Iran: "Enough for one atom bomb"

[Peeping Wizard]

I'm surprised this isn't on here already. This is about as scary as it gets right here:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/20/africa/20nuke.php

Iran has now produced roughly enough nuclear material to make, with added purification, a single atom bomb, according to nuclear experts analyzing the latest report from global atomic inspectors.

The figures detailing Iran's progress were contained in a routine update on Wednesday from the International Atomic Energy Agency, which has been conducting inspections of the country's main nuclear plant at Natanz. The report concluded that as of early this month, Iran had made 630 kilograms, or about 1,390 pounds, of low-enriched uranium.

Several experts said that was enough for a bomb, but they cautioned that the milestone was mostly symbolic, because Iran would have to take additional steps. Not only would it have to breach its international agreements and kick out the inspectors, but it would also have to further purify the fuel and put it into a warhead design — a technical advance that Western experts are unsure Iran has yet achieved.

"They clearly have enough material for a bomb," said Richard Garwin, a top nuclear physicist who helped invent the hydrogen bomb and has advised Washington for decades. "They know how to do the enrichment. Whether they know how to design a bomb, well, that's another matter."

Iran insists that it wants only to fuel reactors for nuclear power. But many Western nations, led by the United States, suspect that its real goal is to gain the ability to make nuclear weapons.

While some Iranian officials have threatened to bar inspectors in the past, the country has made no such moves, and many experts inside the Bush administration and the IAEA believe it will avoid the risk of attempting "nuclear breakout" until it possessed a larger uranium supply.

Even so, for President-elect Barack Obama, the report underscores the magnitude of the problem that he will inherit Jan. 20: an Iranian nuclear program that has not only solved many technical problems of uranium enrichment, but that can also now credibly claim to possess enough material to make a weapon if negotiations with Europe and the United States break down.

American intelligence agencies have said Iran could make a bomb between 2009 and 2015. A national intelligence estimate made public late last year concluded that around the end of 2003, after long effort, Iran had halted work on an actual weapon. But enriching uranium, and obtaining enough material to build a weapon, is considered the most difficult part of the process.

Siegfried Hecker of Stanford University and a former director of the Los Alamos weapons laboratory said the growing size of the Iranian stockpile "underscored that they are marching down the path to developing the nuclear weapons option."

In the report to its board, the atomic agency said Iran's main enrichment plant was now feeding uranium into about 3,800 centrifuges — machines that spin incredibly fast to enrich the element into nuclear fuel. That count is the same as in the agency's last quarterly report, in September. Iran began installing the centrifuges in early 2007. But the new report's total of 630 kilograms — an increase of about 150 — shows that Iran has been making progress in accumulating material to make nuclear fuel.

That uranium has been enriched to the low levels needed to fuel a nuclear reactor. To further purify it to the highly enriched state needed to fuel a nuclear warhead, Iran would have to reconfigure its centrifuges and do a couple months of additional processing, nuclear experts said.

"They have a weapon's worth," Thomas Cochran, a senior scientist in the nuclear program of the Natural Resources Defense Council, a private group in Washington that tracks atomic arsenals, said in an interview.

He said the amount was suitable for a relatively advanced implosion-type weapon like the one dropped on Nagasaki. Its core, he added, would be about the size of a grapefruit. He said a cruder design would require about twice as much weapon-grade fuel.

"It's a virtual milestone," Cochran said of Iran's stockpile. It is not an imminent threat, he added, because the further technical work to make fuel for a bomb would tip off inspectors, the United States and other powers about "where they're going."

The agency's report made no mention of the possible military implications of the size of Iran's stockpile. And some experts said the milestone was still months away. In an analysis of the IAEA report, the Institute for Science and International Security, a private group in Washington, estimated that Iran had not yet reached the mark but would "within a few months." It added that other analysts estimated it might take as much as a year.

Whatever the exact date, it added, "Iran is progressing" toward the ability to quickly make enough weapon-grade uranium for a warhead.

Peter Zimmerman, a physicist and former United States government arms scientist, cautioned that the Iranian stockpile fell slightly short of what international officials conservatively estimate as the minimum threatening amount of nuclear fuel. "They're very close," he said of the Iranians in an interview. "If it isn't tomorrow, it's soon," probably a matter of months.

In its report, the IAEA, which is based in Vienna, said Iran was working hard to roughly double its number of operating centrifuges.

A senior European diplomat close to the agency said Iran might have 6,000 centrifuges enriching uranium by the end of the year. The report also said Iran had said it intended to start installing another group of 3,000 centrifuges early next year.

The atomic energy agency said Iran was continuing to evade questions about its suspected work on nuclear warheads. In a separate report released Wednesday, the agency said, as expected, that it had found ambiguous traces of uranium at a suspected Syrian reactor site bombed by Israel last year.

