Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
TEHRAN, Iran – A hardline newspaper close to Iran's rulers says the country has begun uranium enrichment at a well-protected underground facility.
Kayhan daily reported Sunday that Iran has begun enriching uranium at sophisticated centrifuges at the Fordo site near the holy city of Qom.
Iran's main uranium enrichment site in Natanz in the center of the country is built partly underground, while the long-secret Fordo facility was built deep inside a mountain as a precaution from aerial attacks.
[LEFT]
Read more: Report: Iran Begins Uranium Enrichment At New Underground Site | Fox News
[/LEFT]
Iran is a sword rattler and an instigator. They have done nothing directly. Cut them off from the world and report nothing they do. Do we have North Korea visit the US multiple times and bash the US on US soil? No. Then why let Iran do it?
As to anything being done undergound, why are we acting surprised about it? There is nothing special about something that has been done for numerous years by other countries. We need to stop the fear mongering as if this is something new. When the USSR fell and its nukes went into the wind with smugglers and nothing happened. Its all about the dollars/euros. The more they rattle the more money they make. Its just that simple.
TEHRAN, Iran – A hardline newspaper close to Iran's rulers says the country has begun uranium enrichment at a well-protected underground facility.
Kayhan daily reported Sunday that Iran has begun enriching uranium at sophisticated centrifuges at the Fordo site near the holy city of Qom.
Iran's main uranium enrichment site in Natanz in the center of the country is built partly underground, while the long-secret Fordo facility was built deep inside a mountain as a precaution from aerial attacks.
[LEFT]
Read more: Report: Iran Begins Uranium Enrichment At New Underground Site | Fox News
[/LEFT]
From what I've seen, the intelligence "experts" believe that Iran is at around 20% enrichment rate. That, they say, is a long way from the 90/95% needed for a bomb.
Now, I don't like that Iran is getting the bomb, they likely are. But the United States has no right telling other countries we aren't at war with, what to do.
We aren't at war with Iran, let them do what they want. If they use a bomb, supply a bomb, or attack any nation, then we'll end their existence on this planet.
Iran having the bomb would more than likely be a good thing. They will not use it because doing so would be suicide for the nation. But it would also be a good deterrent for US launching another world police intervention/nation building war that would cost us $2-4trillion and do nothing for our security, just like Iraq.
From what I've seen, the intelligence "experts" believe that Iran is at around 20% enrichment rate. That, they say, is a long way from the 90/95% needed for a bomb.
15%-20% is normal for reactor operations. If Iran wanted to use the nuclear reactors to produce plutonium, then Iran would only be enriching uranium to the 3%-5% level.
The IAEA report claims Iran is enriching uranium to 20%, so the conclusion that you can draw is that Iran has no desire to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
Now, I don't like that Iran is getting the bomb, they likely are.
But Iran isn't getting the "bomb."
When you say "bomb" what exactly do you mean? You don't even know.
Do you mean 1 megaton nuclear warhead? That would be impossible, and the IAEA report proves it, plus the fact that Iran has not test detonated a spherical implosion device.
Do you mean 450 kt nuclear warhead? That is impossible as well, and again the IAEA report proves it, plus the fact that Iran has not test detonated a spherical implosion design.
Do you mean 100 kt nuclear warhead? Again, that is impossible. The only way Iran or any country on Earth can make a 100 kt nuclear warhead (or greater) is if they have plutonium. But you see, the IAEA says Iran is enriching uranium to 20% and not 3%-5%, and also the fact that Iran has not test detonated a spherical implosion design. There is no such thing as 100 kt single-gun/double gun warhead.
When using uranium, the theoretical limit is 60 kt or so. In practice, France was the only country that built a 40 kt uranium-based nuclear warhead, a gravity bomb. You need a bomber for a weapon like that, and I do mean bomber, as in B-17, B-29, B-52, B-57 or B-58, not a fighter aircraft or fighter-bomber like the F-4 Phantom, or the F-5 or the Su-27.
See, the primary difference between uranium and plutonium is the number of neutrons produced.
