Posted on 11/06/2009 7:59:03 AM PST by PreciousLiberty
The U.N. nuclear watchdog has asked Tehran to explain evidence suggesting that Iranian scientists have experimented with an advanced secret nuclear warhead design, according to a report published Friday.
Citing what it calls "previously unpublished documentation" from an International Atomic Energy Agency compiled report, Britain's The Guardian newspaper said Iranian scientists may have tested high-explosive components of a "two-point implosion" device.
The report said that even the existence of two-point implosion nuclear warhead technology is officially secret in both the U.S. and Britain. The technology allows for the production of smaller and simpler warheads, making it easier to put a warhead on a missile, the newspaper said.
The IAEA said in September it has no proof Iran has or once had a covert atomic bomb program.
The U.N. watchdog's statements followed reports from the Associated Press quoting what it called a classified IAEA document saying agency experts agreed Iran now had the means to build atomic bombs and was heading towards developing a missile system able to carry a nuclear warhead.
Extracts of the report have been published before, but it was not known the document included information on such a sophisticated warhead, the newspaper said.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I bet he regrets it today as well...
What did Obama know and when did he know it?
Now would not be the time to visit Tele Aviv.
Strategery....he left that window open to prove a point. That if the world waits without action, evil will happen. He knew what he was doing....trust me when I say that Bush could have knocked this mess off the map in 5 mins. But he is throwing the liberals argument right back in their lap and saying “here...put your money where your mouth is”.
“The technology allows for the production of smaller and simpler warheads, making it easier to put a warhead on a missile”... or a suitcase, backpack, etc.........
prepare for Obama to do a quick media appearance.......he will address the nuclear threat of Iran after he finishes his SHOUT OUTS!
Obama doesn’t really care, and his lefty base is all about apeasement. The left thinks this is the way to handle things, that is, do nothing.
When Iran unleashes one of these things, and they will, the left will go crazy trying to find someone to blame.
Had Bush attacked Iran after that NIE report saying Iran had ceased its weapons program, he would have been impeached.
The real culprits are the NIE traitors, the Democrats in Congress and of course, the worldwide Communist media.
Much blood will be on their collective hands.
Unfortunately, it will be the blood of innocents.
The operation, which took place during the Clinton administration in early 2000, was code named Operation Merlin and "may have been one of the most reckless operations in the modern history of the CIA," according to Risen.
It called for the unnamed scientist, a defector from the Soviet nuclear program, to offer Iran the blueprint for a "firing set" -- the intricate mechanism which triggers the chain reaction needed for a nuclear explosion.
He had been told by CIA officers that the Iranians already had the technology detailed in the plans and that the ruse was simply an attempt by the agency to find out the full scope of Tehran's nuclear knowledge.
But, contrary to orders not to open the packet, he added a note which made it clear he could help fix the flaws for money.
Risen states in his book, "It's not clear who originally came up with the idea, but the plan [to give Tehran nuclear blueprints] was first approved by Clinton." This is just another chapter in the Bill Clinton saga of giving weapons technology to enemies of the United States. He's provided missile technology to the Chinese, which increased the accuracy of their ballistic missiles, and he provided nuclear technology to the North Koreans that eventually enabled them to develop nuclear weapons.
Risen said the Clinton-approved plan ended up handing Tehran "one of the greatest engineering secrets in the world, providing the solution to one of a handful of problems that separated nuclear powers such as the United States and Russia from rogue countries such as Iran that were desperate to join the nuclear club but had so far fallen short."
Long ago, his muslim faith allows him to be on the inner circle.
Try http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCAffMSWSzY
Appeasement leads to mushroom clouds.
If Tel Aviv is nuked I should hope that Tehran, Domascus, Cairo, Mecca, Riyadh etc etc follow.
Obviously some of our Muslim and DHimmi scientists and government spies gave them all the info they needed.
appeasement leads to mass death
“The U.N. nuclear watchdog has asked Tehran to explain evidence suggesting that Iranian....”
I really can’t convey how irritated I’m getting at comments like this in the MSN. They write it as if the UN “Watchdog” really is confused about it and needs answers. All the while the UN “Watchdog” knows full well Iran is actively seeking nukes. The media knows it too and knows the UN knows and Iran knows we know. It’s just a game or a show to the media and they just keep reporting it as if we’re stupid, and most of us are.
There are real stories in this that the world needs to know and the media keeps playing up the game the West and Iran are playing as if there can possibly be some good outcome.
And I remember so well Maddie Halfbright and James Car vile saying the administration did not believe the United States should continue as the lone super power, that equality of power was an important goal of the sinkEmperor administration. With that as a goal for progressives, there is no treachery in giving nuclear secrets to those unable to develop them, in the progressives’ minds. And the current affirmative action liar-in-chief is a progressive among progressives ... a dyed int he wool commie in fatc. But because the media is also now the domestic enemy of we the people, the reality of Barry’s treachery will never be widely reported to the people he’s betraying.
