Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicano3000X
I hear different takes. People say its good and other say we effed up.
Eidt: Iran Deal..
|
It's mostly propaganda-based, relying heavily on disinformation, and in the grand scheme of things, it's largely irrelevant.
For example, you're never told
how the US became aware of Iran's nuclear energy and weapons programs.
Iran went to the Bush Administration in February 2002, in confidence, and discussed it.
So, the idea that Iran was keeping it a giant secret is complete bull-****.
Why did Iran approach the Bush Administration in February 2003? Probably as a peace offering, in an attempt to normalize relationships.
What did Bush and his Administration do? They characterized Iran as part of the "Axis of Evil" and then beat Iran over the head with its admission of a nuclear weapons program, that Iran had halted.
Even though the National Intelligence Estimate reported in 2007 that Iran had completely ceased its nuclear weapons program by 2003, Bush continued to beat Iran over the head with it.
Iran continued with its nuclear energy program, but US Media constantly uses the propaganda and disinformation phrase "nuclear program." Iran has a very real need for nuclear energy.
8,000 years ago, the Iranian Plateau was a lush paradise; a virtual Garden of Eden. But, climate change has turned it into an arid region, not capable of agriculture like it was 8,000 years. Irrigation will change all that, but irrigation requires water, and that requires a lot of desalinization plants along the Persian Gulf, which are extremely energy intensive, meaning they require a lot of electricity.
The dual-reactors at Bushwehr are designed to do exactly that: provide energy for the desalinization plants.
Bringing that water to the Iranian Plateau will create a lot of agricultural jobs and help lower their perennial 20% unemployment rate, creating a larger Middle Class, who will insist on reforms leading to a more democratic form of government.
At the same time, Iran can shut down its oil and gas-fired power plants, diverting more oil to the World Market, or generate more petro-chemical products.
It's a Win-Win for everyone.
The propaganda and disinformation by the US Media is also designed to instill fear, leading you to believe that Iran will be launching 750 kt nuclear warheads on the US with their intercontinental ballistic missiles.
That's pure fantasy.
Iran, like Pakistan, doesn't have weapons grade Plutonium, and without it, Iran can't make a "bomb" bigger than 5 kt.
Sure, in theory, Iran could produce a 20 kt warhead using U-235, but the only thing they could do is stare at it. Iran has no aircraft capable of carrying a warhead that heavy, and no missile capable of carrying that big of a payload.
It requires significantly more U-235 to build the same size warhead using weapons grade Plutonium. The reasons for that are the fact that U-235 is more stable, making it harder to fission. All radioactive elements are inherently unstable, but weapons grade Plutonium is highly unstable and spontaneously fissions at a rate of 20,000 fissions per second per kilogram, while U-235 spontaneously fissions at a rate of 66 fissions per second per kilogram. Weapons grade Plutonium produces on average 3 neutrons per fission, while U-235 only produces 2 neutrons. Neutrons are characterized as moving at slow, moderate or fast speeds, and a neutron of any speed can fission weapons grade Plutonium, but it requires a neutron of moderate or fast speed to fission U-235. The area on the nucleus of U-235 that must be hit by a neutron to cause fission is narrower than the area on the nucleus of weapons grade Plutonium.
That's why the US, UK, France, Israel, China, Russia, India and North Korea use weapons grade Plutonium, instead of U-235.
If North Korea didn't have weapons grade Plutonium, they wouldn't be a threat to the US. If Kim had only U-235, the best he could do is a small yield warhead, about 5 kt, on a short range missile. That would certainly be a threat to South Korea, but not the US.
So, if Iran produced nuclear weapons, they would be very small yields, about 5 kt and less, used only for defensive purposes, which is the real issue here.
The US intends to initiate conflict with Iran, and it doesn't want Iran to have the ability to use those weapons in defense.
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.
