Scott Walker would undo any nuclear agreement with Iran not knowing what's in it.

[sandorski]

Where are you getting your information? They aren't stopping at 20%...they have 9000 centrifuges spinning as we speak. At their current rate, they'll have enough 90% uranium for a nuclear bomb in less than 2 years.

http://www.iranwatch.org/our-publications/articles-reports/irans-nuclear-timetable

Other estimates claimed the middle of last year. So it seems these estimates are rather open to interpretation.

I have noticed an error in my previous post, using Pounds instead of kilograms.

 

[Jhhnn]

If there is a condition on what is or is not in the deal for whether you would disown the deal or not, then the decision is based on knowing what's in the deal. This thread title incorrectly states otherwise.

Dancing on the head of a rhetorical pin.

*If* an agreement is reached, it *will* include enrichment, therefore Walker would disown it. Otherwise, Iran simply won't agree.

This stuff isn't hard. Your technically correct comment is mere distraction.

 

[Jhhnn]

Where are you getting your information? They aren't stopping at 20%...they have 9000 centrifuges spinning as we speak. At their current rate, they'll have enough 90% uranium for a nuclear bomb in less than 2 years.

http://www.iranwatch.org/our-publications/articles-reports/irans-nuclear-timetable

False. Iran's production is monitored by the IAEA & does not exceed generally accepted standards for LEU. Reconfigured, those centrifuges could produce HEU for weapons, but that's not what the IAEA says is happening.

 

[michal1980]

The only way to stop an Iranian Nuclear Weapons Program, is war. Invade and destroy. Sticking our tongues out at them isn't going to accomplish anything.

Anyone that does not stand with Obama for making nice with the Iranians, is instead standing for WAR to stop nuclear proliferation. Cut the BS and draw the lines in the sand, we need to know where people and the politicians we elect stand on this issue.

Do we fight to kill Iranian Nukes?

Nice strawman Obama.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

False. Iran's production is monitored by the IAEA & does not exceed generally accepted standards for LEU. Reconfigured, those centrifuges could produce HEU for weapons, but that's not what the IAEA says is happening.

Source?

 

[cubby1223]

False. Iran's production is monitored by the IAEA & does not exceed generally accepted standards for LEU. Reconfigured, those centrifuges could produce HEU for weapons, but that's not what the IAEA says is happening.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...57b24a-d23d-11e4-8fce-3941fc548f1c_story.html
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles...ation-cant-verify-irans-past-nuclear-activity
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/06/w...-all-nuclear-concerns-un-says.html?ref=topics
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/01/w...-silent-on-efforts-for-a-bomb.html?ref=topics

And just in case those articles above about IAEA's successes monitoring Iran are from sources too right-wing for this forum:
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/statements/statement-carnegie-endowment-international-peace

But we are still not in a position to conclude that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities.

 

[Jhhnn]

Source?

Obviously, the US would be screaming bloody murder if the IAEA reported production of HEU. They have not.

Their centrifuges are not configured for HEU production-

The difference between a military and a civilian enrichment plant is just how the machines are piped together in cascades. This means that a fuel plant could quickly be converted into a weapon plant. Moreover, if the starting material for a bomb program were not natural uranium, but fuel-grade uranium that has been stockpiled, then the time to further enrich the uranium to bomb-grade would be reduced by more than 65 percent.

https://fas.org/issues/nonprolifera...ogy/centrifuges-nuclear-weapon-proliferation/

The IAEA has sealed cameras & ultra sensitive sniffers all over Iranian production facilities. They can differentiate microscopic particles of LEU from HEU. 100% containment of enriched uranium is impossible, apparently. That's fairly common knowledge among people who have any business talking about the subject.

 

[Jhhnn]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...57b24a-d23d-11e4-8fce-3941fc548f1c_story.html
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles...ation-cant-verify-irans-past-nuclear-activity
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/06/w...-all-nuclear-concerns-un-says.html?ref=topics
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/01/w...-silent-on-efforts-for-a-bomb.html?ref=topics

Kee-rist. That's all immaterial to the production of weapons grade material.

No weapons grade material, no weapons. The rest is immaterial.

It's a no-brainer.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Kee-rist. That's all immaterial to the production of weapons grade material.

No weapons grade material, no weapons. The rest is immaterial.

It's a no-brainer.

No brainer is right! You're an idiot.

 

[MongGrel]

Nice strawman Obama.

Nice strawman michael1980.

If you can't do better than that, why not STFU.

No brainer is right! You're an idiot.

You're as bad, more like worse.

Knee jerk twit.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

You're as bad, more like worse.

Knee jerk twit.

You're cut from the same cloth it seems. He's a big boy, and he certainly doesn't need a dimwit like you to defend him.

 

[Jhhnn]

No brainer is right! You're an idiot.

Explain how nuclear weapons can exist without weapons grade material.

Honestly. Cast whatever aspersions you want on Iranian intentions because that's entirely secondary to the core issue of weapons grade material production. It doesn't matter what they "want" or what sort of research they may have done in the past if they cannot produce HEU in an undetected fashion. Hence continuous IAEA monitoring.

If you can't address that argument, you don't have one of your own.

 

[cubby1223]

Kee-rist. That's all immaterial to the production of weapons grade material.

No weapons grade material, no weapons. The rest is immaterial.

It's a no-brainer.

You said:

False. Iran's production is monitored by the IAEA & does not exceed generally accepted standards for LEU. Reconfigured, those centrifuges could produce HEU for weapons, but that's not what the IAEA says is happening.

Which is clearly not true. You should modify your comment to say the portion of the production IAEA has access to is not developing towards weapons grade uranium. My links clearly state there is an unknown quantity involved. The IAEA openly admits they are not monitoring the full range of Iran's nuclear programs. I even added the link directly to IAEA where they state they do not know Iran's full intentions. Yet you claim otherwise. If we're going to make claims as to what IAEA says is happening, let's just go straight to the source themselves.

 

[Zorkorist]

Explain how nuclear weapons can exist without weapons grade material.

Honestly. Cast whatever aspersions you want on Iranian intentions because that's entirely secondary to the core issue of weapons grade material production. It doesn't matter what they "want" or what sort of research they may have done in the past if they cannot produce HEU in an undetected fashion. Hence continuous IAEA monitoring.

If you can't address that argument, you don't have one of your own.

You've got a nuclear engineering degree, and know exactly what is easy or hard to make about a nuclear bomb, eh, Jhhnn?

You're fucking Heisenberg?!

-John

 

[Jhhnn]

You said:



Which is clearly not true. You should modify your comment to say the portion of the production IAEA has access to is not developing towards weapons grade uranium. My links clearly state there is an unknown quantity involved. The IAEA openly admits they are not monitoring the full range of Iran's nuclear programs. I even added the link directly to IAEA where they state they do not know Iran's full intentions. Yet you claim otherwise. If we're going to make claims as to what IAEA says is happening, let's just go straight to the source themselves.

The IAEA has not claimed that the sites Iran keeps secret are production facilities at all, but rather may have been used in the past for weapons related research.

There's a huge difference. If you can't address the issue of how to produce nuclear weapons w/o weapons grade material you have no argument. That's the basis for IAEA monitoring of nuclear facilities all over the world.

 

[touchstone]

Lol the ignorance in this thread. NUCLEAR ENERGY IN A BOMB IS CREATED USING A FISSION PRIMARY AND SOMETIMES FUSION SECONDARY. FISSION IS DEFINED AS A SELF-SUSTAINING CHAIN REACTION OF SPLITTING ATOMS. A MATERIAL THAT CAN UNDERGO FISSION IS CALLED 'FISSILE'. IN ORDER FOR FOR A MATERIAL TO BE DEFINED AS 'FISSILE' IT MUST HAVE ABOVE A CERTAIN CONCENTRATION OF FISSILE MATERIAL. THE CONCENTRATION AT WHICH A MATERIAL BECOMES FISSILE TO THE EXTENT WHERE IT CAN PRODUCE A CHAIN REACTION RESULTING IN AN EXPLOSION IS WHAT IS TERMED 'WEAPONS GRADE'. IF IT IS UNDER WEAPONS-GRADE IT CANNOT BE USED TO MAKE A BOMB. IT IS LITERALLY THE ONE THING YOU NEED TO MAKE A BOMB, WITHOUT IT YOU ARE SCREWED.


Hopefully this can clear up some of your 'conservative' blathering idiocy. The conceptual science is pretty simple to understand, its only when you get down to the actual mathematics that it becomes difficult.

