Iran A-Bomb Complete
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In your view, perhaps, but I suspect they may see it differently.
You assume too much. What I said, if you care to read carefully, was a comparison between the stability and responsibility of the UK and Iran as nuclear nations. NOT a statement of where I stand in the nuclear debate.
I am not pursuaded either by the turn in the discussion towards Israel. I am not sure that effectively saying "Look how bad Israel are and they've got a bomb" is justification for Iran to have one.
Before you assume too much again, NO I AM NOT declaring a position that is pro- or anti-Israel.
You assume too much. What I said, if you care to read carefully, was a comparison between the stability and responsibility of the UK and Iran as nuclear nations. NOT a statement of where I stand in the nuclear debate.
I am not pursuaded either by the turn in the discussion towards Israel. I am not sure that effectively saying "Look how bad Israel are and they've got a bomb" is justification for Iran to have one.
Before you assume too much again, NO I AM NOT declaring a position that is pro- or anti-Israel.
Now here’s an obscure link between Iran and Israel that only fellow prog rock enthusiasts would know about – or maybe even care about. Both countries have Camel tribute bands. Iran has a band called Raha (Farsi for Free, formed 2004) and Israel a band called The Humps (perhaps some sort of pun, formed 2006). If you like that sort of thing and you’re not so uptight that you feel the need to boycott anything Israeli, they are both really rather good.
Raha
The Humps
Raha
The Humps
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Hands up who even imagines Oama will perform the "snap-back" on sanctions he promised if there was any indication Iran breached the terms of the agreement? Or thought there was any chance of them observing them? ............. Thought not...........
Iran violated sanctions with missile test, says UN panel
Iran’s firing of a medium-range ballistic missile in October violated international sanctions banning the Islamic republic from launches capable of delivering nuclear weapons, UN experts have said in a new report. The report submitted to the UN security council and seen by the Associated Press on Tuesday said the launch used ballistic missile technology banned under a June 2010 resolution.
The 10 October launch was the first test of a ballistic surface-to-surface missile after Iran and six world powers reached a landmark nuclear deal on 14 July. The security council endorsed the deal in a resolution on July 20 that also called on Iran not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons.........
The report said the missile had a range of at least 1,000km (620 miles) and up to 1,300km with a payload of at least 1,000kg and up to 1,400kg. The panel said any missile with a range of 300km (186 miles) and a payload of 500kg was considered capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction.
The United States, France, Britain and Germany asked the security council on 12 October to investigate and take “appropriate action” against Iran for the 10 October missile launch. The 11 December report by experts from the council committee monitoring sanctions against Iran supports the contention of the four countries that the firing violated UN sanctions..Whether the security council takes any action remains to be seen.
The US ambassador Samantha Power has accused some unnamed council members of refusing to take action against Iran for sanctions violations in recent months but said the United States would keep pressing for enforcement. “Instead of an effective, timely response the security council has dithered,” she told a council meeting considering a report from the Iran sanctions committee.
She pointed to the lack of action on the 10 October launch, a visit to Moscow by Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani, who is subject to a UN travel ban, and the interception off the coast of Oman of a banned shipment of arms from Iran in late September. “This council cannot allow Iran to feel that it can violate our resolutions with impunity,” Power said, stressing the importance of sanctions enforcement for “a credible, enforceable nuclear deal”.
Under the July nuclear deal most sanctions on Iran will be lifted when its provisions are implemented in exchange for curbs on its nuclear programme. But the experts’ report noted that “ballistic missile launches would be covered” under the 20 July resolution.
Iranian defence minister General Hossein Dehghan said at the time of the 10 October launch that the missile, named Emad or pillar in Farsi, was a technological achievement for Iran — able to be controlled until the moment of impact and to hit targets “with high precision”. He said it “will obviously boost the strategic deterrence capability of our armed forces”.
The UN panel said it has not yet investigated a subsequent Iranian ballistic missile launch reported by the media on 21 November and therefore “cannot determine whether it was another Emad test”.
Based on video footage of the 10 October launch, the panel said the Emad delivery system was identified as “the Ghadr-1 medium-range single stage liquid-fuelled ballistic missile”. It said the Ghadr-1 was an advanced version of Iran’s Shabab-3 ballistic missile system and the re-entry vehicle had a guidance system and steerable fins...........
Iran violated sanctions with missile test, says UN panel
Iran’s firing of a medium-range ballistic missile in October violated international sanctions banning the Islamic republic from launches capable of delivering nuclear weapons, UN experts have said in a new report. The report submitted to the UN security council and seen by the Associated Press on Tuesday said the launch used ballistic missile technology banned under a June 2010 resolution.
The 10 October launch was the first test of a ballistic surface-to-surface missile after Iran and six world powers reached a landmark nuclear deal on 14 July. The security council endorsed the deal in a resolution on July 20 that also called on Iran not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons.........
