Israel has '8 days' to hit Iran nuclear site: Bolton

Yahoo Home Page ^

[Candor7]

Demographic warfare may be the rage, I assume it will fail, you do not. So far it has failed in NYC, but succeeded on our Southern Border,so far.

Once deographicwarfare fails in NYC,it will be a target for those who wish to destroy NYC.And they will have no hesitation bringing a nuke in aboard ship right into NYC, and also into block the straights of Hormuz. Ships will be the preliminary conveyance devices for Iranian nukes which will indeed be used as blackmail devices to remove the USA from that region, and to attack the West.

People who poo poo this mosque application think the context is merely NYC, when in fact t is a key component in the war against t he west by the Islamofascist who use our “ religious freedom” gurantee against us.

They deserve little more than $hit on a shingle for their efforts.And NYC is awakening t the fact that it is in danger of becoming Londonistan. Just imagine, strolling the Kazbah next to the UN, getting camel rides around Greewich Village. And visiting the local sharia courts on Saturdays to watch thieves getting their hands chopped off, with the occasional spice of stoning an adulterous woman. I love that religious freedom ( sarc.).

We will never allow it as Americans, and they will want to destroy us,nothing has changed about that.Obama is merely a zit on the face of history, about to be squeezed and excoriated.

[Candor7]

I do not think the Russian system is fool proof.Evidence shows that someone has already tested it. Its in the referenced article.

The Iranians think its fool proof.

[whence911]

Never assumed it would succeed or fail. I was responding to the guy that said the rterrorists would nuke NYC. I don't think that's the plot at all. If the moslems can take over more of the area, especially Manhattan, they will not bomb all of those mosques and businesses.

If OB has a second term, there will be many more in roads and immigration moslems will increase.

I'm waiting to see how it will be stopped. I think at som point we can oput a million people on the street there. And perhaps the construction unions will block access on a daily basis. Don't know.

[Forty-Niner]

“The Iranians think its fool proof.”

Fools!

[GOPJ]

Thanks for sharing....

http://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/gmap/hydesim.html?inpyield=10

[sefarkas]

everything inside would be too contaminated

The dome is a few feet thick. The reactor vessel is over 12 inches thick high quality steel. Not much long term damage would occur with an explosion inside containment -- the containment is designed for high energy steam releases. It would be more effective to take out the steam turbine. Turbines take years to manufacture and bring to site. The plant is useless without a turbine. Run the reactor and just boil water with it, steam bypass it out, just to get fission products? The process in a low-enrichment reactor like that one makes it quite inefficient for creating Pu. Once the fuel is burned for awhile, you'd have to take it out and put it in a re-processing facility that by necessity would have to guard the operators and technicians from high concentrations of radioisotopes. It just seems a far fetched way of producing weapons grade material. The centrifuges make more sense.

[silentknight]

Well, if the date passes I wonder what will happen next. I just can’t imagine the United States and Israel allowing Iran to get nukes. It seems impossible. But, stranger things have happened.

I keep hoping there is some secret deal behind the scenes with Russia, United States, and Israel.

[sefarkas]

But right now it does indeed look as if Bushehr could be run as a Pu-239 production plant.

Take a look at the aerial pictures. The second unit has a long way to go before fuel load.

[nikos1121]

Id say attack when you can spread radiation...r u stupid? Will keep them from rebuilding....

[tacticalogic]

The dome is a few feet thick. The reactor vessel is over 12 inches thick high quality steel.

Isn't that what high-altitude penetrators are made for?

[GOPJ]

I keep hoping there is some secret deal behind the scenes with Russia, United States, and Israel.

I've lost faith in the ability of our country to make good decisions....

[103198]

I don't think this plant is the big Plutonium generator that is typically attributed to a nuke. There really is a difference between nuclear plants. The Ruskie RBMK (Chernobyl) for example, appears to be a plant that was build for producing electricity and Plutonium and uses graphite as a neutron moderator. Our former government Plutonium producing plants also used graphite. Graphite has different properties with regards to slowing neutrons. Of course, it also burns. The concept of Plutonium production involves enabling U-238 (a different Uranium isotope that the U-235 fuel) to absorb a neutron to produce Pu-239. Of course Pu-239 can absorb a neutron and become Pu-240, which is a sink for neutrons. Pu-240 can also absorb a neutron and create Pu-241 - and also Pu-242, which also a neutron sink. For weapons grade material, you don't want neutron sinks. This means that you only want to create Pu-239 by only having the U-238 in the neutron flux long enough without going to Pu-240. Of course it's a little more involved than that and the Plutonium (mostly Pu-239) must be chemically extracted from the Uranium.

Our PWR and BWR light water commercial reactors (owned by utilities and other investors - and TVA) that are used to generate electricity use water to moderate (or slow) the neutrons. The goal of these plants it to run for a long time (18 months) to produce electricity. This counter of what you want to do to produce good Plutonium. The Bushehr plant appears to be a similar type of plant as our PWRs and built for electric generation. As agere_contra has stated however, it will produce a lot of fission products and daughter isotopes. This material can be used with conventional explosives to create a “dirty” bomb. I believe that this is a terror device since it would induce fear/terror - and unfortunately not justified. However with further thought, the Iranians would have a tough time handling and shipping this material due to a number of reasons.

I don't think this plant will enhance their nuclear weapon material generation capability. What concerns me more is their heavy water reactor (uses the Deuterium isotope of hydrogen as part of the water molecule as the moderator) at Arak. This plant has several advantages to the VVER-1000/440 or other similar PWR. First it doesn't need enriched Uranium as fuel, it uses natural Uranium which means that you don't need to buy it from a select market or use centrifuges. Also the heavy water has a different neutron characteristic. I believe that the Iranians are using this reactor to produce Plutonium, just like the Israelis, Pakistanis, and other have done with their heavy water reactors to produce Plutonium. It is estimated that if this reactor is operated optimally, Iran will be able to produce about 9 kilos of Plutonium annually or about two nuclear weapons each year. The Iranians claim the reactor will be used for isotope production. This type of small reactor is not built for electric generation - it is either for Plutonium and/or isotope production. From everything I've read, I'm not sure of its status, or its hot box labs, but the Iranians have been keeping the IAEA out especially after they found traces of Plutonium. This reactor gives Iran a dual path of enriched Uranium using their centrifuges and Plutonium from Akar.

[103198]

It would be difficult to run the VVER-1000/440 as I understand the plant as a Plutonium production facility. Not only is the fuel burn-up and the neutron flux important, but the time in the flux is too. If the Pu-239 absorbs a neutron, then it starts to be of less quality for use. It would be like running one of our commercial nukes to create Plutonium. Not only would it not make sense but I'm not sure it can be done - but I can be wrong.

If the plant is shown to operate for a very short time period, then “refueled” and then operated for another short time period and so on, then there is a real concern. However this plant isn't designed to operate this way - and water is its neutron moderator, which has a different lethargy than heavy water or graphite moderated cores.

[103198]

I'm humbled by your suggestion.

Maybe - but I don't think so. I don't know of its core's neutronics, but I would think even the minimum flux for criticality would produce interesting anomalies that would make it impractical. However low power and short operation would immediately send up the red flags on the plant.

I'm sure that we've got good folks who have modeled the plant and know the answer. My guess is that the plant can't, but I don't know for sure.

[sefarkas]

Within the containment building, the reactor coolant system and reactor vessel (where the fuel is) is surrounded by dense and (in places) several feet thick rebarred concrete. Note that the containment building (shield) wall is also two to three feet thick rebarred concrete. I am unfamiliar with the KWU containment, but the wall of American containment buildings are lined with thick leak-proof steel. Other designs have a free-standing steel building inside the containment walls. Even if a weapon penetrated the two barriers (shield wall / gas-containment-steel), the explosion would largely stay within the containment. Again, it would be more effective to destroy the steam turbine in the adjacent building. It takes years to order, build and deliver a steam turbine big enough to generate over 900MWe.

[American Constitutionalist]

We already know who's side Obama is going to be on.
He will join in the world condemnation of Israel if and when Israel attacks Iran's Nuke facilities.
Other than our prayers and support of Israel, Israel is alone on this one.

[TomasUSMC]

eye
cee
bee
em

[TomasUSMC]

Note:
1 = approx (@) 1 kiloton (kt) explosion, i.e. small, tactical nuclear weapon (>SADM, >davie crockett);
9= @10KT a medium tactical nuclear weapon (dial a yield 155mm/8” artillery shell, W80 warhead, non-boosted B61) Note: half the size of Nagasaki bomb, 3/4 size of Hiroshima bomb;
99= 100KT a small strategic nuclear weapon such as the W76 warhead (or boosted tactical nuke);
500= @500 kt or one-half of a Megaton (MT). Note: Most strategic nuclear weapons are between @300kt (W87) and @500kt (w88) today;
999= 1000kt or one Megaton (1MT). Most mid cold war weapons were in the Megaton range;
9999= 10 MT- Very large nuclear weapon (Titan II missile carried 9 MT W53 warhead);
15000= 15 MT- Castle Bravo test. Largest US nuclear test explostion. Note: Some estimates say 22MT!;
25000= 25 MT (B41 nuclear bomb) the highest yield US nuclear weapon in service. Now retired;
50000= 50 MT - Tsar Bomba Soviet test. 50 MT. Largest ever nuclear explosion;
99999= 100MT Theoretical yield limit of boosted Tsar Bomba.

Step 4: Enjoy “nuking” other locations. (”Drop” a 100 MT nuke (99999kt) your house by typing in your home address)!
LETS GO WITH A NEW WORLD RECORD.

[TomasUSMC]

The centrifuges can enrich natural Uranium so that it can be used to create a fission device. The already operating heavy water reactor (Arack) can be used to create plutonium (assuming it has the correct configuration) to create a fission device. A standard light water reactor like the one Russia built isn’t good for creating plutonium for a series of reasons including the Pu-240 and Pu-242 and the other fission products – unless the fuel has short core residence times.

GOOD INFO. We will just have to enlarge the target list. Hell, once we knock out their SAM and Aircraft, we will have plenty of time to FUBAR everything thats is on the TO Do list.

[TomasUSMC]

That radiation is a lot less than the FUTURE radiation that is going to be dumped on Israel, Europe and America!

Nuke ‘em today before they nuke US tomorrow.