Nuclear Ring Reportedly Had Advanced Weapon Design

NY Times ^ | June 15, 2008 | DAVID E. SANGER

[neverdem]

WASHINGTON — American and international investigators say that they have found the electronic blueprints for an advanced nuclear weapon on computers that belonged to the nuclear smuggling network run by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the rogue Pakistani nuclear scientist, but that they have not been able to determine whether they were sold to Iran or the smuggling...

--snip--

It was not until 2005 that officials of the I.A.E.A., which is based in Vienna, finally cracked the hard drives on the Khan computers recovered around the world. And as they sifted through files and images on the hard drives, investigators found tons of material — orders for equipment, names and places where the Khan network operated, even old love letters. In all, they found several terabytes of data, a huge amount to sift through.

“There was stuff about dealing with Iranians in 2003, about how to avoid intelligence agents,” said one official who had reviewed it. But the most important document was a digitized design for a nuclear bomb, one that investigators quickly recognized as Pakistani. “It was plain where this came from,” one senior official of the I.A.E.A. said. “But the Pakistanis want to argue that the Khan case is closed, and so they have said very little.”

In public statements, Pakistani officials have insisted that the Khan “incident,” as the call it, is now history, and they publicly declared nearly two years ago that their investigations are over.

A senior Pakistani official, interviewed in Islamabad in April, said that the information provided by the I.A.E.A. was “vague and incomplete,” and he insisted that because Dr. Khan’s laboratories specialized in the manufacture of the equipment needed to enrich uranium, “he was not involved in weapons designs.”

But investigators have no doubt that he was the source of the digitized bomb design...

[Dustbunny]

I have stopped worrying about this. If they bomb us, then we will bomb them. By the time everyone has had their turn bombing each other, a truce will be called because no one will be left.

[CarrotAndStick]

These peoples’ capabilities will be underestimated at everyone’s peril.

[garyhope]

This is not possible, my “liberal” friends and relatives told me so.

They don’t have the technology, the centifuges, the wherewithall, etc. to build and deliver a nuke to NYC, DC and other American cities, so I’m not worried, depressed or paranoid about it at all. OK, sarcasm off.

We have nothing to worry abou,......BOOM!!!

If you think that 9/11 was bad (and of course, the dim Dhims DON’T) just wait til the nuclear 9/11 to come.

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

I have stopped worrying about this. If they bomb us, then we will bomb them. By the time everyone has had their turn bombing each other, a truce will be called because no one will be left.

A nuclear exchange will not determine "who is right", but rather "who is left"!    I have no doubt we will prevail, I just don't know if it would be that much better than loosing?

Regards,
GtG

PS That reminds me of an old political cartoon in which a "hollow-eyed" grunt stood alone on a blasted hilltop, smoking wreckage and bomb craters as far as the eye could see. He said "We won, I think"...

[RightWhale]

Is this the third thread? When it gets to eight it might have some modality.

[neverdem]

Is this the third thread?

Where's the first and second? I want to decide which one to link. Maybe I'll link all three.

[dila813]

I have zero faith in the I.A.E.A.

Does anyone believe the people in the UN can keep this information secure?

[RightWhale]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2031438/posts
But who knows if this is the first or the tenth?

[Citizen Tom Paine]

In the present environment, if we don't get off our fat butts, a low level nuclear or high explosive/nuclear detonation in one of our large cities is almost inevitable. The amount of dollars now in the hands of terrorists strongly imply that they will be able to buy/make whatever weapon type they want.

[neverdem]

Thanks for the link.

[LibWhacker]

tick-tock, tick-tock, tick-kaboom

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

a low level nuclear or high explosive/nuclear detonation in one of our large cities is almost inevitable.

I would not call it a certainty, but the odds are not at all in our favor. Given the mindset of a Jehadist terrorist and his eagerness to die for his share of the virgins, we have lost our ability to depend on MAD to deter an attack. MAD requires a rational opponent and they don't qualify.

They don't have anything to lose except their life and they are prepared to throw that away too. We are certainly at a disadvantage unless we can locate the source of the problem geographically and disinfect the entire region. The Arabs recognize and respect brutal strength if we have the "stones" to use it.

Regards,
GtG

[Schnucki]

:)

[mad_as_he$$]

One Trident submarine can lay waste to all of Iran. We do not have the balls to use it.

