Iran has enough nuclear fuel for 1 bomb »
Posted By israeligirl1 1 year ago in News
According to figures from the latest report from the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran has made 630 Kilos or about 1,390 pounds of enriched uranium. With this Iran has enough material for the bomb - when will it take the next steps in designing one?
Read Full Story at nytimes.com »
3603 Views Share Story 63 Comments Report
Submitted By:
israeligirl1
I've been a marketing consultant to high tech companies for the last 10 years. I am also one of the founders of giyus.org ...
Who Also Submitted: All »
Other Related Articles: All »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 136 of 174 Comments (view all)
-
67%
engineer1 year ago
-
82%
Dionys1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
More scare tactics. Read the article.
Reply
It has low-enriched uranium -- that's used for fueling reactors. It would take a great deal of technological advances and years to get all that uranium enriched to the point where it could be used in a weapon. After that happened, they'd have to design and implement an actual warhead design, which again is years away. Beyond that they don't even think Iran has the scientific capability to do so. Plus Iran hasn't barred the IAEA from inspections.
Iran is complying in every single way with international law. -
60%
hyperbola1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This is pro-war propaganda from zioncons in the US who are trying to dupe us into another war for Israel. Iran is fully entitled to carry out this level of nuclear enrichment under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to which it is a signatory. How manyof you know that Brazil is doingexactly the same - without peeps from our zioncon warmongers?
Reply
Washington Bullies Iran, Ignores Brazil's Nuclear Ambitions
Lula's Nukes
.... Throughout the 1980s, Brazil remained on the UN's watch list for its covert dealings with West Germany to acquire nuclear technology; meanwhile, it increased its conventional weapons trade with "rogue" nations and evaded international nuclear processing inspections. Brasilia's allegedly questionable activities have continued since President Luiz Inácio "Lula" da Silva refused to allow a comprehensive inspection of his nation's nuclear facilities last fall. He recently finalized the $170 million sale of 24 Super Tucano training and light combat aircraft to Washington's Latin American nemesis, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez. Ordinarily Washington would not hesitate to express its strong rancor over such a move, but this proved not to be the case in this instance. ....
http://www.counterpunch.org/schaffer03192005.html
If we want peace in the mideast, it is time to start applying the non-proliferation screws to the only mideast power that has at least dozens of nukes. To do that, we MUST get the zioncons out of running our foreign policy in the mideast. -
50%
ETproductions1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Incoming President Obama inherits a difficult situation, but certainly not a imminent danger.
Reply
Iran has low-grade reactor fuel. It's enough that they could enrich it to yield sufficient highly-enriched uranium to build one bomb. But they don;t currently have the enrichment process in place to do this. They would have to cease low-grade enrichment to swithc to weapons grade, or they would have to build thousands more centrifuges. And still, they would end up with one bomb, which they would then have to test. That test would be dead give-away to their intentions even if they kicked out the IAEA inspectors before conducting it.
So it is a potentially dangerous situation, but way short of an imminent danger that demands nothing short of preemptive war. Let's at least try diplomacy before the first bombing raid.
-
-
-
33%
Juggonau1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
it's a bad story. I don't expect a lot from israeligirl whos pushing her own agenda of hate and pro-Israel stories. **** Israel and they're scaremongering to get people to support the right wing Israeli government in its genocidal atrocities in Palestine.
Reply
The only country to deploy a nuclear bomb is america and that was two times not just once. How come you're not posting stories about the only country in the world to have set off nuclear bombs, but instead focusing on a country which has already proven they aren't manufacturing nuclear bombs. Iran has other problems like social equality issues with gays, but instead of focusing on that you choose to use irans nuclear power as a way of making them look evil.
I'm more scared of Israel then I am of Iran. Because Israel is more likely to use the bombs. so far all the wars between israel and its neighbors Israel is the one who fights dirty with bombs and fires on UN troops. The others usually fight with crappy mortars or stones.
Israel needs to chill the f**k down and start treating its people better and stop spreading hate through schools that teach kids that everyones out to kill Israel. man when will the left wing get control over israel ..when they do Israel will be better..right now it's a craphole.
-
-
27%
reallypsst1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Israel has warned the US and i think they will have to drop a wake up package on Iran,this is a very serious issue and we knew it was coming its time we start dealing with Iran and stop fooling our selves time to stop speaking softly and start whacking with the big stick!