“But, contrary to orders not to open the packet, he added a note which made it clear he could help fix the flaws for money.”
In the Clinton administration, do you really believe this was against his orders? Or was it “wink-wink, nudge-nudge don’t open the envelope” type orders? I’ll bet it was the latter and if you could follow the money Bill got his cut. His administration was known for the prominent “for sale” signs.
“But here’s the question: does the two-point implosion warhead mean the Iranians are seriously looking at building a multistage nuclear bomb—e.g., a thermonuclear device?”
Of course they are. Those with their heads in the sand have chosen to ignore the fact that the US was building such weapons in the 1950s. With today’s manufacturing technology and advanced electronics it’s much easier to do so today. With today’s computers, competent physicists wouldn’t have much trouble with the science either.
The under 200 lb. W80 thermonuclear warhead used on nuclear Tomahawk cruise missiles is dialable from 5 KT up to 200 KT. The W88 warhead (our most advanced, developed in the 80s) delivers a fixed 480 KT punch. It’s small enough that the Trident II SLBM could carry 12 independently targetable warheads - though by treaty they currently only carry three.
The plans for the W88 were reportedly stolen and delivered to the Chinese during the Clinton years.
I think the reasoning was a lot more practical (and Constitutional) than that. Attacking Iran would be an outright act of war, and Bush would have needed Congressional approval for that. There's absolutely no way they would have given it to him, especially after the release of that report denying that Iran's nuclear program was anywhere close to fruition.
That said, the net effect is, of course, exactly as you've laid it out.
I've always said Bush would be seen as a great president, as a result of his actions and predictions with respect to the WOT in general, and Iran in particular. Bush's vindication is coming a lot sooner than I expected though -- I'm sure a lot of folks in DC and elsewhere are looking at Obama's amateurism and are very surprised to discover how much they miss Bush.
This is being reported in one of the most left wing rags in the UK. I wonder when it will go viral.
I am sure that the warheads that will obliterate those cities will be well on their way before the one destined for Tel Aviv ever arrives.
Finding people to blame is always easy for them.
Man, they probably will nuke someone, or give it to some completely unaccountable group to do it for them. And we still won’t do anything but drop some bombs on CMU shacks in Pakistan killing 2 uneducated, dime a dozen terrorists, three of their wives, 5 of their kids, and 27 goats.
When that happens, the people to blame is Every Person in DC government and every Muslim government and the UN. NONE of them will pay.
Every article concerning this issue builds the case that politics is a game.
“I think the reasoning was a lot more practical (and Constitutional) than that. Attacking Iran would be an outright act of war, and Bush would have needed Congressional approval for that.”
That’s incorrect. The President may conduct military operations for up to thirty days without involving Congress. The strike on Iran would have taken only one. (Remember the strike on the aspirin factory during Clinton’s presidency?)
True, there would have been consequences, but a good leader does what’s right for the country instead of worrying about personal consequences. GW dropped the ball on this one.
No, that wont happen, they’ll nuke the settlements in Judea.
Some time after the first of the year Israel will take out as many nuclear facilities as it can. Iran will lash out using all its proxies, rockets and missiles. They'll attack ships in the Persian Gulf.
The US will be drawn into this even with a weak and benighted Obama as president.
Man, that is scary. I often forget how devastating the bomb is. We’re just stuffing ourselves full of garbage while crazies plan the end of humanity in plain sight.
TS Eliot’s Hollow Men is becoming more and more true.
“The US will be drawn into this even with a weak and benighted Obama as president.”
Highly possible, and a disturbing thought.
Imagine what this administration would do with a crisis like that to exploit...
Just another straw landing on the camel’s back of our society. I wonder when it’ll break.
Not to mention that our military would be fighting (at least) three major wars, and it’s now designed to fight at most two. Yikes!
It would not have been "only one" strike. The fact is that it would have meant outright war, between Iran, and our troops in Iraq, just for starters, with all that implies with regard to the production and transport of oil in the whole region.
Congress would, quite properly, object to such an action. Especially given the extent to which we were already committed in Iraq and elsewhere.
True, there would have been consequences, but a good leader does what’s right for the country instead of worrying about personal consequences. GW dropped the ball on this one.
A very nice idea, for a nation that does not have our Constitutional, separation-of-powers, form of Government.
I'm quite sure that Bush's team very carefully considered their options with regard to Iran; and I'm quite sure they would have acted had their been one that didn't put us actually at war with Iran -- which would have required Congressional approval.
That they did not act as you've recommended, indicates that they could find no practical way to do so.
