Article

2007-10-22 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

ElBaradei: Iran will have nuclear weapons in three to eight years

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 tu3031 2007-10-22 13:18|| || Front Page|| [12 views ] Top

#1 You can hear the barely suppressed glee in his voice.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-10-22 13:41|| 2007-10-22 13:41|| Front Page Top

#2 The hell you say...

And what is your job, again, as IAEA chief?

Posted by eLarson 2007-10-22 13:49|| http://larsonian.blogspot.com]">[http://larsonian.blogspot.com] 2007-10-22 13:49|| Front Page Top

#3 I'd appreciate it if someone with some knowledge would explain this to me:

The US, in a time of war, took four years and many dollars to develop the Bomb. We had to invent the theory, the engineering and the knowledge base as we went, and it took four years.

The Iranians today want a Bomb. They know the theory, they understand in broad outlines the engineering, and they have a key advantage -- at the end, whatever they build should go kaboom. What they're developing is the practical engineering (how to make the right centrifuges, etc) and the knowledge base in their people.

The Iranians seem to be pretty dedicated to this, and money appears to be no object. And they've been at it for a while, perhaps a long while.

So why should I believe El-Baradei when he guesstimates, 'three to eight years'?

Sure seems to me that the Iranians could move along as quickly as they solve their engineering problems and accumulate sufficient U235 (corrected, Aos) to make a kaboom. And I wonder if they could do that more quickly than three years.

Guess we'll find out the hard way, huh.

Posted by Steve White">Steve White 2007-10-22 14:19|| 2007-10-22 14:19|| Front Page Top

#4 the first letter in IAEA doesn't stand for International in El-Baradei's mind

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2007-10-22 14:35|| 2007-10-22 14:35|| Front Page Top

#5 The translations from Urdu into Korean, then Damascene Arabic and finally into Farsi take a long, long time.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2007-10-22 14:38|| 2007-10-22 14:38|| Front Page Top

#6 Good 'un, Frank.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-10-22 15:09|| 2007-10-22 15:09|| Front Page Top

#7 A fission bomb will require weapons grade U235 to make a boom on the ground. To make one deliverable on top of a missile will take Pu239, because of weight considerations. Making missile deliverable weapons takes some extremely precise machining of bomb elements, from the plutonium core to the explosive lens. It is not easy. If the fissile material is available to buy, then that is one large hurdle. I wonder how much technology the Iranians can get from the Russians, either the govt, or *ahem* freelancers. The Iranians have the money to buy the parts and the talent.

Posted by Alaska Paul">Alaska Paul 2007-10-22 17:22|| 2007-10-22 17:22|| Front Page Top

#8 "I cannot judge their intentions, but I can assume that Iran is indeed interested in obtaining a nuclear bomb," ElBaradei said.

Waitaminnit. Isn't this the same dingaling who said, only a few weeks back, that he was certain Iran's nuclear intentions were peaceful? I'm sure I recall a RB article or two to that effect.

Shit. Take off and nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

Posted by Dave D.">Dave D. 2007-10-22 17:42|| 2007-10-22 17:42|| Front Page Top

#9 RUSSIA + ISRAEL claim in approxi one yarn, and thats exclusive of the Russ claiming on the Net a while back that Iran may already have nuke bombs [battlefield/tactical]. As during the Cold War, the risk to the US-NATO/West stems not only from the indigenous efforts of hostile nations, but from covert + immediate Commie Bloc transfers to such during any US-USSR/Bloc regional-global confrontation.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2007-10-22 18:11|| 2007-10-22 18:11|| Front Page Top

#10 See also on PAYVAND.com [Iran]> IRAN NEWS > IAEA CHIEF [Baradei] > NO MORE [US] PSYWAR ON IRAN.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2007-10-22 20:34|| 2007-10-22 20:34|| Front Page Top

#11 Alaska Paul,
I believe spherical implosion fission bombs (Nagasaki design) can be made just fine with U235 instead of Pu239. (I'm no nuclear physicist but I saw one in a movie one time.) It is true that that design is the one that can be scaled down to fit easily into a small missile warhead or artillery shell - but the smaller you make it, the harder it is. No tolerance for machining error, contaminants, or fusing/triggering mistakes or mis-designs (my guess is Kim's fizzle was this type.) The gun barrel Hiroshima design is straightforward (relatively speaking) - which is why it was deployed without testing (unlike the Trinity/Nagasaki version) - but it is hard to make lightweight (as far as I know.)

Posted by Glenmore">Glenmore 2007-10-22 22:19|| 2007-10-22 22:19|| Front Page Top

23:53 Verlaine
23:53 JosephMendiola
23:51 Verlaine
23:51 JosephMendiola
23:49 JosephMendiola
23:35 treo
23:32 Zhang Fei
23:32 Verlaine
23:24 Verlaine
23:23 Phinater Thraviger
23:20 Throger Thains8048
22:48 eLarson
22:45 eLarson
22:32 Glenmore
22:31 Barbara Skolaut
22:22 Glenmore
22:19 Glenmore
22:16 Barbara Skolaut
22:13 CrazyFool
22:02 Zenster
21:57 twobyfour
21:42 Frank G
21:41 Zenster
21:33 lotp