You have commented 338 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
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran nuke plant 'would survive attack'
2006-02-21
IRAN'S uranium enrichment facilities, built in underground bunkers, would survive any military strikes, the Islamic republic's nuclear program director said today.

"The enrichment facilities, particularly Natanz, are located underground and no offensive could damage them," said Gholamreza Aghazadeh, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, quoted by the student ISNA news agency.

Mr Aghazadeh also boasted about the fortress like nature of its Isfahan plant, which is located in a network of subterranean tunnels, and touted Iran's uranium supplies.

"Our reserves are extremely developed. We can extract uranium from mines in Bandar Abbas, Saghand and Yazd," he said.

Israeli officials have raised the spectre of air strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities and the United States has refused to rule out the military option in their efforts to stop Tehran's drive for atomic power.

Iran vehemently denies that its nuclear program serves any purpose other than to provide a source of energy for power plants, but the United States and European Union charge the Islamic republic is seeking an atomic bomb.

"Iran is ready to provide any guarantees that our nuclear activities are not geared toward nuclear weapon production," said Mr Aghazadeh.

On a defiant note, he said: "We have obtained our nuclear technology while the target of sanctions and we have not obtained it from the West.

"s a consequence, (future) sanctions will not have any impact on our nuclear activities."

Seeking to end the standoff between Iran and the international community, Russia and Tehran held talks today to develop Moscow's compromise proposal for uranium enrichment to be carried out on Russian soil, but the visit ended with no breakthrough.

If Iran rejects the Russian plan, tension will rise rapidly ahead of the March 6 meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency's board of governors, which voted earlier this month to report Tehran to the UN Security Council.

The UN body could slap sanctions on the Islamic republic.
Posted by:tipper

#23  Well, let us say this about our bunker busters. During the first gulf war, they could penetrate 200ft of sand and then 20ft of reinforced concrete. They have gotten A LOT better since then. So I must ask you Aghazadeh. Do you feel lucky, punk? Do ya?
Posted by: mmurray821   2006-02-21 23:24  

#22  Man does that sound like an invitation or what?
Posted by: Gluger Glereng2886   2006-02-21 23:06  

#21  Similar claims were made for Saddam and his WMD progs/labs, and we all know how it turned out for both. Even ole Saddam by his courtroom antics appears to be biding his time until American Hiroshimas take place, or the world sees his Court hearing is worse than he was - like good Lefty schemes, its prob a little of both, andor any.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2006-02-21 22:18  

#20  close it up like a tomb. I like that, them Israelies are such smat folks!
Posted by: 49 pan   2006-02-21 21:43  

#19  Â¹Although the nuclear tipped bunker busters could do the trick, the object of the game would be to get it (them) to a depth of 400 to 500 feet down before detonation, or a moon shaped crater will blow out the surface exposing all to radiation (assuming we cared at this point)poisoning! How do we get it to target? At 400 feet, a circumspectral-dome would result burying all the pulverized remnants (neat tidy wrapup)!

¹The US could use multiple conventional bunker busters followed by a MOAB in the same track (assuming they have enough in the arsenals for atleast 100 target locations,

³The Israeli option would be to employ the gopher hole smoking technique with iradiated gas to expose "highlight" the entrances and exits to terminally trap the sites with smart bombs.
Posted by: smn   2006-02-21 21:30  

#18  We don't really need to destroy the sites though do we? Just blast whatever area we need to let the radiation loose. It's going to come out if we blast the whole place open anyway, so why not just save some money and kill them with a sliver. The equipment would become contaminated and the scientist working there would be to. problem solved.

Although the world would raise a fuss about the civilians near the target sites. Though I can live with Peaceniks going redface and passing out from lack of oxygen.
Posted by: Charles   2006-02-21 21:17  

#17  LOL!!
Posted by: 49 pan   2006-02-21 20:54  

#16  That's right, 49 Pan. I'll serve them tea and conversation, and then they'll be sorry! You are a silly man, sometimes. ;-)
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-02-21 20:53  

#15  We should thank them for burying all this stuff. All we have to do is deny access in and out.
Posted by: Darrell   2006-02-21 20:53  

#14  From Gundam Wing - Endless Waltz

Scene: Heero is in space in a Giant Mecha, opponents are in 'invulnerable' underground fortress

Heero: Let me confirm, your shelter shield is activated?
Dekim Barton: What are you planning?
Heero: Your shelter is secure, is it?
Mariemaia Kushrenada: Of course it is! See for yourself just how powerless you are.
Heero: Roger that. (Opens fire)
Mariemaia Kushrenada: gasps!
Posted by: DMFD   2006-02-21 20:44  

#13  And if that don't work we'll use zens idea and send in our very own TW! that's the last person they want to deal with!!
Posted by: 49 pan   2006-02-21 20:37  

#12  This guy is gonna go down with the like of Bagdad Bob. Bunker busting does not need to be a nuke. It just might have been canned because we have other means. It was posted here the other day about a 30,000 lb fuel/air bomb. That would probably do most any bunker they could build or at least kill everyone in it.
Posted by: 49 pan   2006-02-21 20:35  

#11  Here's a page that summarizes the political activity against nuclear BB's (actually called RNEPs: Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator) through April, 2004. And once the opposition had it in the bag, Bush dropped it from the 2005 budget in October, 2004.
Posted by: .com   2006-02-21 19:54  

#10  trailing wife, I'm sure by now that you're aware of how even a single woman of your wit and intelligence is of equal danger to all Islam as any bunker busters our military might deploy.
Posted by: Zenster   2006-02-21 19:51  

#9  TW..... look at my post in today's rantburg..


New Bomb Drills for Bunkers
Posted by: 3dc   2006-02-21 19:50  

#8  Good. He hasn't a clue what our bunker busters can do. I don't either, of course, but I suspect my conception is a lot closer than his.
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-02-21 19:45  

#7  Iran nuke plant 'would survive attack'

Let's find out.
Posted by: Zenster   2006-02-21 19:41  

#6  The problem with open pit mines is that they are subject to toxic chemical spills. Say, for example, a large quantity of some toxic chemical that was persistant for say, 20 years minimum, was accidently spilled on such a mine, mining would damn near be impossible.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2006-02-21 19:26  

#5  lol this remains to be seen, how do you say "blistering surprise assault" in farsi?
Posted by: bgrebel   2006-02-21 19:24  

#4  The ones cancelled by Congress, IIRC?
Posted by: .com   2006-02-21 19:10  

#3  The iranians obviously havent heard about our tactical nuclear bunker busters.
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2006-02-21 19:07  

#2  Iran nuke plant 'would survive attack'

Is that an invitation? A double-dog dare?

Have they got some sort of computer program that belches out these canned speeches - 1 from column A and 2 from column B?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2006-02-21 19:05  

#1  I'm available to design a robot that searches for airshafts, then cuts its way in, climbs down the airshaft as far as can, then booms.
Posted by: phil_b   2006-02-21 18:52  

00:00