[Sherman Logan]

Pakistan and Iran will never have the nuclear capability to destroy the USA. The USSR did, but they had 15,000+ nukes, some of them truly giant in size.

It will be years before the Islamic nuclear powers have even 100 bombs, much less the capability to deliver them in a militarily effective way.

IOW, Pakistan and Iran in five years might be able to hurt us. We’d lose a few cities. What they will probably never be able to do is defeat us militarily, punish us to the point where we can fight no more. OTOH, about one hour after they launch an attack, their countries will be radioactive ash. Those of their leaders who are not insane are fully aware of this fact.

The nuclear threat by posed by Islamic nuclear powers is quite literally at least two and possibly three orders of magnitude less than that posed by the USSR in its heyday.

Let’s try to keep some sense of proportion to our panic.

[PLMerite]

“I have zero faith in the I.A.E.A.”

The IAEA was set up to police nations that wanted to be policed. They have no power over “rogue” nations or groups.

[rdl6989]

I hear the same thing from liberals. “Oh, that can’t happen because it just can’t... blah blah blah.” These are the same people who will blame Bush when, not if, it does.

[texas booster]

officials have said that the weapons design was far more sophisticated than the blueprints discovered in Libya in 2003, when Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi gave up his country's nuclear weapons program. Those blueprints were for a Chinese nuclear weapon that dated to the mid-1960s, and investigators found that Libya had obtained them from the Khan network.

And exactly HOW did Khan get Chinese blueprints for old nuclear devices to sell to Libya?

And how did China get reliable nuke blueprints in the 60's?

[texas booster]

It was not until 2005 that officials of the I.A.E.A., which is based in Vienna, finally cracked the hard drives on the Khan computers recovered around the world.

Two years to crack security that encrypts the entire drive?

Thanks, NY Times, for offering up a little information to our enemies on how long their secrets are safe.

[CarrotAndStick]

Saudi Arabia supplied most of the 9-11 hijackers. Nothing much happened to them, in terms of revenge.

Iran / Pakistan could assume the same. After all, whom would one retaliate against, if the source is not known?

[El Gato]

If they bomb us, then we will bomb them. By the time everyone has had their turn bombing each other, a truce will be called because no one will be left.

Not really. They have at most dozens of nuclear devices. We have thousands. Ours can be delivered in 30 minutes, much less if we launch from somewhere nearby, like the Arabian Sea or the Indian ocean.

Their nations would be candidates for giant parking lots before they could get their thumb out.

[meatloaf]

We’ve been too nice. Let’s pick a time when meteorological conditions are prime. One week before, saturate Iran with the news they have one week to vacate the country surrounding the nuclear facilities. Then follow through with multiple nuclear warhead strikes on the facilities.

OR, Bush can joke into an open mike, “The Iranians have one week to clear the areas before the bombing commences.”

OR, since our Air Force is known to screw up. Tell the Iranians it was an accident after the fact. Hey, no body’s perfect!

[El Gato]

I have no doubt we will prevail, I just don't know if it would be that much better than loosing?

It depends on the scenario. Yeh, it an enemy with a comparable arsenal launches a preemptive strike with everything they've got, and we reply in kind, before their weapons arrive, then yes.

But that is likely scenario, even with a comparable enemy, like the Old Soviets or the Chinese. An attempt to get out land based missiles and airbases might, with us not retaliating until after the enemies weapons have hit, and then retaliating at whatever weapons they haven't yet used, plus their command authority, might not leave either side nearly so bad off as you might think. Bad, horrible really, but not Armageddon. Add "Star Wars" defense systems, and many of that first strike would not even get through. That not only reduces causalities, but means those weapons that were targeted, are able to strike back.

However with a terrorist, or even Iran and a "regime changed" Pakistan, would only have at most a few dozen weapons. Star Wars defense could possibly shoot all them down. Now only Achmadinjab would want to attack under those conditions. Deterrence doesn't work against nutjobs. And the weapon(s) might not be delivered by aircraft or missiles. That's harder to defend against, but it also limits the number and sort of weapons that can be delivered. Probably limits the target set as well. Meanwhile it would be easy to determine where the bomb came from, by technical means of analysis of the debris. Thus the source would get a taste of their own medicine, many times over, in mere hours.

