El Baradei: Iran only months away from a bomb

Jerusalem Post ^ | Dec. 5, 2005 | JP

[steveyp]

That's Nobel Peace Prize Winner El Baradei.

I guess that means we're pretty close to Israel taking care of the problem...

[rahbert]

That was a plutonium implosion device.

[Southack]

"The construction of a gun barrel atom bomb is not rocket science. Not even in 1945. Not even without computers. If you add up the above, what makes you think they would not just go for it?"

Good question, so let me make a few relevant points.

First of all, there is a popular myth that the gun-barrel-design nuke is "simple." Keep in mind that the entire might of Nazi Germany couldn't build one. There are technical issues involved that are simply not in the public domain. What's in public is greatly over-simplified.

Second, they seem to be pursuing the more mass-produceable (pun intended) plutonium implosion Device. Technical issues here warrant a test for all involved, even the U.S.

Third, they already have chemical and biological weapons capable of taking out a city...so they are clearly deterred from using something that would kill a city but not eliminate their opponent(s) entirely (e.g. Tel Aviv / Israel).

If they just wanted to kill a city of infidels regardless of (severe) consequences, they could have already done it.

Clearly they haven't done that.

Iran is in an interesting position right now. They are flanked in the East, North, and West by U.S. and allied armies, with armor, on the ground. They have lost Hussein's Iraq as a deterrent to U.S. "meddling" in the region.

Their ally Syria has pulled its Army out of Lebanon, and is making noises about becoming neutral or repeating its 1991 move to be on our side.

They've lost Pakistan. They've lost Afghanistan. They've lost Libya. They've lost Egypt. They've lost Arafat.

Iran's students are protestesting in the streets against their government.

And their fragile economy is highly dependent upon exports that must traverse U.S. controlled seas.

They are expecting a blockade. Iran has more than doubled its domestic production of torpedoes in the last few months.

NOTE: a nuclear "don't care about consequences" power doesn't have to double the production of convention torpedoes.

They are expecting a conventional air raid. They've purchased scores of anti-missile and anti-aircraft defense systems in the last few weeks, set for delivery next year.

And they are still going through the pleasant charade of "negotiating" with the Europeans over their nuclear program.

In sum, they want to demonstrate their nuclear capability while provoking only a conventional response.

To me, that spells a very public Device test that does not involve a direct loss of life.

After which, I expect their rhetoric to increase as they attempt to bluster their way to the top of Islamic politics globally (should their plan go without hitch).

In large scale military operations, the Iranian Army lost *millions* of men against Hussein's Iraqi Army over a decade...a force that couldn't stop the U.S. Army even momentarily. They've seen how conventional wars will play out. That's why a million mujahedeen aren't running towards Israel or Iraq today.

Further, Iran can be stopped...and Iran can be deterred. Their position is weak and their plan is vulnerable.

Right now Iran is in a box. A box in which its students are protesting against their government. Iran is surrounded by U.S. troops on the ground in the North, East, West, and Navy/Air Force in the South.

Iran has to get its exports out of that box every day to keep its economy going...lest its internal unrest explode.

In contrast, we simply need to deter Iran from reaching the testing stage...all while keeping up the pressure on Iran by keeping them boxed in. After all, they may very well crack on their own.

If not, then we spank them.

[M203M4]

If this happens on Pres. Bush's watch, he is a miserable failure of a President.

Wouldn't say that exactly - it will be a miserable failure on behalf of everyone who has an interest in Iran NOT having nukes.

On the other hand, there will be apologists who will blame everything on RINOS, the UN, the democrats (neutered, gutless cowards that they are, they control nothing right now), and the MSM. Action *CAN* be taken regardless of the input of those groups.

Iran will soon not be touchable (without horrible consequences). Now is the time to do something about it - otherwise, we are going to see another few million vaporized Jews.

[Termite_Commander]

I read somewhere recently that Israel was upgrading their jets. Kinda like what they did before bombing Osirak.

Of course, these facilities are deep under the ground. And Israel starting a war with Iran would be bad news for our troops on the Iran-Iraq border. Iran might even declare war on the US/Iraq while they're at it. Sheesh, this is really a no-win scenario.

