Of course the difference between a report from the IAEA and leaks from the US Intelligence services to friendly news sources is:

a. The IAEA has to back up its statements with facts presented in a freely available report,
b. The IAEA was right about Iraq's non-existent WMD program.

vygramul: LeglessDog: vygramul: Therion: Yeah, I hear they can strike the continental US with weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes, and their fanatical elite troops have been dumping babies out of incubators.

I don't think Iran has any nukes yet, and probably pretty far from a delivery platform capable of reaching the US. The North Koreans have detonated a couple of nukes, but so far there's no reason to think they have integrated a weapon with their Taepodong2 as an operational threat.

On top of that, North Korea isn't exactly bristling with launch sites, and it's not like they can fire one off in less time than it takes for a cruise missile to get to the pad.

Land and water-based nukes are the main concern . . . a nuke can fit in a panel van or small seaworthy vessel . . . and even a suitcase, once the technology is developed enough.

That's not a terribly good delivery mechanism for a host of reasons, not least of which is the lack of executive control over the weapon long, long, long before it achieves a deliverable envelope.

While I enjoy your use of big words and jargon--Iran is a terrorist nation as far as I'm concerned, and they're in bed with other terrorist nations. For a terrorist, "executive control" is a remote detonator.

We can't afford to do anything about it anyway.

ansius: Of course the difference between a report from the IAEA and leaks from the US Intelligence services to friendly news sources is:

a. The IAEA has to back up its statements with facts presented in a freely available report,
b. The IAEA was right about Iraq's non-existent WMD program.

Damn, didn't add the last line.

So, to counter subby's snark, the difference between a 'late' IAEA report and leaked reports to the media about "potential > possible > perhaps they are > it looks like they are > OMG they are developing WMD in [country X], let's bomb them" is that the IAEA is reputable.

SnakeMan: BarbadoSlim: SnakeMan: BarbadoSlim: SnakeMan: BarbadoSlim: Excellent regulating there, Lou.


/Religion of Peace...

Kind of hard to regulate the government of a sovereign nation, Skippy.

Well, that's basically their job, slick.

And how are they supposed to do their job, exactly? A government can regulate a private citizen by threatening them with jail or fines. That's because a government has guns and a citizen does not, or at least the government has way more guns. So how do you regulate a government aside from threatening to bomb them back to the Stone Age? How do you counter an organization that has most of the guns in a geographical area except by aiming a nuke at them? Sanctions? Don't make me laugh. You can sanction them all they want, it doesn't deter them. You naive moron.

So you are agreeing that with me that IAEA is basically useless. I'll just ignore the rest of your uncalled for insults.

Well of course it's useless. No shiat, Sherlock, did you figure that all by yourself? How could it be anything BUT? Did you also figure out that the U.N. is worthless? Wow, you're a genius!

Ain't none of what you want to get done can get done without big bombs. Sorry to break it to you children, that's how the world works.

Aren't you just a bucket of sunshine? I bet evvvverybody loves you...

They don't want nuclear weapons so they can bomb us. They want nuclear weapons so we can't bomb them.

IStateTheObvious: To be fair, they have put a satellite in orbit. A rocket that can put a satellite in orbit is just an ICBM by another name.

To be really fair, there is a lot of development time between a verified nuc explosion, and a warhead small enough to fit in the missile, tough enough to survive a launch, and then detonate at the right time, over the right target.

Russia/US/UK/France/China have decades of experience at this. And no, even after your first test explosion..a deliverable, accurate, reliable weapon is not 'easy'.

Should we expect a strongly worded letter?

Israel has many nukes ready to fire on Iran.

http://anoncentral.tumblr.com/post/12465224856/iran-vs-israel-what-t he -media-wants-you-to-forget

Israel has many nukes ready to fire on Iran.

/How quick does it take for Nuclear fallout from Iran to reach the North America anyways?

SnakeMan sure is special.

My solution - send a few dozen nuclear weapons to Saudia Arabia. As a gift. Complete with delivery systems capable of hitting anywhere in Iran. Allow CNN to broadcast the weapons transfer.

YouPeopleAreCrazy: IStateTheObvious: To be fair, they have put a satellite in orbit. A rocket that can put a satellite in orbit is just an ICBM by another name.

To be really fair, there is a lot of development time between a verified nuc explosion, and a warhead small enough to fit in the missile, tough enough to survive a launch, and then detonate at the right time, over the right target.

Russia/US/UK/France/China have decades of experience at this. And no, even after your first test explosion..a deliverable, accurate, reliable weapon is not 'easy'.

I agree...but developmental time can be cut considerably if you have help coming from a country that has already done it. This IAEA report specifies that they did receive help from a Russian. And they reportedly were given partial warhead designs by the Pakistani scientist Khan.

