ability and intentions.
My assumption is this information is being provided by the same agencies that said Iraq had WMDs and that India was years away from a nuclear weapon and Pakistan hadn't a clue.

Let's just say I woke up on the skeptical side of the bed this morning.
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

There are two types of nuke fuel, Uranium and Plutonium. The difficulty was always that weapons grade Plutonium is relatively easy to get...but very hard to make a nuclear weapon out of (it has to be an implosion type device). Weapons grade Uranium is very difficult to get, but very easy to make a nuclear weapon out of (gun-tube device). The Iranians have just claimed that they can do the hard step. Now it is a matter of time, and that time is merely a function of how many centrifuges they build. Not the most efficient way...but it can nuke a city just as well.
Written By: blanknoone
URL: http://
Always assume the worst and Iran plans to build nuclear weapons.Isn’t time for a military strike against Iran to made public by the Bush adminstration? Just a thought.
Written By: Tom
URL: http://
This is the reason that all of the stupid liberal whining about diplomacy is just that. The WaPo article tells us why Islamist fanatics require the stick and not the carrot:

“The hijackers, as shown on a computer simulation played on monitors throughout the courtroom, jerked the plane violently to the left and right during the struggle. They tried to cut off the oxygen as passengers banged on the cockpit door. In the end, as the passengers were either in the cockpit or moments from entering it, the hijackers turned the plane upside down — and crashed it. "Allah is the greatest!" one screamed nine times as the plane went down.”

Which is exactly what some Iranian fanatics will scream when they push the button to destroy Israel (or Washington, D. C.) . One Neville Chamberlain in history is enough. Talk of diplomacy with these fanatics without the threat of attack is just so much wishful thinking. Diplomacy will solve this problem only if we make it clear that we will use the big stick. Stupid liberal whining is making that more and more difficult.
Written By: Notherbob2
URL: http://
You must be taling about the CIA. Why did we ever listen to an agency the missed the fall of the Soviet Union?

Written By: cindyb
URL: http://
Actually one can use Uranium in an implosion device as well. Most modern nuclear weapons use Pu239 and U235 cores any way.

And the ease of production of fissile materials is a matter of debate. Pu is "easy" to come by to the extent that one has only to "cook" fuel rods or slugs to produce Pu, but the separation process is EXTREMELY dangerous, involving highly corrosive and toxic solvents and remote manipulation. U-235 does require a gasification process but the rest is just production engineering and precise manufacturing of the distillation equipment, centrifuge or gaseous diffusion equipment.

Why is Iran going for the centrifuge approach any way? The US found gaseous diffusion to work quite well, though it was a complex system and energy intensive system of production.

It is unlikely that Iran will go with a "gun-type" device. It’s HIGHLY inefficient, requiring 50-55 kilograms of fissile material to produce a 20 Kt weapon. There is no compression of the pit, super-criticality is shor-lived, and there is the problem of post- or pre-detonation. Better to spend the extra time in development tp produce an implosion device. An implosion device with neutron insertion and good tamping requires 5-10 kilograms per weapon. One gun device equals 5-11 implosion devices. Implosion devices make better use of scarce fissionable material.

Iran is several years from the actual deployment of a weapon, so take the extra time and do it "right." If you haven’t been bombed by 2008 or 2009 what’s another few months difference make?

Plus guys, come on no one has yet to say, "Someone set us up the Bomb." After all next door they can see, "All your bases are belong to US."
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
I was just reading "See No Evil" by Bob, I had forgotten how nasty Lebanon was in the 80’s - it’s like Iraq on steroids. Kidnappings, Beheading, carbombs, and a civil war: check.

and Iran was deeply involved.

I don’t think we will attack Iran though, so prepare for a Septmber 10/law enforcement period of a few years after 2008 elections followed by some climactic attack later on...
Written By: Harun
URL: http://

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks