Why does the US forbid Iran from developing nuclear weapons?

[Jhhnn]

No known open contract between the Saudi Arabians and Pakistan because obviously that would cause instant world protesting and UN sanctions. But as I understand it if the Saudi Arabians want nuclear weapons then all they have to do is ask the Pakistanis. Not sure where I read that but I would have to start searching for the article and that is not something I feel like putting lots of time on right now. Possibly was FP or some other world studies magazine.

We return to the absurdity of any nation giving away nuclear weapons.

Using that concept as the premise for anything is pure folly.

Yeh, sure, the AQ Khan network gave away technical information & even used centrifuges, but they didn't give away any nuclear weapons.

 

[Omar F1]

No known open contract between the Saudi Arabians and Pakistan because obviously that would cause instant world protesting and UN sanctions. But as I understand it if the Saudi Arabians want nuclear weapons then all they have to do is ask the Pakistanis. Not sure where I read that but I would have to start searching for the article and that is not something I feel like putting lots of time on right now. Possibly was FP or some other world studies magazine.

I read about that as well in local news so no need for another source, but it's just some talks and nothing has been determined as far as I know.


Btw, I read the Wiki article about P. Mishal in another thread. Never heard before about such problems to the mentioned degree in the article, also it didn't specify a timeframe for the events.
I'd try to get another opinion on the subject.

 

[michal1980]

Ok, then you can provide us with verifiable examples of 'liberals' showing support for Iran getting nuclear weapons.

You can, can't you? Especially examples of those 'liberals' who "are working day and night to give iran [sic] weapons?"

This threads question is exhibt Number 1

Exhibit 2 is all the reports coming out that Obama is caving to Iran.

 

[nickqt]

This threads question is exhibt Number 1

Exhibit 2 is all the reports coming out that Obama is caving to Iran.

Exhibit 3 is that whatever you say is true because you just done did said it!

Keep on keepin' on!

 

[Victorian Gray]

This threads question is exhibt Number 1

Exhibit 2 is all the reports coming out that Obama is caving to Iran.

As neither of your 'exhibits' actually answer my question, I repeat:

"Ok, then you can provide us with verifiable examples of 'liberals' showing support for Iran getting nuclear weapons.

You can, can't you? Especially examples of those 'liberals' who "are working day and night to give iran [sic] weapons?"

 

[Subyman]

Small minds discuss people

Average minds discuss events

Great minds discuss ideas

Small minds quote people. Your quote makes no sense in the current context either.

 

[nickqt]

As neither of your 'exhibits' actually answer my question, I repeat:

"Ok, then you can provide us with verifiable examples of 'liberals' showing support for Iran getting nuclear weapons.

You can, can't you? Especially examples of those 'liberals' who "are working day and night to give iran [sic] weapons?"

The libruuls that Ministers of Enlightenment Limbaugh and Hannity scream about are selling out real 'murricans every single moment of every single day.

Also: Benghazi.

 

[Victorian Gray]

The libruuls that Ministers of Enlightenment Limbaugh and Hannity scream about are selling out real 'murricans every single moment of every single day.

Also: Benghazi.

Just because he's dead doesn't mean you can make fun of his name.

 

[el padrino]

 

[soccerballtux]

Oops, no reading comprehension.

I don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons.

I think it is beyond reasonable to preclude any country from using nuclear power.

nobody is blocking them from it. They, just like anyone else that wants to, can purchase 20% uranium on the open market from any of 30 odd countries for use in their reactors.

 

[Jaskalas]

Obama is presiding over the start of a Middle East nuclear arms race.

KINGDOM EYES NUKES TO COUNTER IRAN

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Most nuclear reactors need a 3-5% concentration. Low grade nuclear weapons require 20%+. High grade nuclear weapons require 85%+.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium#Low-enriched_uranium_.28LEU.29

Is there really any doubt about Iran's intentions?

 

[Abwx]

Most nuclear reactors need a 3-5% concentration. Low grade nuclear weapons require 20%+. High grade nuclear weapons require 85%+.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium#Low-enriched_uranium_.28LEU.29

Is there really any doubt about Iran's intentions?

Therorical low grade weapon, an improbable weapon that would surely weight tons for an efficency comparable to the most primitive such devices, but i guess that you werent accurate for a reason, that is, to spread falsehood.

Highly enriched uranium (HEU) has a 20% or higher concentration of 235U. The fissile uranium in nuclear weapon primaries usually contains 85% or more of 235U known as weapon(s)-grade, though theoretically for an implosion design, a minimum of 20% could be sufficient (called weapon(s)-usable) although it would require hundreds of kilograms of material and "would not be practical to design"

You should read the articles you re linking....

Obama is presiding over the start of a Middle East nuclear arms race.

KINGDOM EYES NUKES TO COUNTER IRAN

Lol, the dark age kingdom wants to compare itself to the iranian excellency, in 100 years they didnt had as much genuine engineers as what Iran produce in a single year...

How could this retarded kingdom get any nuclear capacity above the one that is mining uranium minerals..?..

That s all talks and sabre rattling as aknowldgment of powerlessness, and to get the US being harsher in the current "negociations" with Iran..