What was once the work of geniuses eventually becomes the work of a technician. I know enough (former machinist) that if you give me the fissile material, I'll produce a crude hiroshima type (gun barrel) a-bomb for you. It may fizzle, in that it only produces a few KT verses the 15 or so KT that a proper bomb would create, but it would be suitable for terroristic purposes. I presume an Iranian nuclear scientist would be a bit more advanced than me.

Excuse me, someone is at the door...

Get Lost: Israel has many nukes ready to fire on Iran.

http://anoncentral.tumblr.com/post/12465224856/iran-vs-israel-what-t he -media-wants-you-to-forget

Israel has many nukes ready to fire on Iran.

/How quick does it take for Nuclear fallout from Iran to reach the North America anyways?

....but israel

seems to be a good response to the IAEA releasing a report saying iran at least was pursuing an atomic weapon, and probably still is.

Occam's Chainsaw: Incidentally, were I running Iran, I'd be chasing nukes hard and fast as well. It takes that big United States-shaped stick out of Saudi Arabia and Israel's arsenal and forces them to make nice-like.


That's been working out excellently for Pakistan lately hasn't it...totally forcing the US to back off on drone strikes..

They should have kept Hans Blix Super Inspector around, but he's returned to racing his Volvo and promoting his lifelong passion - The Swedish Street Rod Association.

IStateTheObvious: What was once the work of geniuses eventually becomes the work of a technician. I know enough (former machinist) that if you give me the fissile material, I'll produce a crude hiroshima type (gun barrel) a-bomb for you. It may fizzle, in that it only produces a few KT verses the 15 or so KT that a proper bomb would create, but it would be suitable for terroristic purposes. I presume an Iranian nuclear scientist would be a bit more advanced than me.

Same here. But the entire ecosystem, to include delivery and detonation on demand...that's a lot tougher. Truck or boat, that requires a non idiot to do the deed. A missile requires a tough warhead to survive the flight. And testing that is hard in their geo location.

Given a reliable weapon, Iran's target is not mainland US. It can't be for quite a while. Decades, IMHO.
Somewhere in Israel, OTOH, is doable within this decade.

People! We need to start a war with an intense nuclear conflagration NOW! It's the only way to stop a war with an intense nuclear conflagration! ! World War Three!! Pearly Gates!!! Whoo-hoo!! RIde 'em cowboy!

YouPeopleAreCrazy: IStateTheObvious: What was once the work of geniuses eventually becomes the work of a technician. I know enough (former machinist) that if you give me the fissile material, I'll produce a crude hiroshima type (gun barrel) a-bomb for you. It may fizzle, in that it only produces a few KT verses the 15 or so KT that a proper bomb would create, but it would be suitable for terroristic purposes. I presume an Iranian nuclear scientist would be a bit more advanced than me.

Same here. But the entire ecosystem, to include delivery and detonation on demand...that's a lot tougher. Truck or boat, that requires a non idiot to do the deed. A missile requires a tough warhead to survive the flight. And testing that is hard in their geo location.

Given a reliable weapon, Iran's target is not mainland US. It can't be for quite a while. Decades, IMHO.
Somewhere in Israel, OTOH, is doable within this decade.

I agree. I don't think they intend to target the US any time soon. My personal belief is that they saw what happened with Iraq (we think you have WMD...INVADE!) and Best Korea (we know you have WMD...let's talk!) and they figure they are better off emulating the latter.

JK47: That's been working out excellently for Pakistan lately hasn't it...totally forcing the US to back off on drone strikes..

Pakistan is schizophrenic when it comes to US drone strikes. We're killing their worst of the worst, the militants they don't want to track down, or that they fund to f*ck with others so they'll not destabilize locally. But publicly, they have to decry every time we do it or the populace will think they're complicit.

It's like the guy who just moved in next door killing fire ants in your yard. While you're not too keen on him trespassing, the whole eliminating pests bit is somewhat beneficial.

But what if this time they are telling the truth and those guys are trying to develop nuclear weapons to be used in some manner to harm us? Can we take that chance? I say NO! Take them out before they take us out. It's the only sane thing to do.

IStateTheObvious: And they reportedly were given partial warhead designs by the Pakistani scientist Khan.

Genta 2011-11-08 08:27:24 PM

jpo2269: Subby is obviously new to Fark.. Wouldn't be surprised that within 75 posts, someone will deny Iran has a nuclear weapons program..

yep, i laughed too when people denied that iraq had WMDs.

Very close, very, very close, but Gyrfalcon was a little more direct...

Well, Doh!!

That is their only hope of survival.

glenlivid: Therion: Apparently you and I are the only two that "get the joke".

At first the thread was on a good course, but damn it went south quick.

Nukes don't kill people. People kill people.
The world would be safer if all countries had nukes.

Thankfully, we all know the Israelis will react in a calm & reasonable fashion.

