Article

2004-09-12 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Iran begins processing enough yellowcake for 5 nukes

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Dan Darling 2004-09-12 1:55:31 AM|| || Front Page|| [11130 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Ladies and gentlemen, faster your seatbelts.

Posted by AzCat 2004-09-12 1:59:08 AM|| 2004-09-12 1:59:08 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Want me to check it out?

Posted by Joe Wilson 2004-09-12 2:10:45 AM|| 2004-09-12 2:10:45 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Gee, and where'd you suppose they got that yellowcake?

Posted by an dalusian dog 2004-09-12 2:17:32 AM|| 2004-09-12 2:17:32 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 IIRC Iran has a bunch of indigenous uranium deposits. Not sure how far along their mining operations are though.

Posted by AzCat 2004-09-12 2:45:49 AM|| 2004-09-12 2:45:49 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 Rantburgers,
I have three imporatant questions:

1) Do you think the centrifuges used to purify the hexafluoride have "Produit de France" or
"Made in Germany" writtent on their bottoms ?

2) Is Yellowcake tasty ???

3) For how long do you glow in the dark after having a slice of yellowcake ?

Those who provide a reliable answer to question #1
are exempt from answering #2 and #3.

Posted by Elder of zion 2004-09-12 3:01:24 AM|| 2004-09-12 3:01:24 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 I think they meant, international nuclear lapdog

Posted by B 2004-09-12 3:38:36 AM|| 2004-09-12 3:38:36 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 The centrifuges used to purify the hexafluoride have "made in Pakistian" and "made in North Korea" stamped on them.

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2004-09-12 4:41:14 AM|| 2004-09-12 4:41:14 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 hmmm... why 5?. i think 2 are enough to turn zion into environment-friendly glass.....

Posted by Sir Fizzle of Arabia 2004-09-12 5:51:22 AM|| 2004-09-12 5:51:22 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 Next war coming- up ...get ready for the big one..

Posted by Dutchgeek 2004-09-12 5:55:50 AM|| 2004-09-12 5:55:50 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 Sir Fizzle,
two for zion
two for New York and San Francisco
and the last one for commiting suicide when they
realize the response is on the way.

Posted by Sir Fazzle 2004-09-12 6:32:04 AM|| 2004-09-12 6:32:04 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 If a nuclear device goes off in the US I wouldn't give you 5 cents for a muslims survival over a period of 24 hours.

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2004-09-12 7:35:53 AM|| 2004-09-12 7:35:53 AM|| Front Page Top

#12 Meccatite will be on ebay by the 2015.

Posted by Shipman 2004-09-12 10:15:07 AM|| 2004-09-12 10:15:07 AM|| Front Page Top

#13 I don't know about that "Sock Puppet' (#11)...Unless that nuclear device clearly breaches our Norad grid aboard a missile, from a known country, we probable would "hold back the gates of hell" to confirm an accident of launch or by rogue terrorists.

Posted by smn 2004-09-12 11:56:33 AM|| 2004-09-12 11:56:33 AM|| Front Page Top

#14 On November 3 Bush can formally announce the re-targeting of much of our cold war arsenal at Iran, North Korea, and Syria and all nuclear and missile facilities in Pakistan. [Personally, I'd throw in Mecca and Medina too, but that's just me -- I've never been known as being PC.]

Posted by Tom 2004-09-12 1:38:51 PM|| 2004-09-12 1:38:51 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 The centrifuges may have been made in Malaysia, like the ones we intercepted going to Libya. It's a global economy, folks. Outsource the components from everywhere and bring to Iran, assemble, plug in, concentrate. And voila! You have HEU. A little machining, a good gun barrel and you have a uranium nuke. And don't forget a good truck to haul it around with.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2004-09-12 3:18:16 PM|| 2004-09-12 3:18:16 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 #14 On November 3 Bush can formally announce the re-targeting of much of our cold war arsenal at Iran, North Korea, and Syria and all nuclear and missile facilities in Pakistan. [Personally, I'd throw in Mecca and Medina too, but that's just me -- I've never been known as being PC.]

Now you're beginning to make sense, Tom. I have no problem with resetting the destination coordinates for part of our nuclear arsenal over to locations in the Middle East. I'd even suggest making it publicly known.

I hope that we're developing +Mach 5 hypersonic explosive warheads that can penetrate their underground centrifuge facilities. When Iran has been properly dealt with, the only yellowcake left will be in their urinals.

Posted by Zenster 2004-09-12 3:57:05 PM|| 2004-09-12 3:57:05 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 I don't really care whether we penetrate their underground centrifuge facilities or not, just as long as we collapse the access tunnels and leave the whole area radioactively contaminated. We can always hit them again if they start digging again.

Posted by Tom 2004-09-12 6:49:50 PM|| 2004-09-12 6:49:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 Tom, without wanting to be any more fractious than I usually am, notice how not very many (or zero) other people are concurring with your advocacy of using nuclear bombs against Iran? Why is that?

One specific thing I enjoy about Rantburg is the number of seasoned military and intelligence personnel that we have contributing here. If your idea had much merit, some of these people would have come in and backed you up by now. I don't see that happening and hope you might begin to reassess your own strategy.

Again, the use of atomic weapons against Iran would open a Pandora's box regarding terrorists being given free license to attempt nuclear attacks in America.

