- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Why is it so hard to believe Iran is close to a nuke?
Posted on 6/17/25 at 5:02 am
Posted on 6/17/25 at 5:02 am
I'll preface this by saying I don't know how to build a nuke but...
The how has been known for a long time...it's not really a secret. Any secrets to it have probably been given to Iran by Russia, China or the North Koreans.
It seems the hardest part is getting enough enriched uranium. Iran has been enriching it for about 20-25 years in one manner or the other. It has had setbacks:
I remember Stuxnet.
There is little commercial use for highly enriched uranium so why else have they been doing it?
So is it really that big of a logical leap to think they are close?
The how has been known for a long time...it's not really a secret. Any secrets to it have probably been given to Iran by Russia, China or the North Koreans.
It seems the hardest part is getting enough enriched uranium. Iran has been enriching it for about 20-25 years in one manner or the other. It has had setbacks:
quote:
Israel has repeatedly taken actions to slow Iran's nuclear program, primarily through covert operations and strikes on key infrastructure. These actions have included cyberattacks like Stuxnet, attacks on nuclear facilities, and assassinations of key Iranian scientists. While these efforts have caused delays and setbacks
I remember Stuxnet.
There is little commercial use for highly enriched uranium so why else have they been doing it?
So is it really that big of a logical leap to think they are close?
18
Posted on 6/17/25 at 5:05 am to DMAN1968
Muslim loving Obama wanted this.
Posted on 6/17/25 at 5:07 am to DMAN1968
Why is it hard to believe we’re being bullshitted yet again ?
Posted on 6/17/25 at 5:08 am to DMAN1968
Weapons of mass destruction.
Posted on 6/17/25 at 5:12 am to DMAN1968
Iranian children in this country only lack fissionable materials for garage/suitcase nukes, it's been common knowledge since the 80's. Last one was a few years ago outside St. Louis. Little Persian kid with a garage setup for a kiloton or so bomb, just lacked the really controlled stuff.
Just and innocent kid is all
Just and innocent kid is all
Posted on 6/17/25 at 5:12 am to DMAN1968
How close is close?
Posted on 6/17/25 at 5:16 am to DMAN1968
I don't know how Pakistan and India both got one.
But you can bet that Russia or China probably slipped one to Iran, since US backed Israel has one.
But you can bet that Russia or China probably slipped one to Iran, since US backed Israel has one.
Posted on 6/17/25 at 5:32 am to DMAN1968
quote:
It seems the hardest part is getting enough enriched uranium.
quote:dassit.
There is little commercial use for highly enriched uranium so why else have they been doing it?
There's a lot that goes into a nuke. Fact of the matter is, unlike NKO Iran doesn't even have to have a delivery system to achieve what they want to achieve.
But one thing you absolutely have to have for a nuke is fissable material. You don't even need that for nuclear power. There's only one use, and it is absolutely necessary for that one use.
My personal opinion, opinion only, is they have been centrifuging long enough at above 60% to stash a small amount of fissable material to make a small amount of shitty low-yield nuke bombs. Which if true, that's going to be hard to locate and destroy. But, you have to take out the centrifuges anyway to prevent that small amount of 60% enriched from becoming a larger amount or even a small amount of 90%.
The stashed amount leads us to the linked 'regime change' and where the problems really start...
A) we're going to want that stash turned over by the new regime just in case.
B) My theory on why there hasn't been much opposition within the elite is because they want that nuke too. Why? see next...
C) Any new regime is going to face opposition from China and Russia. They will be under constant pressure and a funded opposition from inside from the get go. The new regime's best guarantee is also having the bomb.
For a benchmark regarding enrichment the first uranium bomb dropped on Nagasaki was 81% U-235 at about 64 kg. Weapons grade is considered 90%. But that's obviously not true based on Nagasaki; it's just not optimal.
That leaves us with a couple of questions. One we know for sure. The other not so much.
1. Can a chain reaction be made with a sufficient amount of 60% U-235 isotopes? YES. This is known. It would be shitty low-yield, but a nuclear explosion nonetheless.
2. How much 60% U-235 does Iran have (the stash I'm guessing). IAEA estimates 408 kg. Which is way too much for a delivery vehicle such as ballistics. Not too much for the back of Toyota Hilux though.
Posted on 6/17/25 at 5:34 am to prouddawg
quote:
Why is it hard to believe we’re being bullshitted yet again ?
Doesn't really make sense.
The MIC will be making money hand over fist just off the Ukraine/Russia crap for years. We aren't going to put any boots on the ground so we won't be "winning" anything physically tangible.
Posted on 6/17/25 at 5:36 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
How close is close?
60% enrichment...90% needed for a weapon.