/what? it's one way to get peace in the middle east & you know it.
//ok, but only if the iranians have a decent delivery capability too

It would be interesting to produce a graph of 'number of posts' VS 'flamewar intensity'. You could then extrapolate via the number of Fark users to figure out the percentage of flamers. You could even cross-map the exact moment that a thread became a flamewar against posts by individuals. Anyone who posts frequently at the turning point might be a potential flamewar catalyst.

That might allow the moderators to study a handful of posters and grant some kind of Fark award (eg FarkWit or FarkKnuckle).

It would certainly help me with comment filtering.

/freedomofspeech.jpg
//Moderocracy.jpg

Ah, Bibi Hanky. Always raising a stink.

this is playing out just like dune.

lol

Oh hell, WMD's! They is a shiat load of liberating to be done here.

And you Democrats have to support it cause of Obama.

So let me get this straight, Iran has or will or soon have a nuclear bomb and this same Iran has said that it will destroy Israel, the same Israel that has not made the same threat to Iran. Israel in the passed has bombed countries that have made the same threats and have been in pursuit of the same weapons.................Yeah, I have no idea how this will end.

Exchanging one countries "Q" for another countries "N" does not make it right to invade it.

/let Israel take care of the problem if they are so worried about it.

//America: Israel's biatch

Guys, a long time ago on here someone posted a satirical pic of a map showing the Middle East under water... a hilarious situation that begs the question, "What would everyone get all cranky over if this happened?"

Try as I may, I cannot find this pic now on the interwebs. Can anyone help?

vygramul: Basically, North Korea and Iran both decided to seek nuclear weapons in the wake of Desert Storm, and OIF just reinforced that decision. Both regimes realized that their equipment was at minimum as obsolete as Saddam's, and realized that their conventional forces wouldn't amount to a speed-bump should the balloon go up.

North Korea was already after them before Desert Storm.

I think the real driving force behind Iran's nuke program wasn't Desert Storm but our invasion of Afghanistan--they saw a country held accountable for supporting terrorism and they didn't want that to happen to them.

IStateTheObvious: What was once the work of geniuses eventually becomes the work of a technician. I know enough (former machinist) that if you give me the fissile material, I'll produce a crude hiroshima type (gun barrel) a-bomb for you. It may fizzle, in that it only produces a few KT verses the 15 or so KT that a proper bomb would create, but it would be suitable for terroristic purposes. I presume an Iranian nuclear scientist would be a bit more advanced than me.

Excuse me, someone is at the door...

A gun-barrel device may fizzle even when built by the pros. They even knew it was a possibility with the Hiroshima device. That's one reason for no advance notice--we knew a fizzle was possible but the computers of the time couldn't tell them how likely it was. (Reality: A few percent chance.)

Anyway, you need one more piece of information before you build your device: How big the pieces should be. Make them too small and your bomb does nothing, make them too big and a piece goes critical while you're building it. You've got a few minutes to live and your machine shop is contaminated.

vygramul: IStateTheObvious: Therion: Yeah, I hear they can strike the continental US with weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes, and their fanatical elite troops have been dumping babies out of incubators.

To be fair, they have put a satellite in orbit. A rocket that can put a satellite in orbit is just an ICBM by another name.

This is way less true than you think. The trick to ICBMs is de-orbiting, and de-orbiting in a controlled manner is not easy. Just look at how the predictions for satellites seem to be "somewhere other than the Arctic or Antarctic".

No. Any rocket that can put a satellite in orbit can put a bomb on target with whatever accuracy it could put the satellite in orbit. The reason we don't know where satellites are coming down is that they're coming in very gradually and we don't know exactly where drag will bring them down.

Head down to the lake and put a piece of wood in the water to aim at.

Throw #1: Lob a rock at it. If you're a basketball player you'll probably hit it. (The rocket being used as an ICBM.)

Throw #2: Send it out on the water a distance and try to hit it after the rock has skipped 3 times. Think you'll come close? (The satellite re-entering.) (Note that for a manned capsule coming down the difference between bounce and die from coming in too steeply is only a few degrees.)

Funk Brothers: Iran has every right to construct nuclear weapons in order to defend its sovereignty. The United States had to during World War II to prevent the killings of innocent people. The Soviets didn't launch a first strike against the United States and neither did the United States. Should we be worried? No.

We should all have them. Think of the politeness!

SnakeMan: netweavr: Can't help but remember how convinced everyone was about Iraq.

So what happened to the WMDs? Were they just never there? I love how everyone acts like Iraq never had WMDs. Oh well, guess they never had them, derp de derp.

They used to, long, long ago. We know, because we sold them to them.

LS1Bird: Guys, a long time ago on here someone posted a satirical pic of a map showing the Middle East under water... a hilarious situation that begs the question, "What would everyone get all cranky over if this happened?"

Try as I may, I cannot find this pic now on the interwebs. Can anyone help?



Delivered

Evil High Priest: They used to, long, long ago. We know, because we sold them to them.

[Citation needed]

/srsly