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Therorical low grade weapon, an improbable weapon that would surely weight tons for an efficency comparable to the most primitive such devices, but i guess that you werent accurate for a reason, that is, to spread falsehood.

You should read the articles you re linking....

I linked the source as I don't have a lot of time to explain details to morons, especially those who are unable to grasp the simple point I was making.

 

[Jhhnn]

Most nuclear reactors need a 3-5% concentration. Low grade nuclear weapons require 20%+. High grade nuclear weapons require 85%+.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium#Low-enriched_uranium_.28LEU.29

Is there really any doubt about Iran's intentions?

Gawd. Weapons using 20% enriched uranium are utterly impractical.

The critical mass for lower-grade uranium depends strongly on the grade: with 20% U-235 it is over 400 kg; with 15% U-235, it is well over 600 kg.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass

Under IAEA supervision, Iran recently down blended what little 20% LEU they had manufactured-

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28397207

Their intentions? Figure it out.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Gawd. Weapons using 20% enriched uranium are utterly impractical.

I didn't say they were...are you fucking retarded?

 

[Jhhnn]

I didn't say they were...are you fucking retarded?

So you're just fear mongering about Iran's production of 20% LEU, or what?

Other than an accidental & embarrassing small batch overrun to something like 25% LEU, The IAEA says that Iran's production has not exceeded 20% yet you still go on about them making weapons?

Can you not see the contradiction in what you offer?

Is down blending their small stock of 20% not a sign of good faith?

 

[Ventanni]

Personally, I think the Iranian uranium enrichment issue has very much less to do with nuclear weapons than it does free oil on the market. Currently Iran uses a large percentage of the oil it produces for its national energy requirement. Offsetting that amount of oil with nuclear energy would greatly, and I mean greatly, increase its export revenues. And given both Saudi Arabia and Iran's animosity towards each other, you can see why Saudi Arabia and its allies do not want a richer (and therefore much stronger) Iran.

Purely political.

 

[soccerballtux]

Gawd. Weapons using 20% enriched uranium are utterly impractical.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass

Under IAEA supervision, Iran recently down blended what little 20% LEU they had manufactured-

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28397207

Their intentions? Figure it out.

their 16000+ gas centrifuges were arranged in a cascade for enriching to 80%+

allowance for completely random IAEA visits is all I want to make sure they're not going to 80%.

 

[soccerballtux]

So you're just fear mongering about Iran's production of 20% LEU, or what?

Other than an accidental & embarrassing small batch overrun to something like 25% LEU, The IAEA says that Iran's production has not exceeded 20% yet you still go on about them making weapons?

Can you not see the contradiction in what you offer?

Is down blending their small stock of 20% not a sign of good faith?

I wanna see proof of this but down-blending is good faith.

I would still be skeptical that they havent just wisked it away to hide somewhere.

 

[soccerballtux]

Personally, I think the Iranian uranium enrichment issue has very much less to do with nuclear weapons than it does free oil on the market. Currently Iran uses a large percentage of the oil it produces for its national energy requirement. Offsetting that amount of oil with nuclear energy would greatly, and I mean greatly, increase its export revenues. And given both Saudi Arabia and Iran's animosity towards each other, you can see why Saudi Arabia and its allies do not want a richer (and therefore much stronger) Iran.

Purely political.

because the market for oil is soooooo lucrative

 

[Jhhnn]

their 16000+ gas centrifuges were arranged in a cascade for enriching to 80%+

allowance for completely random IAEA visits is all I want to make sure they're not going to 80%.

Mere assertion, contrary to information provided by the IAEA.

 

[Abwx]

I linked the source as I don't have a lot of time to explain details to morons, especially those who are unable to grasp the simple point I was making.

Sure that taking more time would had rendered your fear mongering totaly innfeffective, instead you relied to a half lie possible only with cherry picked and willfully discriminated information...

Next time you get to the bank to deposit some money tell them that it will be enough to write 10 on the books for the 10 000$ you deposited...

Anyway i like the "moron" coming from an obvious troll, it s like being accurate is impossible for a conservative (indeed quarter) brain, hence the insult as a smoke screen for the poor intellect.

 

[Abwx]

Personally, I think the Iranian uranium enrichment issue has very much less to do with nuclear weapons than it does free oil on the market. Currently Iran uses a large percentage of the oil it produces for its national energy requirement. Offsetting that amount of oil with nuclear energy would greatly, and I mean greatly, increase its export revenues. And given both Saudi Arabia and Iran's animosity towards each other, you can see why Saudi Arabia and its allies do not want a richer (and therefore much stronger) Iran.

Purely political.

Purely political is right but not the strategy, wich is keep thoses countries underdevelopped so they are forced to sell their oil at dirt cheap price, actualy at Coca Cola price, that is, at he same price as mineral waters.

Think about it, here in France we have roughly 75% of electricity supplied by nuclear plants, yet all thoses nuclear plants annual production would be barely enough to supply the energy needed for our cars and trucks for a straight two months.

 

[Jaskalas]

Iranian defector: The US negotiating team are mainly there to speak on Iran’s behalf.

Seems the deal struck between Obama and Iran needs to be sold to the world.
If the Saudis are willing to enter a nuclear arms race, you know people have to be panicked about what we are committing to enable.