The report said the missile had a range of at least 1,000km (620 miles) and up to 1,300km with a payload of at least 1,000kg and up to 1,400kg. The panel said any missile with a range of 300km (186 miles) and a payload of 500kg was considered capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction.
The United States, France, Britain and Germany asked the security council on 12 October to investigate and take “appropriate action” against Iran for the 10 October missile launch. The 11 December report by experts from the council committee monitoring sanctions against Iran supports the contention of the four countries that the firing violated UN sanctions..Whether the security council takes any action remains to be seen.
The US ambassador Samantha Power has accused some unnamed council members of refusing to take action against Iran for sanctions violations in recent months but said the United States would keep pressing for enforcement. “Instead of an effective, timely response the security council has dithered,” she told a council meeting considering a report from the Iran sanctions committee.
She pointed to the lack of action on the 10 October launch, a visit to Moscow by Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani, who is subject to a UN travel ban, and the interception off the coast of Oman of a banned shipment of arms from Iran in late September. “This council cannot allow Iran to feel that it can violate our resolutions with impunity,” Power said, stressing the importance of sanctions enforcement for “a credible, enforceable nuclear deal”.
Under the July nuclear deal most sanctions on Iran will be lifted when its provisions are implemented in exchange for curbs on its nuclear programme. But the experts’ report noted that “ballistic missile launches would be covered” under the 20 July resolution.
Iranian defence minister General Hossein Dehghan said at the time of the 10 October launch that the missile, named Emad or pillar in Farsi, was a technological achievement for Iran — able to be controlled until the moment of impact and to hit targets “with high precision”. He said it “will obviously boost the strategic deterrence capability of our armed forces”.
The UN panel said it has not yet investigated a subsequent Iranian ballistic missile launch reported by the media on 21 November and therefore “cannot determine whether it was another Emad test”.
Based on video footage of the 10 October launch, the panel said the Emad delivery system was identified as “the Ghadr-1 medium-range single stage liquid-fuelled ballistic missile”. It said the Ghadr-1 was an advanced version of Iran’s Shabab-3 ballistic missile system and the re-entry vehicle had a guidance system and steerable fins...........
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
On a related matter.....
Israel says Arrow 3 missile shield aces test, hitting target in space
Reuters: Thursday 10th Dec 2015
JERUSALEM Israel's upgraded Arrow ballistic missile shield passed a full interception test on Thursday, hitting a target in space meant to simulate the trajectory of the long-range weapons held by Iran, Syria and Hezbollah, the Defense Ministry said.
The success was a boost for "Arrow 3", among Israeli missile defense systems that get extensive U.S. funding. Its first attempt at a full trial, held a year ago, was aborted due to what designers said was a faulty deployment of the target.
"The success of the Arrow 3 system today ... is an important step towards one of the most important projects for Israel and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) becoming operational," said Joseph Weiss, IAI's chief executive officer..........
Arrow serves as the top tier of an integrated Israeli shield built up to withstand various potential missile or rocket salvoes. The bottom tier is the already deployed short-range Iron Dome interceptor, while a system called David's Sling, due to be fielded next year, will shoot down mid-range missiles.........
Defense Ministry and Israeli military will discuss a possible schedule for deployment of Arrow 3, Ramati said, adding that further tests of the system were expected.
Israel says Arrow 3 missile shield aces test, hitting target in space
Reuters: Thursday 10th Dec 2015
JERUSALEM Israel's upgraded Arrow ballistic missile shield passed a full interception test on Thursday, hitting a target in space meant to simulate the trajectory of the long-range weapons held by Iran, Syria and Hezbollah, the Defense Ministry said.
The success was a boost for "Arrow 3", among Israeli missile defense systems that get extensive U.S. funding. Its first attempt at a full trial, held a year ago, was aborted due to what designers said was a faulty deployment of the target.
"The success of the Arrow 3 system today ... is an important step towards one of the most important projects for Israel and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) becoming operational," said Joseph Weiss, IAI's chief executive officer..........
Arrow serves as the top tier of an integrated Israeli shield built up to withstand various potential missile or rocket salvoes. The bottom tier is the already deployed short-range Iron Dome interceptor, while a system called David's Sling, due to be fielded next year, will shoot down mid-range missiles.........
Defense Ministry and Israeli military will discuss a possible schedule for deployment of Arrow 3, Ramati said, adding that further tests of the system were expected.
The United States, France, Britain and Germany asked the security council on 12 October to investigate and take “appropriate action” against Iran for the 10 October missile launch. The 11 December report by experts from the council committee monitoring sanctions against Iran supports the contention of the four countries that the firing violated UN sanctions. Whether the security council takes any action remains to be seen.
The US ambassador Samantha Power has accused some unnamed council members of refusing to take action against Iran for sanctions violations in recent months but said the United States would keep pressing for enforcement. “Instead of an effective, timely response the security council has dithered,” she told a council meeting considering a report from the Iran sanctions committee.
