I think where Iran is concerned it would be wise to expect the unexpected

I think they do not have "Balls" enough,
 

to think so..:yep:

Not completely accurate.

You are correct, however, in stating that increasing the amount of 235U decreases the critical mass. But the critical mass of Uranium is the minimum density/configuration needed to sustain criticality, not achieve and maintain supercriticality.

Any concentration of 235U can achieve criticality depending on many factors (temperature, shape, reflectors), however, to build a "bomb", the material has to achieve a state of supercriticality.

Criticality is achieved when there is no increase or decrease in power, temperature, or neutron production. The number of neutrons produced is equal to the number of neutrons lost.

Supercriticality is achieved when there is an increase in power, temperature, and neutron production. The number of neutrons produced is greater than the number of neutrons lost.

Under achievable environments, it is incorrect to say that any concentration of Uranium can be made to achieve supercriticality.

Suppose I should have elaborated but Aramike said it so Ill save it mostly.Putin is really in charge of Russia and you are naive if you believe otherwise.

Like many mid-asian nations whose background is Muslim, much of what they say is, for lack of a better word, are exageration.

That being said, it doesn't mean we should reguard the rhetoric as empty.

At some point classic diplomacy can fail and military action must be employed to protect a nation. Since very few mid-asian nations have denounced the actions, the option should be on the table.

I think the bottom line is that this thread is filled with assumptions and suppositions which make little sense. I remember in my early time here I posited portions of a paper I was writing which predicted North Korea would attain nuclear weapons. It was commented that somehow I was nuts for thinking that.

Now North Korea has nukes. Go figure.

Let's start from A, shall we? Should Iran be allowed nuclear power plants? Despite the limited, albeit very real, danger in "granting" this technology, in this the Russians got one right. How do you restrict atomic power? Quite frankly, their position on this was ingenious - which nation will attack Iran for building a friggin' power plant? So why not position themselves to profit from the construction of said plants?

Now onto B, it has been suggested here that it would be difficult, if not impossible for Iran to secretly weaponize Plutonium. Anyone who know's anything whatsoever about intelligence would understand the folly of that reasoning. Hiding just about anything within a sovereign nation's borders is fairly easily accomplished, all the moreso when said nation doesn't even begin to prescribe to personal freedoms.

My fear is that, unlike North Korea, Iran will not openly flaunt its nuclear weapons capability. Whether or not they are able to complete a true, multi-stage thermonuclear weapon or simply multiple "Fat Man" type bombs is academic when considering their true theological objective, which is Israel.

Ultimately, my point is this: let them have nuclear energy. Really - even if you disagree with it, who has the political will to prevent it? However, understand that nuclear weapons MAY not be far behind, and be prepared to take extraordinary measures should our intelligence sources indicate Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions coming to fruition.

And finally, my largest fear: we will be "Bushed-out" afraid if said intelligence indicates that Iran has nuclear weapons. Meaning, we will be so afraid that the intelligence is flawed that we won't act, ignoring the absolute imperative the stakes are in this game. Quite frankly, it's better to be wrong and act than to be right and be afraid to act.

If Iran insists on becoming nuclear, THEY assume that risk.

I am going to have to agree with that. Medvedev is no mere figurehead, but Putin does indeed hold considerable sway and he is very popular in Russia.

Israel is probably watching all this very closely and its no secret that they have one of the worlds best spy networks. I think that when the time comes they will act swiftly and i doubt we will know anything about it until the bombs start falling. I really doubt they would announce their plans until it was too late for anyone to stop them.

The big question is how far will they go? Would they use Nukes to prevent Iran from obtaining them? If so then that could very well start WWIII because i'm sure Russia and China would react with there own nuclear weapons and once that happened who knows where it would lead?

Why would Russia and China go nuclear on this? They have nothing to gain from it. This isn't the cold war anymore after all.:hmmm:

Exactly, Russia and China would have keen interest in not allowing Iran to have nuclear weapons, both Russia and China have problems with Islamic Extremists who might receive nuclear weapons from Iran.

In fact Russia has already had two dirty bomb attempts by Chechen terrorists. I would not what to see what the Chechens would do with fissile material.

One thing you can be certain is that Israel will not use nukes against Iran. The Israeli nukes are a last resort weapon. They were not used in 73 even though the Isarelli governement at one point thought they were about to be overrun.

This article is a bit old, but gives an idea of the Israeli plan:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/wa...1&pagewanted=1

Since then Israel has received permission to over fly Saudi Arabia which solves condition #3. It apparently has a limited in flight refueling capacity which solves condition #2, if they can station the tankers over Saudi arabia. The only question mark remaining is the weapons.

p.s. As an aside, President Bush was not as much a cowboy as the Democrats make him out to be.

Brakig it down into its simplest form....I can't imagine Israel attacking whilst there are Russian personnel at the plant. The risk of angering Russia and causing a retaliatory strike from them is simply too great IMHO.

I think the Israelis will await irrefutable proof and a Russian staff exit before moving in a hostile way.

I've been known to be way off the mark in the past mind :hmmm:

A side Topic,
 

Iran says it's prepared sell weapons to Lebanon if Beirut asks for military assistance.TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran is prepared to sell weapons to Lebanon if Beirut asks for help in equipping its military, Iran's defense minister said Wednesday.

Gen. Ahmad Vahidi's comments come a day after the leader of Lebanon's Shiite Hezbollah group, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, called on the Lebanese government to formally seek military assistance from Iran.

"Lebanon is our friend," Vahidi was quoted as saying by the official IRNA news agency. "If there is a demand in this respect, we are ready to help that country and conduct weapons transactions with it."

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/08...ry-assistance/


Note:Published August 25, 2010

Why China and Israel should go to war is beyond me since both coutries are friendly.
Is there are a need to use nukes on Iran?
All Israel need is silent aproval of some nations to do it
Dont think anyone want to see Iran selling jihad throu third party organizations having nukes as insurence policy.

oh Israel stop trying to complain until everybody else does what you want.

the U.S has spoiled them too much by supporting them no matter what. If Iran wants Nulcear power, so be it. If its for nukes...we'll have to deal with it. But until then, innocent until proven guilty