Iran nuclear threat not imminent

[Lemon law]

According to this NYT link, Obama has persuaded Israel that Iran is at least a year from building a Bomb.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/20/world/middleeast/20policy.html?ref=middleeast

Actually I have considered the dash to a Uranium bombs theory absurd, because what good would it do Iran to divert all of its Uranium enriching capacity to building just one bomb U235 based bomb? With the second taking another one to two more years. Especially when Israel has 80 or more ready to go.

When fueling nuclear reactors instead would build up a larger potential Plutonium based bomb arsenal , would be not yield any bombs in the two or three year short range, but COULD possibly lead to a large Iranian arsenal in the 2025 time frame. And that even assumes Iran has any plans to go the bomb route later, a cross roads Iran has not yet reached.

Hopefully at least this development will slow down the bomb Iran crazies.

 

[DesiPower]

you realize you are talking about a leader you wants to debate other world leaders "man-to-man" on live TV? He will do it just for the lulz

 

[StageLeft]

what good would it do Iran to divert all of its Uranium enriching capacity to building just one bomb U235 based bomb?

What good has the bomb done NK? Cemented its position, as it would for Iran, and vastly up the ante if anybody decided to attack them.

I'm sure they are a way off, though, and when they have the bomb I'm also sure they'll do nothing with it. There is no sane motivation to use it or sell it and I don't believe it will happen.

I am sure Iran wants a nuclear bomb. It makes perfect sense, but no reason to think they want one to use it immediately, or ever, it's merely a threat as it is for most nations.

 

[Sinsear]

HAHAHAHHAHA!!!



LemonLaw tells another joke.

 

[Lemon law]

Since Israel has been jumping up and down, bitching and moaning, that Iran would have a bomb any minute for like six years running, it sorta means GWB is not the only little boy to cry wolf.

 

[chucky2]

A year, two, five, or twenty...it's the same situation as Iraq basically. Given the F'd up ness of those who control Iran, is it in our interests to do anything short of all out war to prevent them from acquiring nuclear weapons?

Those who say No, when Iran goes aggressive on policy and there is no check as they're nuclear, is your plan to hope the world is off ME oil by then?

Unfortunately the ME has not evolved at the pace of the West...had they, we'd likely have zero problem with any of them being nuclear, but unfortunately, they haven't.

Chuck

 

[nick1985]

Lemon law, if Iran shot an unprovoked nuke into Israel, would you support an Israeli retaliation?

 

[Lemon law]

Lemon law, if Iran shot an unprovoked nuke into Israel, would you support an Israeli retaliation?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes.

But not until Iran did that stupidity. And not before.

 

[ElFenix]

Actually I have considered the dash to a Uranium bombs theory absurd, because what good would it do Iran to divert all of its Uranium enriching capacity to building just one bomb U235 based bomb? With the second taking another one to two more years. Especially when Israel has 80 or more ready to go.

because one is all you need to practically guarantee your survival.

 

[Lemon law]

because one is all you need to practically guarantee your survival.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sadly it ain't working for North Korea or Pakistan. But then again, I have lived under the threat of MAD all my life. Its kept both sides rational. What is so wrong with Israel being rational for a change?