"While it cannot be excluded that the building in question was intended for non-nuclear use," the report said, the building's features "along with the connectivity of the site to adequate pumping capacity of cooling water, are similar to what may be found in connection with a reactor site." Syria has said the uranium came from Israeli bombs.

[SkinsOrlando]

Well it's a good thing there only enriching uranium for power.................

However, unless they have a system we haven't detected they don't have the ability to "purify" it for weaponal use YET.

[Kilmer17]

Almost time.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,455005,00.html

Israeli Air Force 'Ready for Iran's Nuclear Sites'

The Israeli Air Force is ready to attack Iran's suspected nuclear weapons project if diplomacy fails to persuade the Islamic Republic to halt uranium enrichment, said Commander Ido Nehushtan in an interview published Tuesday.

The news comes as the U.N. watchdog agency reports Iran is probably at the point of being capable of making a nuclear bomb.

"We are prepared and ready to do whatever Israel needs us to do and if this is the mission we're given then we are ready," Nehushtan told German magazine Der Spiegel.

A strike against Iran's nuclear facilities "is a political decision," the IAF commander said, "but if I understand it correctly, all options are on the table ... The Air Force is a very robust and flexible force. We are ready to do whatever is demanded of us."

[Campbell4Clipboard]

Israel can do whatever they want, as long as they don't drag us into this. It's their problem, not ours.

[MurrayH81]

This is what happens when you threaten (and even attack) non-nuclear club members as part of normal foreign policy, while leaving nuclear club members alone (or treating them with kid gloves).

No one wants to be attacked by the US (or China, Russia, etc.) and if developing nuclear weapons is all it takes to avoid that, most sovereign nations will go for it if they can.

Wouldn't you?

[Koolblue13]

This is what happens when you threaten (and even attack) non-nuclear club members as part of normal foreign policy, while leaving nuclear club members alone (or treating them with kid gloves).

No one wants to be attacked by the US (or China, Russia, etc.) and if developing nuclear weapons is all it takes to avoid that, most sovereign nations will go for it if they can.

Wouldn't you?

I thought we did attack a nation specifically because the had them.

[Stophovr6]

Israel can do whatever they want, as long as they don't drag us into this. It's their problem, not ours.

I'm sure no one in the middle east will have us share the blame.

[USS Redskins]

Dont worry - there is CHANGE in the air. His Barackness will wave his hand and something wonderful will happen.

[Koolblue13]

Israel can do whatever they want, as long as they don't drag us into this. It's their problem, not ours.

I'm sure the Iranians will see the Israelis attacking with Weapons given to them by Americans and backed by money given to them by Americans, but just leave us out of it.

[mbws]

Maybe they'll F-up and blow themselves up.

[jpyaks3]

I thought we did attack a nation specifically because the had them.

Who did we attack that had a confirmed nuclear weapon?

[NavyDave]

Israel can do whatever they want, as long as they don't drag us into this. It's their problem, not ours.

What do you mean by US? I'll gladly help protect Israel. However comma Israel knew the moment BHO was elected that they had to be ready to protect themselves since the UN and a lot of people in the USA either don't have their back or side with religion of peace types.

[Koolblue13]

Who did we attack that had a confirmed nuclear weapon?

Didn't Powell tell the UN and the entire world we knew there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?

[jpyaks3]

Iran will not nuke anyone, they want to develop a nuclear weapon simply so they can avoid being pushed around by the United States, and they can use it as a deterrent to Israel. Iranian leadership isn't crazy, they won't commit suicide by using the nuclear weapon, they simply understand that the only way they can continue to be a major player in the region is if they can push back on Israel through deterrence. That said, it isn't a good thing that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon as it will limit our power in the region significantly, however, Iran is not a threat to wipe out Israel or to attack anyone really with a nuclear weapon.

[jpyaks3]

Didn't Powell tell the UN and the entire world we knew there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?

Weapons of Mass Destruction != nuclear weapon. Also if there were nuclear tests I am sure we would have been a whole lot less cavalier about going in there.

[Burgold]

Iran will not nuke anyone, they want to develop a nuclear weapon simply so they can avoid being pushed around by the United States, and they can use it as a deterrent to Israel.

A deterent to Israel to do what? What were they afraid Israel was going to do? Invade? Take over their country?

[jpyaks3]

What do you mean by US? I'll gladly help protect Israel. However comma Israel knew the moment BHO was elected that they had to be ready to protect themselves since the UN and a lot of people in the USA either don't have their back or side with religion of peace types.

