You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
U.S.: Iran Says Can Make Uranium for Nuke in a Year
2004-08-18
By Saul Hudson
A hawkish yet incredibly sane U.S. official said on Tuesday that Iran has warned it could make enough bomb-grade material in a year to produce a nuclear weapon, a threat that may boost a U.S. push to bomb the crap out of them and report Tehran to the United Nations.
Invitation to special UNSC Iran Crisis catered panel discussion in Tahiti in 4...3...2...
In recent weeks, Iran has intensified its standoff over its nuclear programs and the United States has said it is increasingly likely the U.N. Security Council would take up the case against the Islamic republic for possible hand slapping sanctions. U.S. Under Secretary of State John Bolton said Iran had sought in negotiations with European powers to pressure them to ease their uncharacteristic opposition to its suspected weapons programs. "They've told the EU three (Britain, France and Germany) that they could produce, they could enrich enough uranium for a nuclear weapon within a year and they could produce nuclear weapons within the range of our own assessment, which is a way of threatening the Europeans to get them to back down," the senior official said at a Washington think tank session on Iran. U.S. officials with access to intelligence estimates say Iran can achieve a bomb in three to five years and the United States believes that would be a danger in the Middle East, notably to its close ally Israel.
None of this accounts for what would happen if a rogue nation like North Korea simply sold them the fissile material.
Oil-rich and neuron poor Iran says its nuclear programs, which the U.N. nuclear watchdog has been monitoring, are for Jew killing peaceful energy projects. Bolton, a hawk in the Bush administration who is skeptical talks with Iran will ever be successful, said the Europeans had assured the United States they would not bow to the pressure and instead continue to sell them dual use technology. The European Union three have been negotiating with Iran for a really big arms sale package and share information with the United States on the talks, although they have given few details publicly about high-level meetings they held last month, diplomats said.
Posted by:Zenster

#13  I disagree, I don't think it will go nuclear.

I wish I could believe that but I'm afraid that A. Q. Kahn's Nuclear Supermarket has let the atomic genie out of the bottle once and for all. It's been decades since the actual details of the production of nuclear weapons were secret, the key to avoiding proliferation has always been control of fissile material and now the ability to produce that has been widely dispersed. There are likely at least hundreds (probably thousands and perhaps tens of thousands) of Muslim engineers who are capable of setting up & operating the fuel cycle to enrich uranium. The requisite raw material isn't extremely scarce or particularly difficult-to-obtain, nor is the necessary machining/manufacturing technology anything to write home about by modern (or even 1980s) standards.

There's nothing preventing Iran's mullahs from outsourcing their enrichment activities to, say, Muslim nations in North Africa. It's a virtual certainty that Iran has already propagated the relevant knowledge to Syria & Saudi Arabia and likely others to preserve it for the Ummah in the event that the worst happens in Iran. With the relevant information, knowledge, people, material, machinery & processes necessary to produce nuclear weapons now widely dispersed, I fear we're in for a rough stretch.

Reports posted today on this site significantly up the ante for any potential Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear capability. Iran has apparently delivered over a thousand missiles to Syria/Hizbolla that would almost certainly be used (by Hizbolla of course for whom Syria will deny responsibility) in the event of an Israeli action against Iran. In addition, Iran has promised to strike Israel's operating nuclear plant (likely causing a Chernobyl-like disaster) in the event of any attack ... that would almost certainly demand a nuclear response from Israel.

I can envision dozens of similar scenarios, but I don't see one that ends other than in an nuclear exchange or at minimum open warfare between Israel and one or more Muslim nations in the next few years. The endgame in the Middle East is rapidly approaching and it appears that there's little to be done to head it off.
Posted by: AzCat   2004-08-18 11:14:39 PM  

#12  the global community won't care - witness the outrage when Arafat uses ambulances to transport weapons and gunnies, or the Baathist habit of storing weapons in hospitals, schools, and orphanages

*crickets chirping*
Posted by: Frank G   2004-08-18 6:14:10 PM  

#11  The Iranian mullahs' incessant threats and provocation are nothing but an outright invitation to attack their nuclear facilities. Does anyone else feel that that the consequent radiological poisoning of so many Iranians will constitute a crime against humanity committed by the mullahs? Iran knows d@mn well Israel and America will never let them go nuclear, yet they firmly position themselves as a victim, fully aware of the potential for loss of life. This is tantamount to using their population as a human shield for their nuclear weapons program. All of this is much like positioning military headquarters in an orphanage or hospital. Somehow, this malfeasance needs to be highlighted for the global community.
Posted by: Zenster   2004-08-18 6:10:32 PM  

#10  I'm with AHM - Sharon or his successor can never allow the blackhats to have nukes, regardless of the *ahem* fallout from a disabling attack
Posted by: Frank G   2004-08-18 5:57:16 PM  

#9  I sure hope you are right.

Sometimes it just gets a body down thinking about it.

Sorry for being so negative.
Posted by: Michael   2004-08-18 5:39:09 PM  

#8  I disagree, I don't think it will go nuclear. No matter what the US or Euro's do, Israel can not and will not allow Iran (or any arab nation) to get nuclear weapons. They'll whack the reactor before it gets to that.
Posted by: AllahHateMe   2004-08-18 4:31:18 PM  

#7  I think the bottom line is we will all go nuclear. Probably hundreds of millions of people are going to die and civilization is going to take a hell of a hit. It's sort of like 1938 with radioactivity.

The really sad part is that it is all so unecessary, unfortunately we (that includes Europe) do not have the will or sense to act and head this all off.

Makes you wonder who the war criminals really are.
Posted by: Michael   2004-08-18 4:02:24 PM  

#6  could we nuke the site and them blame it on a faulty reactor?
Posted by: Yosemite Sam   2004-08-18 12:49:27 PM  

#5  thanks for the timeline Iran...noted.
Posted by: B   2004-08-18 12:10:40 PM  

#4  B-A-R: I'm with ya. "Awwwwww..... I'm tellinnnnnnng..."
Posted by: eLarson   2004-08-18 12:05:38 PM  

#3  ..a threat that may boost a U.S. push to report Tehran to the United Nations.

This sounds so grade schoolish. And it's just about as useful too.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2004-08-18 10:40:08 AM  

#2  What can Kerry say? Does he take the French, German, Russian and Chinese side or the American side?

My guess is that he'd take the French, German, Russian and Chinese side, but that's just a hunch.
Posted by: AzCat   2004-08-18 6:10:16 AM  

#1  This could be the October surprise:

Eliminating the Mahdi Army and all the baathist dregs requires Bush to take action against both Syria and Iran. Needs to send the right message while the Marines mop up the remaining islamicidiots. So, send a few cruise missles targetted on the Iranian nukes and enrichment sites. Give no warning - anyone working to develop a WMD is fair game. What can Kerry say? Does he take the French, German, Russian and Chinese side or the American side?
Posted by: Jack is Back   2004-08-18 3:33:32 AM  

00:00