Iran obtained docs for molding uranium hemispheres...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Manedwolf

member
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Messages
3,693
Location
New Hampshire
Well, hm. Here we go, I guess, if this is true. And this is the IAEA saying this, not any hawkish groups, so...

-------------------------

Agency: Iran papers are for an atomic bomb

GEORGE JAHN
Associated Press

VIENNA, Austria - A document obtained by Iran on the nuclear black market serves no other purpose than to make an atomic bomb, the International Atomic Energy Agency said Tuesday.

The finding was made in a report prepared for presentation to the 35-nation IAEA board when it meets, starting Thursday, on whether to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council, which has the power to impose economic and political sanctions on Iran.

The report was made available in full to The Associated Press.

First mention of the documents was made late last year in a longer IAEA report. At that time, the agency said only that the papers showed how to cast "enriched, natural and depleted uranium metal into hemispherical forms."

The agency refused to make a judgment on what possible uses such casts would have. But diplomats familiar with the probe into Iran's nuclear program said then that the papers apparently were instructions on how to mold highly enriched grade uranium into the core of warheads.

In the brief report obtained Tuesday, however, the agency said bluntly that the 15-page document showing how to cast fissile uranium into metal was "related to the fabrication of nuclear weapon components."

Asked about the finding, a senior diplomat close to the IAEA declined to elaborate but emphasized that the documents had no other use.

The report said the document was under agency seal, meaning that IAEA experts were able in theory to re-examine it, but "Iran has declined a request to provide the agency with a copy."

Diplomats familiar with the IAEA investigation of Iran said earlier Tuesday that part of the document recently was given to the agency in an effort to deflect building international momentum to report Iran to the Security Council. But the report did not mention Tehran handing over any papers.

The document was given to Iran by members of the nuclear black market network, the IAEA said. Iran has claimed it did not ask for the document but was given it anyway as part of other black market purchases.

The same network provided Libya with drawings of a crude nuclear bomb which that country handed over to the IAEA as part of its 2003 decision to scrap its atomic weapons program.
-----------------------------------------
 
On the other hand

for how long have the construction principles of nukes been public knowledge? Anybody with a little bit of brains can build a gun-type nuke, and most people probably a "Fat Man" nuke as well.
 
for how long have the construction principles of nukes been public knowledge? Anybody with a little bit of brains can build a gun-type nuke, and most people probably a "Fat Man" nuke as well.

If it was that easy every third world toilet would have one.
 
I think the building of the nuke is the easy part, its getting ahold of the enriched uranium that is the difficult part, most of the time anyways.
 
Big catch is the materials and specifications. The theory is so simple as to be absurd, but applying it is a problem.

I don't know about the tolerances needed on those spheres, but it's gotta be pretty close(relatively speaking. I work down to .0001" every day, so less than that is hairy.). Then critical mass depends on density, so you can't just pour it, you have to pour just enough. A bunch of stuff with actually making them, and any metalurgist and machinist could figure it out. I don't think I'd trust someone else's numbers anyway. The bomb could fizzle, or kind of go off when the metal cools.

The other part is getting the metals. Natural uranium has less than one percent U235, and getting that out is a problem. Easier to do plutonium, but that needs a reactor, and that's a whole 'nother ballgame.

Mostly, you need the technical skills. And they are expensive, regulated, and rare.
 
Well, well, let's see.

Didn't GWB invade Iraq because Saddam was secretly trying to get nukes and possibly give them to the terrorists?

These crazy Iranians obviously are trying to get nukes and would likely give them to terrorists to "wipe Israel off the map".

Hmmmm...
 
Will we fall for the same old song and dance twice?
Sadly, I think that we might.
If desperation is a place without hope, I just saw hope in my rear view mirror.
Biker
 
Oooh, an amazing tech innovation for molding uranium?


I have papers on that too.


From 1950.
 
"The document was given to Iran by members of the nuclear black market network, the IAEA said. Iran has claimed it did not ask for the document but was given it anyway as part of other black market purchases."

Love it:) Probably true, too. Lol what a world.
 
Biker, do you believe that we should just sit back and retreat all our military powers within our borders?

I agree with Bush, we do this and they will simply just come for us on our own borders.
 
Optical Serenity said:
Biker, do you believe that we should just sit back and retreat all our military powers within our borders?

I agree with Bush, we do this and they will simply just come for us on our own borders.
I don't believe that option is a viable one for us at this point, especially after invading Iraq. However, I don't see the wisdom in starting another unnecessary war. Iran *will* obtain nukes, if they haven't already. It's inevitable. Only the method of procuring them is in question.
And no, I don't have a solution to the mess that Bush has gotten us into.
JMO...
Biker
 
Well, well, let's see.

Didn't GWB invade Iraq because Saddam was secretly trying to get nukes and possibly give them to the terrorists?

These crazy Iranians obviously are trying to get nukes and would likely give them to terrorists to "wipe Israel off the map".

Hmmmm...
Invading Iran is a much harder propostion due to topography.

