Posted on 04/12/2006 5:03:46 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
Iran could build a nuclear weapon within "days" once it completes plans to beef up its uranium enrichment facility at Natanz, a State Department official said Wednesday.
"Natanz was constructed to house 50,000 centrifuges," Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, told reporters in Moscow. "Using those 50,000 centrifuges they could produce enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 16 days."
Earlier on Wednesday, Iran's deputy nuclear chief, Mohammad Saeedi, appeared on Iran's state-run TV network to announce plans for "industrial scale" uranium enrichment involving 54,000 centrifuges at the Natanz facility, according to the Associated Press.
Rademaker, whose stunning "nukes-in-days" prediction was first reported by Bloomberg News, offered his comments in reaction to Saeedi's announcement.
Iran's first successful attempt to enrich uranium, announced Tuesday by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was accomplished with just 164 centrifuges. While it's not clear how quickly Iran could reach the 50,000 centrifuge mark, there are indications that the rogue nation is already much closer than indicated by Tuesday's announcement.
Last August, an exiled Iranian dissident who helped uncover nearly two decades of covert nuclear activity in 2002, told the Associated Press that Iran has already manufactured thousands of centrifuges capable of enriching uranium to weapons grade.
"4,000 centrifuge machines have not been declared to the IAEA," Alireza Jafarzadeh said. "And the regime has kept the production of these machines hidden from the inspectors while the negotiations with the European Union have been going on over the past 21 months."
In Feb. 2003, UN nuclear watchdog Mohamed ElBaradei visited Natanz. He reported that in a nearby building, workers were assembling parts for thousands of centrifuges.
The Natanz facility is buried 75 feet underground and has a reinforced concrete roof, according to GlobalSecurity.org.
Well? Let's hear it. What you got?
Where did the 10 years come from? Seymour Hersch?
If we strike now, (we have poor choices either way) they'll claim just retaliation for whatever action they take in the future.
I think our strike must be thorough, way more than removing the nuclear program. The nukes are just the symptom. What really needs removal is the problem, the sicko terrorist regime that's fostering all this hate and inspiration to the fanatical masses.
Where did the 10 years come from? Seymour Hersch?
It took us less than four years from FDR starting up our atomic bomb project full speed just before Pearl Harbor to dropping the bombs on Japan. It took about 5 months from when the gas diffusion enrichment plant at Oak Ridge went into production until we bombed Japan. Iran has claimed that they have now run their enrichment plant. Anyone who claims that Iran is more than months (at most) from having the bomb is too stupid to be allowed to care for and feed themselves, much less make national policy statements.
The difficulty I see is making sure we take out ALL the trash. (See my post 23)
How do we know we'll get ALL the trash when we start this ball rolling?
Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran
Bomb Iraaaaaaaaaaaaan!!!!!!!!
Read #27...
</sarcasm>
Your sarcasm is more accurate than either of us would like.
My guess is that we do not act first.
The only question is, will Israel or Iran shoot first?
Just keep hammering it in the same 50 meter by 50 meter square over and over with GPS-guided bunker busters until the roof caves in. Then bomb the interior and all the centrifuges.
LOL. That's it!! Let's bomb everybody we don't like. Wasn't that Hitler's plan also?
This report is obviously false. Iran is 5 - 10 years away from a nuke - that idiot reporter at The New Yorker said so!! EXTREME sarcasm
You learnt NOTHING from 9/11?
Let's give them the benefit of the doubt and send them one anyway...
The "American intelligence community" via the NY Times, a few weeks back -- but, of course, they did a CYA near the end of the article -- "then again, we could be wrong." Very reassuring.
I'm all for erring on the side of caution and nuking they're butts right now.
Ooops...'their'
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.