... with uranium enrichment.

As can be expected, the Big 3 & US are up in arms. Even Russia is critizing the announcement (wtf did they expect). Israel is very concerned, as they like their spot on the map.

So Iran is another step closer to announcing, "Yeah, about that 'Peaceful Use' stuff... We lied."

Clearly Iran can not be allowed to go very much further with this.

pick your source

I heard about this on the radio tonight. They interviewed a guy from the Australian nuclear body (I forget the acronym, sorry) and he said that the speech was more politics than an accurate reflection of where Iran is at with regards to producing a nuclear weapon at the moment. In order to produce a nuclear bomb you need thousands of centrifuges (I believe he said up to 50,000) and Iran is only known to have 164. The plutonium has to be of a certain "grade" (I believe he said 90% refined) and Iran is still a long way from acquiring this (3.5% refined from memory?).

I'll see if I can find some links that back up what I'm saying, but I don't think this is anything to get too worried about just yet...

EDIT: Close enough.

quote:

"Iran said it had become a nuclear power like other countries pursuing peaceful nuclear programs," said Mikhailov, who heads the Strategic Stability Institute think tank. "Indeed, uranium enrichment at 3.5% is a medium used in fuel rods at nuclear power plants." The enrichment level announced by Ahmadinejad falls far short of weapons-grade material, which needs at least 80% enrichment, Mikhailov said, adding that Iran should take a realistic view, given its current enrichment capacities.

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20060412/45719776.html

quote:

The IAEA found Iran had probably carried out test enrichments of uranium with its centrifuges long before this. • A claim of 3.5% enrichment is not much of an achievement if true. • There is no clear evidence that Iran has brought the limited 164 centrifuge chain at Natanz on-line in any kind of sustained operation. A one shot, limited output test has little meaning. • These are old P-1 centrifuges. It takes thousands operating continuously for a year to have major output and 10,000s to get seriously into the weapons grade production.

http://abcnews.go.com/International...=1833030&page=1

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

Last edited by Renegade on Apr-12-2006 at 10:07

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade and Iran is only known to have 164. The plutonium has to be of a certain "grade" (I believe he said 90% refined) and Iran is still a long way from acquiring this (3.5% refined from memory?).

coulda swore i read somewhere they were in possesion of more centrifuges than that. i'll look.

a "long way" on the atomic scale is "relative"...get it? dumb. anyway this should shorten the timeline for everyone a bit.

quote:

September, 1944 - * At this point K-25 is half built, but no usable diffusion barriers have been produced. The Y-12 plant is operating at only 0.05% efficiency. The total production of highly enriched uranium to date is a few grams. December, 1944 - * Y-12 output climbs to 90 grams of highly enriched uranium a day. August 6, 1945 - * 0916:02 (8:16:02 Hiroshima time) - Little Boy explodes at an altitude of 1850 feet, 550 feet from the aim point, the Aioi Bridge, with a yield of 12.5-18 kt (best estimate is 15 kt). http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq10.html

that was when the technology didn't even exist just shortly before the next crucial steps needed to be completed to the end we are all familiar with.

according to the archive, the first "racetrack", Y-12 consisted of "96 units" (centrifuges) when started in OCT '43 but had trouble with the magnets. however, a year later it's pumping out 90g a day. only 40kg is needed to yield a 15kt device.

Last edited by Q5echo on Apr-12-2006 at 10:56

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo coulda swore i read somewhere they were in possesion of more centrifuges than that. i'll look.

According to this they only have 164 and it would take them two decades to produce a bomb with that many:

quote:

It would take Iran about two decades to yield enough highly enriched uranium for one bomb with its current cascade of 164 centrifuges. But Tehran says it wants to install 3,000 centrifuges, enough to produce material for a warhead in a year.

http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/intern...y=1144805877000

More technically:

quote:

An implosion weapon using U235 would require about 20 kg of 90% U235. Roughly 176 kg of natural uranium would be required per kg of HEU product, and about 230 SWU per kg of HEU, thus requiring a total of about 4,600 SWU per weapon. To enrich natural uranium for one gun-type uranium bomb would requires roughly 14,000 SWUs. Thus, producing one HEU weapon in a year would require between 1,100 to perhaps 3,500 centrifuges.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/i...-centrifuge.htm

quote:

a "long way" on the atomic scale is "relative"...get it?

I'm struggling to find information about how accessible these additional centrifuges that Iran wants to build would be in terms of cost or technological know-how (Iran may not be able to afford to, or know how to, build these additional centrifuges) but until they are built, or it seems that they are close to being built, the issue isn't urgent in the sense that Iran is currently on the brink of "getting the bomb". By any definition, Iran is still a fair way from producing even a single nuclear bomb, let alone an entire nuclear arsenal.

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

yeah, ive read the same; that they have far fewer (known) centrifuges than is necessary to make a bomb any time soon.

however, if everything is so honest and forthright, whats with how they are going about it all? theyre thumbing their nose at the international community and i cant see for what reason?? if things were a bit more open, honest & transparent, id be worried a lot less.

but the anti-semitic commentary from the president as well as his contention that israel should be wiped off the map isnt cool in my books. sure, he might just be full of hot air but its still not helpful on the international stage.

anywayz, heres a link from an article i found really quite interesting.


from the new yorker

(i have no idea about the quality of the paper nor the journalist, i just took the arguments at face value)

___________________

they are far from a nuke... but the mainstream and administration would like to scare the shit outa everyone and get higher news rate etc. "we gota get them now!" bull shit as usual

quote:

Originally posted by dcougar99 they are far from a nuke... but the mainstream and administration would like to scare the shit outa everyone and get higher news rate etc. "we gota get them now!" bull shit as usual

+1

Iam glad that they can now finally bring electricity to millions of people that go through constant blackouts daily.
Media and the white house is trying to hype all this for another war.

___________________
Mystic Mind - DJ Mixes
http://soundcloud.com/mystic-mind

Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/DJMysticMind

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer +1 Iam glad that they can now finally bring electricity to millions of people that go through constant blackouts daily. Media and the white house is trying to hype all this for another war.

you make me laugh, thanks

___________________
Vernato

quote:

Originally posted by Kapedan you make me laugh, thanks

As I said in this thread:

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...threadid=321913

It seems 'lol' is your only defense.

Forgive my ignorance regarding this matter, but why shouldn't Iran be allowed nuclear technology? Or a nuclear bomb for that matter?

India, Pakistan, North Korea all recently produced their own nukes and we didn't hear nearly as much "evil empire" BS from the media.

US, UK, Israel all have nukes. I mean, Iraq just got invaded for nothing and now the US is setting up military bases there. If I were Iran, I'd be developing a nuke as fast as possible.

So lets say Iran gets a nuke. It would only guarantee that they don't get invaded. Do you really think they would use it to strike Israel or the US? Come on . Doing so would pretty much guarantee their destruction.

So, worst case scenario, Iran develops nuclear weapons and no one can invade/attack them. So what?

quote:

Originally posted by tranceNlife As I said in this thread: http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...threadid=321913 It seems 'lol' is your only defense.

your an idiot purple, i wasnt defending myself, i was just laughing at the statement, so stfu idiot.

___________________
Vernato

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer +1 Iam glad that they can now finally bring electricity to millions of people that go through constant blackouts daily. Media and the white house is trying to hype all this for another war.

Yep, good for Iran. I just hope Bush doenst make up some BS evidence that Iran has a nuke or some shit like that to go to war.

___________________
. . .. . .. . . . .. . .