Is War With Iran Necessary?

[Skybird]

http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/m...564654,00.html

Als ob die internationalen Atom-Kontrolleure nicht schon genug Sorgen hätten, kommt nun die überall beschworene Renaissance des Atomstroms hinzu. Und die dürfte, sollte sie tatsächlich stattfinden, die Gefahr einer nuklearen Katastrophe noch verschärfen. Denn eine massive Ausweitung der Kernkraft-Nutzung würde bedeuten, dass eine große Zahl neuer Reaktoren nicht nur in demokratisch regierten Industriestaaten, sondern auch in Drittwelt- und Schwellenländern entstünde.

"Das setzt einen enormen Transfer von Material und Know-how voraus", sagt John Large, einer der führenden Atomenergie-Experten Großbritanniens, im Gespräch mit SPIEGEL ONLINE. "Dieses Wissen könnte später auch für ein mögliches Waffenprogramm genutzt werden."
Das Problem sei, dass man unmöglich wissen könne, wie sich die politische Lage in heutigen Schwellenländern entwickelt. "Jedes zivile Nuklearprogramm eignet sich per se dazu, ein Waffenprogramm zu verbergen", erklärt Large. "In vielen Bereichen ist die militärische von der zivilen Nutzung kaum zu unterscheiden." Spätestens seit dem Fall Khan gebe es einen internationalen Schwarzmarkt für Nukleartechnologie. "Zusammen mit der Verbreitung von Know-how ist das eine gefährliche Mischung."

Or in summary: you cannot separate the civilian and the military use of nuclear technology.

[PeriscopeDepth]

I know, I am a whore for this blog. But I think it's very well done.

Things aren't lookin' good :
http://informationdissemination.blog...r-part-ii.html

PD

[Tchocky]

Question - Would the use of American nuclear bombs of Iranian soil guarantee a nuclear reprisal by a non-state group?

Seems like using nukes to knock out nukes both legitimises the use of nuclear weapons and invites responding attacks.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Question - Would the use of American nuclear bombs of Iranian soil guarantee a nuclear reprisal by a non-state group?

Seems like using nukes to knock out nukes both legitimises the use of nuclear weapons and invites responding attacks.

Would you happen to know of any non state groups that have access to nuclear weapons for sure?

And I don't think we'll be nuking Iran, anywho.

PD

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by PeriscopeDepth

Would you happen to know of any non state groups that have access to nuclear weapons for sure?

Not at all, but I think a nuclear strike would act as an incentive to get one.

This is irrespective of the likelihood of nuclear release, the idea just occurred to me.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Not at all, but I think a nuclear strike would act as an incentive to get one.

This is irrespective of the likelihood of nuclear release, the idea just occurred to me.

I dunno. I've always thought if it's something that groups who would actually use them (AQ type groups who've ALWAYS had an incentive to use them) could get, they'd have it by now with all that money and cunning. Perhaps the bombing of Iran would give certain states incentives to get these groups nukes to use as proxies? Is that what you're saying?

PD

[Subnuts]

Persian Gulf naval confrontation?
International sabre-rattling?
Invasion of Iran?
Possible use of nuclear weapons?

Oh poopie pants, I've seen this somewhere before. What is this reminding me of...?

http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0090163/

Oh crap.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Question - Would the use of American nuclear bombs of Iranian soil guarantee a nuclear reprisal by a non-state group?

Counterquestion: can one safely assume that terrorists - whose declared intention is to terrorise and cause shock and awe - would not use nukes, if they get access to them? Terrorists have no nation they stand for, so they do not care for retaliation against such nations. If they are relgious nutheads, they even accept the martyr death of people of the faith they claim to act for. Trust in such people, counting on their reason, negotiating and having treaties with them? Yes - but only it that helps to kill them. Every trick and every lie is acceptable that helps to kill them and prevent them from committing mass murder.

I do not believe that anyone has the courage and cold unscrupelousness to use nukes selectively to take out key components of the Iranian program, and that is why I think that the West will ultimately fail on Iran. The success of a cinventional strike by the Israelis is hgighly quesitonable, at best, and some of their analysts said that themselves. This is not osiriak - this is mutliple times as difficult, and much bigger in scale. I know that with every state gaining access to nuclear technology, the risk that we see nukes being used in the future, by terrorists, and then by nations, becomes greater. You cannot really separate civilian use from milurtry use of nuclear technology. the more nations use civilian nuclear energy, the smaller the line becomes we walk on. I fear that before the end of ma natural lifetime we will see nukes being used. and then we will curse ourselves that we did not act with determination to prevent the spreading of nuclear technology at all costs. Not only does nuclear technology by far not solve climate issues, and does not do much in lowering energy costs (all that is myths if you only look beyond the aparrently obvious arguments that are not so solid at all, and check the rat-tail of additonal background conditions) - it's spreading and current revival is an invitation for nuclear terror, and later nuclear wars. the more nuke tech there is, the more countries are possessing it or having acces to it, the smaller the basis for our luck becomes. It is only a question of time then before we run out of luck.

Is that what our policies come down to: hoping that we will be lucky...?

I see the threat of nuclear technology today multiple times as dangerous as just some years ago. just two years ago I wrote in one of the first threats we had on Iran that "the use of nukes in any conflict with Iran is totally unacceptable". Yes, in more or less these words that was said by me. You see, the more I thought about the issues, Iran and civilian use nuclear technology as well, the more I saw myself in need to change my mind. The resulting conclusions are not that scenario I want the world to be. But what I want the world to be, and what the world really is - are two totally different things, unfortunately, and wishful thinking or hopes and prayers will not help anybody for better or worse. The world is just what it is, and that is the one world we have to deal with in this life. Another one we will not be given. maybe when we die, but that is worth a discussion in a separate threat.