Provided the POTUS has the balls of marmoset.

I think this one is a female, but you get the idea.

[El Gato]

One Trident submarine can lay waste to all of Iran. We do not have the balls to use it.

Not without first losing a few hundred thousand Americans. Then I think the politicians would either grow a pair, or lose their jobs, the quick, but very hard, way.

[El Gato]

. After all, whom would one retaliate against, if the source is not known?

A nuke leaves a very distinct signature. We'd know.

[purpleraine]

Is this a practical scenario. Two nukes on cargo ships. NYC and LA. Detonated same day. Who would we attack?

[CarrotAndStick]

Let’s say they got one from the former Soviet Union. Do you think Russia would be in for retaliation?

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

Let’s say they got one from the former Soviet Union. Do you think Russia would be in for retaliation?

In theory it is possible to analyze the fission products of a blast and determine not only the country of origin but also which of their reactors produced the fissile material. You point out a perfectly valid point, if the identity of the origin of the material is not the same as the group delivering it we have a good chance of starting Armageddon by retaliating against Russia, for instance, by mistake. I am sure that the Iranian nut job would be tickled pink at such a result. Similarly, with Pakistan's "Khan nuclear wannabe club" providing DIY kits (with some assembly required!) for weapons, it is possible that North Korea, Iran, maybe Syria, and perhaps some non-national "players" could all share the same source for their fissile material. This situation would make retaliation truly a Pandora's box.

Regards,
GtG

[mad_as_he$$]

In the current climate - yes. I would think that the Iranians would not want us out of Iraq simple becasue it stops us from mass nuking their narrow a$$es. If we use smaller stuff the plants are vulnerable and easily destroyed by cruise missle or even old Slammers if we have any left around- that is if the Air Force didn’t “misplace” them.

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

Let’s try to keep some sense of proportion to our panic.

No panic here! I agree 100% with your analysis of the situation. And we are also arriving at the same likely outcome of such an exchange. Provided we can determine who gets the object lesson delivered to their little corner of the world.

I was only trying to point out that "Mutually Assured Destruction" will not work with terrorists or their state sponsors. Yes, we can determine the original source of the plutonium but that may not be the same as the parties that delivered it to our soil.

Let's say terrorists acquire an ex-USSR nuke and they successfully deliver it by small boat to the tidal basin and detonate it. Who do we strike back at? If we "go all Medieval" on Moscow we stand a good chance of putting the end game in motion (and I do mean end!).

Regards,
GtG

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

I agree with your points, however, I was trying to establish that if we have to resort to a nuclear response and we "prevail" that does not equate to "winning". It's rather like swatting at flies with a fifteen pound hammer. We are very likely to cause a great deal of damage and still miss the fly!

I really miss the "good old days" of MAD and the stare-down with the Soviets. We had a rational enemy and so did they. The only way to "win" a thermonuclear" war was never to play the game. I think I would prefer something more like a proportionate response. It offends my sense of scale to obliterate an entire nation, turning it into a "glass ashtray" when perhaps a few onces of C4 in a cell phone would suffice. We should be following a policy of the "minimum necessary change" not overwhelming force. when dealing with these annoying pests. Let us field a black ops dirty tricks squad and follow the Mossad's lead.

Regards,
GtG

[GOPJ]

MAD requires a rational opponent and they don't qualify.

No, it doesn't. Mullahs on the take - look at the riots in Mashad - have no desire to die for the "Mahdi".

[Cacique]

btt

[El Gato]

Is this a practical scenario. Two nukes on cargo ships. NYC and LA. Detonated same day. Who would we attack?

It would obviously depend on where analysis of the debris, or other information, indicated the source of the devices, at least their plutonium.

[El Gato]

If we "go all Medieval" on Moscow we stand a good chance of putting the end game in motion (and I do mean end!).

If the source were one that seemed questionable as the user of the device, we could just hit that one plant, with notification to the owners, but not too much. But more likely, we'd just assume that the "usual suspects" were responsible, and "go medieval" on them and their camels.

[purpleraine]

Can that be traced to specific countries?

[Dustbunny]

Of course. I guess I should have added a /sarc someplace in my comment.

[Fishrrman]

“Similarly, with Pakistan’s “Khan nuclear wannabe club” providing DIY kits (with some assembly required!) for weapons, it is possible that North Korea, Iran, maybe Syria, and perhaps some non-national “players” could all share the same source for their fissile material. This situation would make retaliation truly a Pandora’s box.”