You do realize that if Israel was not Israel they would probably be classified as a rogue nation or sponsor of terrorism. They have a right to exist, however, they do not have a right to commit collective punishments, establish settlements on lands won through war, or possess nuclear weapons without signing on to numerous agreements. Israel has a right to protect itself and look out for its own self interest, the United States however, needs to look out for our self interest first the Israeli's are an ally that is it, we shouldn't give them any more benefits than any other ally.

[jpyaks3]

A deterent to Israel to do what? What were they afraid Israel was going to do? Invade? Take over their country?

Attack them. Nuclear weapons are a bargaining chip and an extremely powerful one. If Iran develops nuclear weapons it allows them to have a lot more leverage in the region. Do you honestly believe that Iran wants nuclear weapons for offensive purposes?

[JMS]

Israel can do whatever they want, as long as they don't drag us into this. It's their problem, not ours.

I think the point is with 150,000 troops on the boarder with IRan in Iraq and Afghanistan, and with the fact we have given Israel all of her capabilities to strike Iran.. We are responsible for "whatever" Israel does.

I think the article and primese here are propaganda. Israel is going to make it's move soon and they are manufactuing the press in order to cover their move...

"with added purification" translates to years of effort. Iran isn't going to get the bomb for years. Israel want's to hit them now because they're not sure they will be permitted to under Obama's presidency. Time to take care of business is therefore now.

[JMS]

I thought we did attack a nation specifically because the had them.

Nope... we've only ever attacked countries to keep them from getting them or who didn't have them. Two nuclear countries have never fought directly only by proxi during the cold war.

[Burgold]

It's possible they want them for defensive purposes against the U.S., but Israel. All Israel wants and ever wanted was to be left alone. All those lands you spoke of that she took in a war were taken when Israel was attacked. That used to be the name of the game in war. You engage in war, you win, and you own that land. Heck, if we went by 100,000 years of precedent Iraq should be the fifty first state and not a black hole of monetary drain.

Israel is not a threat to anyone unless they attack first or theaten to attack. It's just too small a country, both populationwise and militarily. It has a very good and efficient military, but it's small.

Iran's urge to have a nuke is so that it can be offensive. Maybe not with the nuke, but in all other ways.

[jpyaks3]

It's possible they want them for defensive purposes against the U.S., but Israel. All Israel wants and ever wanted was to be left alone. All those lands you spoke of that she took in a war were taken when Israel was attacked. That used to be the name of the game in war. You engage in war, you win, and you own that land. Heck, if we went by 100,000 years of precedent Iraq should be the fifty first state and not a black hole of monetary drain.

Israel is not a threat to anyone unless they attack first or theaten to attack. It's just too small a country, both populationwise and militarily. It has a very good and efficient military, but it's small.

Iran's urge to have a nuke is so that it can be offensive. Maybe not with the nuke, but in all other ways.

It is illegal to occupy lands gained through war.

Israel is being attacked because of the Palestinia issue or due to their actions (Hezbollah) until someone finds a fair and equitable solution to the Palestine issue Israel will have security problems.

[JMS]

I'm sure the Iranians will see the Israelis attacking with Weapons given to them by Americans and backed by money given to them by Americans, but just leave us out of it.

Not only that but if Israel was to attack Iran they would have to fly directly through American controled airspace to do it. So we would have had to pre-approve their act.

It will be seen as the equivelent of an American attack throughout the world, not just in Iran. The only countrys which differentiate American will and Israeli actions are the US public and sometimes Israeli government.

[Mad Mike]

Iran will not nuke anyone, they want to develop a nuclear weapon simply so they can avoid being pushed around by the United States, and they can use it as a deterrent to Israel. Iranian leadership isn't crazy, they won't commit suicide by using the nuclear weapon, they simply understand that the only way they can continue to be a major player in the region is if they can push back on Israel through deterrence. That said, it isn't a good thing that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon as it will limit our power in the region significantly, however, Iran is not a threat to wipe out Israel or to attack anyone really with a nuclear weapon.

A deterrent to Israel? WTF are you talking about? Do you think Israel is picking on Iran or something?

I think you are making the grave mistake of assuming that Iran has a rational leader and that they are not driven by radical ideologies. This is not a small european nation we are talking about. This is a country run by religious fanatics who have stated that they want Israel wiped off the face of the map.

:doh:

[Burgold]

It is illegal to occupy lands gained through war.

That's a very, very recent notion. I don't think that was what the Soviets believed, or the U.S. for that matter in WWII when we gained all those territories, I don't think that's what the Brits believed or the ancient Greeks or Ooogla and Grok or even Adam and Eve when they signed their pre-nup

And the Palestinians are being used horribly by the entirety of the Middle East as a diversion, as pawns. Ask yourself when was the last time that Iran did anything constructive in Israel/Palestinian negotiations.