Posted by Zenster 2004-09-12 7:08:00 PM|| 2004-09-12 7:08:00 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 I don't think that we have the capability of dealing with Iran the way we are dealing with Iraq. We need a sudden, total strike to wipe out both nuclear and military capability -- not another slow build-up and conventional weapons attack that gives the Iranian military time to hide weapons and evaporate into the population. The leadership in Iran is intent on killing us. They, and the other Islamoterrorists, will not hesitate to use a nuke on us as soon as they get one. And they will have no reason to delay after getting one, since that may cause them to lose it. I think that if you look at it from their perspective you will see that there is little reason to hold back. So why would you hold back? Haven't we learned that a conventional attack leaves these guys plenty of time to hide? I NEVER thought I'd see the day I'd say it, but: where are the WMDs? Where are all the insurgents getting their RPGs, etc. You want years of ground war in both Iran and Iraq?

Posted by Tom 2004-09-12 7:27:58 PM|| 2004-09-12 7:27:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 I've never understood this "after November 3" crap. If it needs to be done, it needs to be done now. Waiting until after the election to effectively defend this country is at least as chickenshit as anything Kerry has been accused of.

The political argument doesn't even make sense - if it's anything like a reasonable decision, Bush's poll numbers will go up - they have after every strong move he's made for the last three years.

Posted by VAMark 2004-09-12 7:48:43 PM|| 2004-09-12 7:48:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 #19 I don't think that we have the capability of dealing with Iran the way we are dealing with Iraq. We need a sudden, total strike to wipe out both nuclear and military capability -- not another slow build-up and conventional weapons attack that gives the Iranian military time to hide weapons and evaporate into the population. The leadership in Iran is intent on killing us. They, and the other Islamoterrorists, will not hesitate to use a nuke on us as soon as they get one.

I am in complete agreement, Tom. We will probably want to use aerial bombing and cruise missiles for knocking out these sites. A liberal sprinkling of cluster bombs afterwards might help to discourage any rescue or salvage operations. I'd also like to see some fuel-air bombs used to suck the air out of the bunkers and suffocate all of their underground personnel. A dozen for each site in a non-overlapping sequence would suit me just fine. I want every machine and scientist associated with this program taken offline permanently.

Iran has been the source of so much grief that it's time for them to get their comeuppance. We need to run the bombsight videos on world-wide television just to humiliate them even further. I'd also love to see a couple of Tomahawk cruise missiles flown into a full session of the Revolutionary Council. Killing all the Iranian mullahs might not solve every one of our problems, but it would sure be a good start.

Posted by Zenster 2004-09-12 8:24:51 PM|| 2004-09-12 8:24:51 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 Tom doesn't want us to telegraph our punch. This is a political decision, not military. The realistic situation in which we would attack without warning is almost impossible to conceive. It would be the end of America as we know it. We will go to the U. N. We will try to get consensus. If we can't we will give warning. If we don't get cooperation we'll give a final warning.Then we'll attack.

I'm not one of those military guys Senster refers to. But I think I can say that when we do attack it will be with conventional weapons but in no way will it be conventional. Nothing our military has done in the last 15 years has been conventional. We have a military of exceptionally smart people, probably smarter than any comparably large organization in the world. That's the biggest reason why our wars last days, not years. I'd bet that if we decide to take on Iraq, it will be done differently than Afghanistan, or GWI or Iraq. I suspect it will be 12 hours of hell in Iran then silence. I'd prefer not to find out, but we'll see.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2004-09-12 8:56:40 PM|| 2004-09-12 8:56:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 Mrs. D makes a lot of sense. As I understood it at the time, one of the reasons for the long, slow buildup leading to the Iraq invasion was to give Saddam and the UNSC time to capitulate to the inevitable, thus avoiding active warfare.
But they didn't, so we had to.

Iran, on the other hand, has seen what happens when we actually invade. So by continuing their defiance, they are telegraphing acceptance, which need therefore not be threatened. Now that the EU and the UNSC have agreed to a Nov.1 deadline, I anticipate an announcement of continued non-compliance followed immediately by an announcement of consequential invasion. Followed within hours by film of nuclear manufacture and storage facilities destroyed (in the familiar but disturbing glow-in-the-dark green of night vision goggles), Republican Guard barracks and perhaps one missile to wherever the Mullahs are meeting.

With all the ordinance at our disposal, I don't see why real nukes would be necessary. I'm not even sure that much in the way of boots on the ground would be needed for the defeat, although consolidating victory would be impossible without them. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that even as military spouses in S.Korea and Germany are preparing to move their households Stateside, the soldiers are getting ready to deploy eastward. After all, why should the guys already over there get to have all the fun?

Posted by trailing wife 2004-09-12 9:32:23 PM|| 2004-09-12 9:32:23 PM|| Front Page Top

23:51 UFO
23:00 UFO
20:26 UFO
20:18 UFO
19:54 UFO
19:40 Anonymous6410
19:19 UFO
15:53 UFO
13:01 UFO
13:23 whitecollar redneck
13:23 whitecollar redneck
13:22 whitecollar redneck
13:22 whitecollar redneck
08:26 UFO
06:47 UFO
02:17 UFO
02:17 UFO
00:22 UFO
00:19 UFO
00:19 UFO
13:29 feeling bitchy
13:05 Anonymous6428
11:19 trailing wife
08:47 lyot