[buckeye2159]

hahaha...i didn't realize you could get a foreign policy degree from a box of cracker jacks

[buckeye2159]

i don't think it's quite as easy as you suggest, but we get the point

[M203M4]

Your optimism is a bit comforting. But I have doubts about the long-term sanity of fundamentalists.

[Southack]

The North Koreans have been deterred for half a century. It can be done.

[jw777]

Where is the MSM after complaining that we ignored the UN and went around them to invade Iraq?

[SF Republican]

IMHO the Israelis should give the Iranians one for Christmas.

[Travis McGee]

Hope you're right.

[Marine_Uncle]

"They are still trying to acquire the full fuel cycle...once they've reached that stage, then it's several months before they can assemble a Device."

At least the UN is not playing hide and seek in this game. The world cannot blam the US or Brits for trying to jin up false accusations etc.. Meanwhile Putin looks on with slitted eyes and wonders how long he will get away with this latest charade.

[Southack]

"Hope you're right."

Me too, but if not then we'll just nuke them.

I can live with that, too.

[samadams2000]

Thank you MR. Muhammed. Guess your process didnt work...again!!!. Let the adults handle it now. Warm up the diamond tip nukes!

[SevenMinusOne]

A war involving Israel today would not be fought with tanks and aircraft - It will not be fought with the idea of falling back (for Syria and Iran) if the conflict doesn't go well - It will be fought as a "last stand" type conflict.

The main goal of Israels enemies will be to prolong the conflict for a month or more - By that time Israel will be depleted, its economy in shambles and its ability greatly reduced.

Israels enemies are not going to get in an air war with them - They are going to fight with boots on the ground - With homicide bombers (at levels not seen before) they are going to make it a war of attrition which Israel cannot fight -

Israel cannot go "nuclear" with 200,000 + U.S. Soldiers in the region. This won't be allowed by us (U.S.).

[r9etb]

It's already almost too late, and if they will acquire full nuclear capability, it will be too late.

Nope. Not too late. Just messier. And suffice it to say that they would not survive if they ever decide to pop a nuke for real. (And, what with the fact that Israel's missile defenses are coming along nicely, it's not clear that Iran would be successful if they did try.)

[SevenMinusOne]

Lastly, I don't want you to confuse my comments (and thus think I am against a preemptive strike on Iran by Israel)

I am not. I would fully support any such strike if they had they needed Intel to make the strike effective. And they had our (U.S.) complete backing beforehand.

However, my point being if that were to happen the reality on the ground of the entire middle east would change drastically.

A complete new war would start - Which would far outlast Israel's ability to fight it alone -

The additional reality is great harm would come to the success we have built up over the past 3 years. Which is exactly why Iran may be looking or seemingly willing to take this gamble.

[r9etb]

First of all, there is a popular myth that the gun-barrel-design nuke is "simple." Keep in mind that the entire might of Nazi Germany couldn't build one.

Only because their enriched fuel program failed. Once you've got the enriched Uranium, the gun-barrel part of the problem is nothing more than some high-precision machining.

As to your assessment of Iran's strength/problems, I agree with you.

[Rutles4Ever]

If we presume that Iran has A nuclear weapon (one, maybe), then the solution will have to be a complete catastrophic decapitation of the Iranian government. If they have said nuclear weapon, there's no chance it's been deployed yet. A quick, sharp strike on the Islamic government is the only chance Israel has, assuming whatever nuclear weaponry they have would also be impossible to deploy after a nuclear attack on the capital city.

If they DON'T have it just yet, Iran's best choice is to drag everything out from underground and leave it out in the open. The biggest problem they've created for themselves is the notion that their program is too far underground to be threatened by conventional warfare. The amount of insecurity this creates for a potential nuclear scenario for Israel is what makes a nuclear pre-emptive strike appear to be the only option Israel has. If Iran wants to survive, they need to drag the equipment out and let Israel destroy it. Their knowledge won't go away. But they can save face and cause Israel some massive diplomatic headaches by daring them to repeat the destruction of Osirak.