Interesting comment, and to-the-point.

Response #1:
Retaliate against them ALL. Simple, effective. One strike fits all.
M.A.D. at its finest. This is what it’s all about, eh?

With an “Islamic bomb” (i.e., a bomb built and used for jihadic purposes), the “retaliation” must be against all of Islam. This must be the sword that hangs over Islamic heads - forever, or until they turn from that despicable religion.

Response #2:
A less destructive, but equally symbolic strike “against Islam”. Of course, everyone here knows what that must be:
Destroy Mecca and Medina.

This will be the equivalent of destroying the golden calf. Islamics everywhere will be forced to witness their idols and “pillars” blown to kingdom come. They must be shown that their “allah” is false and that everything they believe in will lead to nothing but their own destruction.

This will be as symbolic as that famous newsreel footage of the Nazi swastika being blown up at the close of World War II. In that explosion, Germans were shown that everything that they had [priorly] embraced was kaput, and that there could be no going back to what was.

Those whose hearts and minds are enthralled with Islam must be shown the same.

- John

[Westbrook]

> We are certainly at a disadvantage unless we can locate
> the source of the problem geographically and disinfect
> the entire region.

Oh, but we already know the geographical source of the problem.

Mecca and Medina.

The Koran says that Mecca will never be destroyed.

If it were, that would immediately invalidate the Koran.

[Westbrook]

> Pakistan and Iran will never have the nuclear capability
> to destroy the USA.

Actually, it wouldn’t take much.

A thermonuclear detonation in New York would put out electricity for much of the Eastern Seaboard and Canada, utterly destroy the economy, and put an unsurmountable load on medical services for at least a generation.

Detonations in several major cities simultaneously, e.g. New York, Chicago, Houston, L.A, D.C, Boston, and Miami would put an end to the U.S. as we know it.

For the vast majority of the population living in or near these major cities, there would be no power, no communications, no food, no potable water, no medicine, no health care, no fuel, no help, and no hope.

[Sherman Logan]

Disagree. Even your not particularly likely second scenario would leave the US in considerably better shape than Germany was by the end of 1944. Most of our territory would be essentially untouched. I refuse to believe that Americans cannot fight as bravely as Germans.

You are quite correct that such a war would bring our present easy life to a screeching halt. So? We would just have to get tough fast.

So what’s your solution? Pre-emptive nuclear strikes on anybody who might pose a threat? Conquest and rule of the entire world using Roman/Mongol methods? Invasion of Iran, into a far deeper quagmire than Iraq has been?

[El Gato]

Can that be traced to specific countries?

Supposedly finer than that.

[El Gato]

I guess I should have added a /sarc someplace in my comment.

I think so. I was not the only one to miss it. Someone even agreed with it.

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

"With an “Islamic bomb” (i.e., a bomb built and used for jihadic purposes), the “retaliation” must be against all of Islam. This must be the sword that hangs over Islamic heads - forever, or until they turn from that despicable religion."

I believe that is an excellent point. It might just be the basis for a 21st century update of MAD. By providing an "incentive" for all Islamic governments to keep a tight reign on their in-house crazies we would gain their cooperation (however grudgingly) in the WOT. Sort of get'em by the 'nads and their hearts and minds will follow.

Regards,
GtG

PS We could call it the "Burning Bush" Doctrine!

PPS I'm all for raising the price of grain exports to ME countries to $128 per bushel. Can't afford it? Then eat your oil!

[Westbrook]

> So what’s your solution?

Frankly, I don’t have one.

I don’t think anybody really does.

We’d like to think diplomacy would work.

Perhaps, as Sen. Tancredo proposed, we need to put the Islamo-Fascists on notice that a nuclear strike on any American city will be answered with the vaporization of Mecca and Medina.

The Koran says that Mecca will never be destroyed.

If Mecca were destroyed, the Koran would be moot, and the Mahometan lunatics will have nothing upon which to base their faith and call the faithful to martyrdom for their satanic deity.

It’s the best I’ve got.

[Sherman Logan]

I have no real solution either.

Perhaps we can hold the ground until the universal solvent of modernism dissolves their society.

But that’s kind of a faint hope.