 

[Jhhnn]

You've got a nuclear engineering degree, and know exactly what is easy or hard to make about a nuclear bomb, eh, Jhhnn?

You're fucking Heisenberg?!

-John

I just know how to read. If you can explain how to make nuclear weapons w/o weapons grade material it'll be the Nobel Peace Prize in physics for you, so have at it.

 

[michal1980]

Nice strawman michael1980.

If you can't do better than that, why not STFU.



You're as bad, more like worse.

Knee jerk twit.

You're the idiot that thinks the only options are to allow Iran nuclear weapons or to bomb them.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Explain how nuclear weapons can exist without weapons grade material.

Honestly. Cast whatever aspersions you want on Iranian intentions because that's entirely secondary to the core issue of weapons grade material production. It doesn't matter what they "want" or what sort of research they may have done in the past if they cannot produce HEU in an undetected fashion. Hence continuous IAEA monitoring.

If you can't address that argument, you don't have one of your own.

Wow...the dementia is really, really strong with you. I NEVER said that nuclear weapons can exist without weapons grade material. I don't know what your problem is...but it appears to be quite serious.

 

[Jhhnn]

Wow...the dementia is really, really strong with you. I NEVER said that nuclear weapons can exist without weapons grade material. I don't know what your problem is...but it appears to be quite serious.

Of course you haven't. You just argue away from that absolutely central point into side issues that are largely immaterial in relationship to the future.

Why wouldn't we want an agreement that addresses the heart of the matter, prevents Iran from creating weapons grade material?

Why would that not be enough?

 

[sportage]

To me it doesn't matter what he or the like, i.e. republican candidate hopefulls, say or believe. For one, they all play to their base. Second, none of them actually know what is is to be president. Nor, could most of them last one single day in that job.
"Day one"? Yeah right. Famous last words.
Just a ploy to stir up the idiots that believe such nonsense.

No, none of that static means a hell of a lot to most people.

What I want to know is, how does the 2016 democratic team of Hillary Clinton/Elizabeth Warren sound?
Can you imagine?
Hillary attacking from the social issue side, and Warren from the economic injustice side.
I'm reminded of those old Batman cartoons.
I can just see the Clinton/Warren action bubbles, BING, BAM, BOOM. Knockout.

 

[Jaskalas]

Why wouldn't we want an agreement that addresses the heart of the matter, prevents Iran from creating weapons grade material?

Why would that not be enough?

Any agreement is simply not enforceable. If you're not willing to go to war to stop nuclear proliferation today, why should I believe you'll change your mind later? The consequence of them choosing the one year "breakout" option is that we'll wag our fingers at them and welcome them to the nuclear table.

 

[Jhhnn]

Any agreement is simply not enforceable. If you're not willing to go to war to stop nuclear proliferation today, why should I believe you'll change your mind later? The consequence of them choosing the one year "breakout" option is that we'll wag our fingers at them and welcome them to the nuclear table.

The current situation is no more enforceable, either- actually less.

It's reasonably clear that Iran is not producing weapons grade material which realistically leaves us w/o cause for military action. It's in our interests to provide them with no reason to do so, which is the whole point of any agreement.

Slice it, dice it, spin it any way you want, even fly it to the moon on a pogo stick- that's the truth of the matter.

 

[Jaskalas]

The current situation is no more enforceable, either- actually less.

Hence my earlier statement to follow Obama's plan, or go to war.

Scott Walker's comments would leave us with the current situation. I do not want the current situation.

 

[Jhhnn]

Hence my earlier statement to follow Obama's plan, or go to war.

Scott Walker's comments would leave us with the current situation. I do not want the current situation.

I want war even less. The consequences of war with Iran are incalculable, even though we still suffer from Neocon delusions of world hegemony through military means.

The reason that Iran's hardliners still have power is the same reason our own still hold sway- they exploit external threats, both real & imagined. We get the crazy Mullahs routine, they get the Great Satan. If anything, their paranoia is a lot more justified than our own, their actions a lot more rational than their detractors will admit.

Freed of the propaganda around external threats, I doubt that Iranians will put up with some of the more repressive aspects of their govt for long. They have democratic institutions & a society that can evolve in the same direction as our own given the opportunity.

If we really want regime change in Iran, we need to accept the idea that the only way that will happen is from the inside & that our ongoing hostility only prevents that.