Amusing in a sad way.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One thing that sets my alarm bells off is that this article seems to equate uranium with plutonium. They are vastly different. Not only are uranium enrichment processes very different than plutonium enrichment processes (with the former requiring huge numbers of cascading centrifuges and the latter a nuclear reactor), but a uranium weapon is very very different than a plutonium weapon. The former is relatively simple to build and requires essentially WW1 cannon technology, while the latter is very very hard to build and requires highly complex implosion technology. Something appears to be amiss with that article.
So let's look at this logically.
Iran has actually built a bomb.
And via formal, official channels, we the general public have heard and seen - nothing.
No televised address from POTUS, no highly credible leaks from Defence sources reported in authorative mainstream media outlets - zip.
In an age when it is impossible to even keep secrets about some of UKUSA's most sensitive SIGINT capabilities?
I think when they really do develop a bomb - we'll all find out about it quickly enough.
Let's imagine what would happen if the daily intel brief landed on the desk in the Oval Office, and the topline issue was "Iran demonstrates working nuclear warhead - miniaturised to fit on ballistic missile."
What would we see?
At the very least I would have thought, a sudden and very marked increase in shuttle diplomacy, and an emergency UN Security Council meeting? NATO convening all sorts of meetings?
Significant changes in force postures all across the region?
Relocation of all sorts of defence assets?
And then the leaks to well informed journalists in the US would begin - while their brethren in the UK were slapped with D notices preventing them from disclosing anything sensitive?
Somehow I don't think it's happened - yet.
Iran has actually built a bomb.
And via formal, official channels, we the general public have heard and seen - nothing.
No televised address from POTUS, no highly credible leaks from Defence sources reported in authorative mainstream media outlets - zip.
In an age when it is impossible to even keep secrets about some of UKUSA's most sensitive SIGINT capabilities?
I think when they really do develop a bomb - we'll all find out about it quickly enough.
Let's imagine what would happen if the daily intel brief landed on the desk in the Oval Office, and the topline issue was "Iran demonstrates working nuclear warhead - miniaturised to fit on ballistic missile."
What would we see?
At the very least I would have thought, a sudden and very marked increase in shuttle diplomacy, and an emergency UN Security Council meeting? NATO convening all sorts of meetings?
Significant changes in force postures all across the region?
Relocation of all sorts of defence assets?
And then the leaks to well informed journalists in the US would begin - while their brethren in the UK were slapped with D notices preventing them from disclosing anything sensitive?
Somehow I don't think it's happened - yet.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Iran gets, and it's a big IF, an atomic weapon system it will probably be the greatest boost for regional stability since the parting of the Red Sea.
Why do I think this?
Because it's the exact opposite of what the warmongers and Hawks want!!
Why do I think this?
Because it's the exact opposite of what the warmongers and Hawks want!!
Gentleman Aviator
but a uranium weapon is very very different than a plutonium weapon.
Plutonium = Nagasaki
Not a vast difference in effect methinks ........
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One thing that this discussion on "why" Iran should not have nukes seems to ignore is that Iran was a signatory to the nuclear non proliferation treaty. Attempts to build a nuke are non compliant, giving the UN and other nations the legal authority to do something about that, including military action.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uranium = Hiroshima
Plutonium = Nagasaki
Not a vast difference in effect methinks ........
Plutonium = Nagasaki
Not a vast difference in effect methinks ........
By comparison, Tokyo was more severely devastated and more people died there than either Hiroshima or Nagasaki, and no nukes were involved. So another totally different technology with a similar outcome.
Which begs the question: why all the outrage about Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Tokyo was far worse.
Last edited by KenV; 17th Dec 2015 at 17:39.
As teeteringhead dragged them into this discussion, maybe we can all toss them out and return out attentions to the Iranian nuclear weapons -- real or potential -- as more information presents itself. I am also interested to see what sanctions, if any, will be applied to Iran for having welched on the recent deal.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Maine USA
Age: 82
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not especially reassuring that a theocracy that regards martyrdom-by-suicide-bomb as a virtue may soon have the means of constructing a doomsday device. "Do as we say or everybody gets it!" may yet prove to be a foreign policy winner.
And note that no delivery system is needed.
And note that no delivery system is needed.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not especially reassuring that a theocracy that regards martyrdom-by-suicide-bomb as a virtue....
And on a related note, once Iran has nukes, does anyone imagine that it will stop there? The Saudis are certain to want to get some. And almost certainly Turkey. And after that probably Egypt. And so on. Jihadists with nukes. What could possibly go wrong?
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Iran, about half way through:
KenFM am Set - Vortrag von Ray McGovern und Elizabeth Murray - Wie werden Kriege "gemacht"
KenFM am Set - Vortrag von Ray McGovern und Elizabeth Murray - Wie werden Kriege "gemacht"