That's why we need a staging area in Iraq... :p
 
When this whole thing started I brushed off the analogies to Vietnam, but the longer this draws out and the more Bush apparently wants to do, the more real those analogies are getting. How long can our military take being practically permanently stationed over there? Sheesh we have two whole countries to worry about already.
 
Yes, and in *MY* library I have all the technical documents needed to brew up some batches of anthrax, ergot molds and the H5N1 virus (aka Bird Flu). I could even cobble together the bioreactors and some rudimentary proccessing equipment needed to isolate the first two for large scale production.

QUICK! CALL BUSH!!
 
Biker said:
And no, I don't have a solution to the mess that Bush has gotten us into.

Biker

Just out of curiousity, what is your solution for the mess that Bush inherited vis-a-vis Iraq?

Let's turn back the clock. GWB wasn't elected in 2000 - you were. You're looking at 10 years or so of UN sanctions wrecking the Iraq economy and making life miserable for the people there. 60,000 children dying in Iraq each year for lack of basic food, medicine, and shelter (by UN numbers). Blatant Iraqi flaunting of the Gulf War I cease fire conditions (including weapons inspections). Our forces enforcing the no-fly zone taking fire every day. Our forces stationed in Saudi Arabia more or less indefinitely to keep an eye on Saddam, meanwhile serving as agit-prop fodder for Islamist crazies. A totally corrupt "oil-for-food" program that's feeding corruption in the UN and $ to Saddam.

All right, President Biker. What do we do about all this?
 
antsi said:
Just out of curiousity, what is your solution for the mess that Bush inherited vis-a-vis Iraq?

Let's turn back the clock. GWB wasn't elected in 2000 - you were. You're looking at 10 years or so of UN sanctions wrecking the Iraq economy and making life miserable for the people there. 60,000 children dying in Iraq each year for lack of basic food, medicine, and shelter (by UN numbers). Blatant Iraqi flaunting of the Gulf War I cease fire conditions (including weapons inspections). Our forces enforcing the no-fly zone taking fire every day. Our forces stationed in Saudi Arabia more or less indefinitely to keep an eye on Saddam, meanwhile serving as agit-prop fodder for Islamist crazies. A totally corrupt "oil-for-food" program that's feeding corruption in the UN and $ to Saddam.

All right, President Biker. What do we do about all this?
Well Friend, no offense meant, but this subject has been debated ad nauseum. I mean, the maggots wont go near that carcass anymore.
We won't change each other's mind, just recycle the SOS.
So, call yourself the winner if you like, but I believe that I'll just save my e-breath on this one.


:)
Biker
 
Biker said:
Well Friend, no offense meant, but this subject has been debated ad nauseum.
Biker

Here, on THR?

Sure, I've seen plenty of debates about the Iraq war. But I don't think I've ever seen anyone offer a coherent solution as to how they would have managed the "Saddam Problem" as GWB inherited it in 2000.

Link?
 
The "Anti-Bush at all costs" crowd are showing their true colors..

now we know in no uncertain terms that Iran has nukes in process and they still won't do anything

hey...I've got an idea. Let's all bury our heads in the sand and make the bad boys go away..

or, click the heels of our ruby slippers together and chant "There's no place like home, there's no place like home..."

if Israel hits Iran to preserve themselves, is it still a war for oil???
 
Last edited:
Sure, I've seen plenty of debates about the Iraq war. But I don't think I've ever seen anyone offer a coherent solution as to how they would have managed the "Saddam Problem" as GWB inherited it in 2000.

Wouldn't it be great if some real alternatives were actually offered by the naysayers.

I am all for libertarian style reforms to our government. The problem is they seem content to stay "pure" in philosophy and not get dirty actually governing and making hard difficult decisions.
 
Anyone want some nice Niger yellowcake? I guess that went down the memory hole.

Actually we recieved the intelligence from the British who stand by it. The "scandel" about the documents is that the "documents" weren't even around when the Brits made their assesment. The bogus documents appeared after the fact and were mentioned by the Pres to support what the Brits were already saying.

The media distorts the truth to the point where just saying Niger yellowcake makes people think of the scandel du jour. The fact that the Brits stand by their inteligence doesn't hardly merit mention.
 
Heard a thing on the radio the other day about the WMD's in Iraq. Seats were removed from commercial jet liners (passenger planes) and the stuff was moved to Syria under the guise of relief supplies for a natural disaster there.

Military transports would have raised too much attention. One pilot said he made over 70 such flights.

Obviously, some made it into Libya. How do you think Lybia suddenly sprouted nukes???
 
redneck2 said:
The "Anti-Bush at all costs" crowd are showing their true colors..

now we know in no uncertain terms that Iran has nukes in process and they still won't do anything

hey...I've got an idea. Let's all bury our heads in the sand and make the bad boys go away..

or, click the heels of our ruby slippers together and chant "There's no place like home, there's no place like home..."

if Israel hits Iran to preserve themselves, is it still a war for oil???


People would be more interested if we hadn't invaded the country that DIDN'T have WMDs and waited for real evidence. Now our military is stretched to the breaking point in two countries that have virtually no government and are under martial law. How can we sustain war with a country that may actually have nuclear arms at this point? We'd have to abandon the other two which Bush is always saying is the wrong thing to do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top