If what is being said is true.
I don't know how long the process actually takes.
Posted on 6/17/25 at 6:03 am to WWII Collector
quote:
I don't know how Pakistan and India both got one.
India got theirs by hoodwinking Canada. The Canadians sent them a reactor for "research purposes." Within a few years the Indians had extracted the plutonium and built a bomb. If you have a reactor you can skip the uranium enrichment step (the hardest part). If you can get at plutonium, it doesn't need enriching.
Pakistan didn't like this, so they started their own program. If I recall, they did it the hard way from scratch since they didn't have any energy reactors that gave them a shortcut.
Posted on 6/17/25 at 6:17 am to AUstar
quote:fissable plutonium (P-239), which the Indians use, results from using Uranium in reactors. So yes, that's how they skipped their enrichment process. It still requires centrifuging of first the Uranium, but only to about 5% and then of the resulting fuel to extract the P-239.
India got theirs by hoodwinking Canada. The Canadians sent them a reactor for "research purposes." Within a few years the Indians had extracted the plutonium and built a bomb. If you have a reactor you can skip the uranium enrichment step (the hardest part). If you can get at plutonium, it doesn't need enriching.
Pakistan didn't like this, so they started their own program. If I recall, they did it the hard way from scratch since they didn't have any energy reactors that gave them a shortcut.
If you have 5% U-235 (what Iran has at 60%) you have 95% U-238. Exposing the U-238 to the controlled reaction in a nuclear reactor produces the P-239.
So while the centrifuging required to get that P-239 is much faster than the time it takes to make the P-239 in the first place.... unless you put a mass quantity in a reactor and put the reaction to the limit bombarding the U-238 like a mofo. Which is how the Indians tricked the Canadians that you referred to.
Posted on 6/17/25 at 6:19 am to DMAN1968
Iran has been close to getting a nuke since the 80s
Posted on 6/17/25 at 6:21 am to DMAN1968
I think it’s a fool me once scenario.
Most of us on this board are old enough to remember the WMD from Iraq.
Most of us on this board are old enough to remember the WMD from Iraq.
Posted on 6/17/25 at 6:34 am to WWII Collector
quote:Came to suggest this. If Putin needed global leverage the threat of slipping one to even the playing field would be potent
But you can bet that Russia or China probably slipped one to Iran
Posted on 6/17/25 at 6:39 am to DMAN1968
quote:
Why is it so hard to believe Iran is close to a nuke?
1. The IAEA closely monitors Iran's nuclear program
2. Netanyahu, the man that lied to us about Iraq having WMDs, is leading the charge about Iran being a week away from a nuclear weapon.
Posted on 6/17/25 at 6:42 am to RemouladeSawce
quote:
But you can bet that Russia or China probably slipped one to Iran
quote:I've wondered about this. It would be in violation of several treaties, international law, and risk extreme sanctions from the entire western world.
Came to suggest this. If Putin needed global leverage the threat of slipping one to even the playing field would be potent
Would Putin take this risk? Yes- if desperate enough.
Is he desperate enough? No, things aren't exactly peachy in Ukraine the trajectory is for a very costly victory
Would he be stupid enough? He's never shown any evidence of being that stupid.
Posted on 6/17/25 at 6:50 am to DMAN1968
quote:
I'll preface this by saying I don't know how to build a nuke but...
The how has been known for a long time...it's not really a secret. Any secrets to it have probably been given to Iran by Russia, China or the North Koreans.
It seems the hardest part is getting enough enriched uranium. Iran has been enriching it for about 20-25 years in one manner or the other. It has had setbacks:
quote:
Israel has repeatedly taken actions to slow Iran's nuclear program, primarily through covert operations and strikes on key infrastructure. These actions have included cyberattacks like Stuxnet, attacks on nuclear facilities, and assassinations of key Iranian scientists. While these efforts have caused delays and setbacks
I remember Stuxnet.
There is little commercial use for highly enriched uranium so why else have they been doing it?
So is it really that big of a logical leap to think they are close?
Do we really need to post the clip of Bibi from 2012 again saying Iran was "months" away from a bomb.
Here's a stark reality that cannot be denied: All of Israel's cool weapons and military power...was supplied and/or purchased by the US taxpayer and a little from EU. They dont have industry, they arent rich because they make things. They are rich because people from other countries give them money.
Posted on 6/17/25 at 6:56 am to scottydoesntknow
quote:
They dont have industry, they arent rich because they make things.
This isn’t true.
Posted on 6/17/25 at 7:00 am to DMAN1968
The only difficulty in believing this is that we are getting some “intelligence” from Israel who only cares for themselves. They use the rest of the world for their gain alone. And the US foots the bill.
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News