If I wanted to build a 1 kt nuclear device that would weigh 50 pounds and fit into a pack-back, how much plutonium would I need?
4.5 kilograms.
The US had a weapon like that.
If I had 15 kilograms of uranium, what would I get?
A weapon that weighed 75 pounds and would fit in a back-pack, but it's yield would only be 0.1 kilotons.
The US had a weapon like that, too.
So conclusions could you draw about Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, since Pakistan retired the B-57F bombers they had about 20 years ago, and since Pakistan doesn't have plutonium (but India does)?
They have nothing over 20 kt.
Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons, but if they did, their arsenal would be very much like Pakistan's. Small yield warheads in the 0.01 kt to 10 kt range.
15%-20% is normal for reactor operations. If Iran wanted to use the nuclear reactors to produce plutonium, then Iran would only be enriching uranium to the 3%-5% level.
The IAEA report claims Iran is enriching uranium to 20%, so the conclusion that you can draw is that Iran has no desire to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons.
But Iran isn't getting the "bomb."
When you say "bomb" what exactly do you mean? You don't even know.
Do you mean 1 megaton nuclear warhead? That would be impossible, and the IAEA report proves it, plus the fact that Iran has not test detonated a spherical implosion device.
Do you mean 450 kt nuclear warhead? That is impossible as well, and again the IAEA report proves it, plus the fact that Iran has not test detonated a spherical implosion design.
Do you mean 100 kt nuclear warhead? Again, that is impossible. The only way Iran or any country on Earth can make a 100 kt nuclear warhead (or greater) is if they have plutonium. But you see, the IAEA says Iran is enriching uranium to 20% and not 3%-5%, and also the fact that Iran has not test detonated a spherical implosion design. There is no such thing as 100 kt single-gun/double gun warhead.
When using uranium, the theoretical limit is 60 kt or so. In practice, France was the only country that built a 40 kt uranium-based nuclear warhead, a gravity bomb. You need a bomber for a weapon like that, and I do mean bomber, as in B-17, B-29, B-52, B-57 or B-58, not a fighter aircraft or fighter-bomber like the F-4 Phantom, or the F-5 or the Su-27.
See, the primary difference between uranium and plutonium is the number of neutrons produced.
If I wanted to build a 1 kt nuclear device that would weigh 50 pounds and fit into a pack-back, how much plutonium would I need?
4.5 kilograms.
The US had a weapon like that.
If I had 15 kilograms of uranium, what would I get?
A weapon that weighed 75 pounds and would fit in a back-pack, but it's yield would only be 0.1 kilotons.
The US had a weapon like that, too.
So conclusions could you draw about Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, since Pakistan retired the B-57F bombers they had about 20 years ago, and since Pakistan doesn't have plutonium (but India does)?
They have nothing over 20 kt.
Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons, but if they did, their arsenal would be very much like Pakistan's. Small yield warheads in the 0.01 kt to 10 kt range.
Enriching.....
Mircea
Actually I think they would likely work on small yield weapons, somewhere around the size of the Hiroshima bomb. We aren't talking city levelers here, but enough to strike fear in Tel Aviv and Washington.
I don't think Iran would even use a nuclear weapon, its all about the fact that they want to be left alone. Much like North Korea.
Let me know, when they start working on intercontinental missile sites!
They're well on their way.
That radical regime has already designed a nuclear-capable warhead to fit its ballistic missiles, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (the UN "watchdog"). The range of those missiles currently gives the regime the ability to threaten all of the Middle East and most of Europe. And according to Obama's DOD, within three years the mullahs will have the mainland US in its sights:
And sooner if their North Korean friends hand them their ICBM technology.
The extremist Islamic regime which has control over Iran is the cancer of the Middle East. It is the source of weapons and money to the most violent, anti-peace forces in the region. Until that tumor of terror is destroyed, there will be no peace.
must go kill iranians now...must go kill iranians now...must go kill iranians now...must go kill iranians now...must go kill iranians now...must go kill iranians now...must go kill iranians now...must go kill iranians now...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Are you trying it again?
The neobots are on it!