Iran is extremely vulnerable to an aerial onslaught that could decapitated its regime. As such, and if necessary (and I believe that it is), the US will have to destroy Iran's air defense, its remaining nuclear capabilities and any other suspected sites for chemical weapons, its air force, its munitions storage areas and factories making ammunition, its weapons plants, its secret police infrastructure, its spy agencies, its motor pools and tank farms for their military vehicles, its terrorist training camps, and then assess what's also in need of destroying. Certainly, there are plans in place to do this and more.
“It would not have been “only one” strike. The fact is that it would have meant outright war, between Iran, and our troops in Iraq, just for starters, with all that implies with regard to the production and transport of oil in the whole region.”
That is a possible outcome. It’s also possible that Iran would have backed down when directly threatened with US military power. Even if not, I suspect it would have been possible to knock out the antiship missiles threatening the Gulf, and take out any Iranian troops heading into Iraq with air power, nullifying any significant military threat fairly easily.
At any rate, as another poster pointed out, what we’ll get instead is the limp wristed 0bama approach. Good luck, we’ll all need it. I’m glad I don’t live in New York.
The Guardian is an interesting case.... they've been at the forefront of reporting on stuff like this for years. Not sure about their accuracy overall, but they're not afraid to print uncomfortable stories.
Whatever ...
Hey Pookie get off that couch and talk to the Iranians for me. I’ll send some one to pick you up. I’ve got a golf game to play.
Undoubtedly, Iran will want to take the “normal” progressional development path of the major nuke powers and develop a fusion-based weapon as long as the world is being so ineffective in preventing them from moving down that road. For now, I am sure they’d be happy to acquire/develop reliable fission weapons. It is fusion weapons that are multi-stage.
“I believe the fact that the three wars it would be fighting are all in one theater highly mitigates the worst part of fighting three wars when only being designed to fight two. Also, ending the Iranian regime would be like when the Soviet Union collapsed; it ended terrorism in many places until Iran’s mad mullahs took up the tactic.”
My thought about that is that our ground forces are overstretched already. It’s true that we have enough air and sea assets to go around, but we’d need an immediate draft to fight another ground war. My concern isn’t so much about Iran, but if other countries decide it’s time to enter the fray when the US is stretched so thin. Pakistan, for instance.
“Iran is extremely vulnerable to an aerial onslaught that could decapitated its regime. As such, and if necessary (and I believe that it is), the US will have to destroy Iran’s air defense, its remaining nuclear capabilities and any other suspected sites for chemical weapons, its air force, its munitions storage areas and factories making ammunition, its weapons plants, its secret police infrastructure, its spy agencies, its motor pools and tank farms for their military vehicles, its terrorist training camps, and then assess what’s also in need of destroying. Certainly, there are plans in place to do this and more.”
The way I think the strike should have gone under Bush is this: bomb the nuclear facilities then immediately communicate to the Iranian regime that any response will result in the type of strike you describe. If that strike becomes necessary, the next threat is to take out their oil terminals if they don’t start behaving. Without the oil terminals, Iran is a poor country with little to offer.
“Undoubtedly, Iran will want to take the “normal” progressional development path of the major nuke powers and develop a fusion-based weapon as long as the world is being so ineffective in preventing them from moving down that road.”
I’m guessing you meant “fission-based” instead of “fusion-based”.
There’s really no need, or reason, to build a pure fission weapon first these days. You should read the Wikipedia article linked above on “Nuclear Weapon Design”.
The Manhattan Project was hard because it’d never been done before. Everyone building one now has a pretty good idea of how they work, and there’s even quite a bit of information in the open literature. Lithium and deuterium are readily available to any national government. In Iran’s case, it appears they’ve had quite a bit of outside help from experts as well.
“Our nuclear projects are only related to the production of energy...”
Israel: GREEN LIGHT
Better that than a yellow/red one...
bookmark
I am sure O is worried about his tee time tomorrow.
Yes, but on which side?
I'm not a military man. Second best case is taking out nukes and senior leadership. Best case is Iranian internal revolution. The Iranian youth and many elders never were against the U.S., unlike what the SCM showed in 1979-198 444 day Carter hostage drama. Revolution is usually chancy, see the Taliban in Afghanistan for what can go wrong.
It’s too late, baby, it’s too late......
Though we really did try to make it.....
he’s too busy looking up and stretching his neck, he just loves himself.
Iranian scientists have experimented with an advanced secret nuclear warhead design
He wants to trigger the end of the United States, but not the world. :’)
And when we do finally get nuked, those same idiots (media pressholes and other Zero supporters), will still manage to blame Bush.
It’s a dangerous game. Fundamentally, as a commie, he wants the end of the UNITED STATES, but what about long term planning? The Moslems presumably have to be victorious for what they think will happen to happen. Can’t really accomplish that with the U.S. in the way. In any way, don’t you have more than one plan?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.