Reply-
100%
Tangent0011 year ago
-
-
100%
jovial1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think it will take much more work to fashion a warhead. They have already stated that they are enriching uranium for nuclear power plants. It's important that we make them comply to what was stated. Threatening them with sanctions seems to even make them more determined. A good way of deterring the research for these weapons, is for the countries that possess them now in the Middle East, to dismantle their arsenals as a good will gesture. No one wins in a nuclear conflagration. The countries that have nukes only keep them as a deterrent. To actually use them is not sane thinking. If we get rid of all of them we stand a better chance of convincing those that may wish to acquire them to cease seeking the technology.
Reply-
14%
reallypsst1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
YES thats a nice and perfect world but sadly reality is Russia has dealings with them also Korea the russians are flexing their power and seem to be going back to old Kremlin tactics , right now russia is building a so called nuclear power plant for them,very easy for them to place nukes in iran and they have hundreds to spare.that would check mate the USA and others also would give iran control of the middle east.
Reply -
-
-
-
-
-
25%
reallypsst1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Dont get me wrong i didn't say we should drop nukes on them that would be crazy i meant we should use smart bombs which destroy bunkers and building structures, Israel recently drop one on Syria We have to let other countries know we will engage them when diplomacy doesn't work. And Iran doesn't get the message yet, they think we are not capable of conventional war with them our air force alone can destroy their country , lets hope it doesn't come to this .
Reply
-
-
100%
djn3nunez31 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA-The report concluded that as of early this month, Iran had made 630 kilograms, or about 1,390 pounds, of low-enriched* uranium.
Reply
Several experts said that was enough for a bomb, but they cautioned that the milestone was mostly symbolic, because Iran would have to take additional steps. Not only would it have to breach its international agreements and kick out the inspectors, but it would also have to further purify the fuel and put it into a warhead design — a technical advance that Western experts are unsure Iran has yet achieved.
(*has a lower than 20% concentration of 235 U. For use in commercial light water reactors (LWR), the most prevalent power reactors in the world ...)
Weapons grade enriched Uranium is 90% -
0%
ChefEOD1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Every step of the way the IEA has told us no way is Iran close to having a weapon, this, this and this must occur first. Then a few months later their next reports says something like, "OH we were kind of off on this part, they do have this or that in place afterall", or "they were further advanced than we suspected". We will wake up one day (and sooner than later) with Iran having one or more weapons in hand sitting atop a missile or two and everyone will be standing around blinking and stammering, "how did this happen", "who screwed up and let this happen without us knowing".
Reply-
-
-
Neutral
Tangent0011 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
All this fearmongering ignores the simply tenet of Islam that nuclear weapons are forbidden.
Reply
"Led by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the nation's "supreme leader," Iranian clerics have repeatedly declared that Islam forbids the development and use of all weapons of mass destruction. "
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chron...
That didn't keep Pakistan from getting the bomb? Yes, but Pakistan is Sunni (like Saddam), Iran is Shia.
-
-
-
100%
Grrr1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So basically this whole headline and article is a LIE. You can't build a nuke with low-enriched uranium. I don't find where they have ANY weaponizable material.
Reply
Don't believe the hype. Let them have their reactors with inspectors and they'll never have a bomb. It's a different material entirely and requires a whole next level of enrichment and facility. -
-
100%
canadianrancher571 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree with the first part of your comment , the last sentence bothers me just a bit . the way I read it I would take it as a threat. When one looks at the history of nuclear weapons I think of the idea of "first strike", and the world has already seen the first strike of a nuclear weapon.
Reply
-
-
-
-
100%
canadianrancher571 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sorry I didn't read the artical just the intro at the top of this page. It asks an interesting question about when they will take the other steps to develope THE BOMB. I think that the development of the bomb depends on us not them, we can accept them as a new member of the nuclear family or we can continue to poke them with a stick. Many of us in the world are concerned about rights, you know the rights of free speech, religion, heck even the right to own guns. Many Americans are willing to fight and die for these rights which is honorable in a way but what about the rights of others to determine their own destiny.
Reply -
100%
StevieGee1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So Iran has half a ton of reactor fuel. The headline says Iran has enough fuel for a bomb. They don't. This kind of misleading story is designed to scare people. It's the same kind of story that we had about Iraq leading up to our invasion and occupation. Iran is abiding by the treaties and agreements that it has made with the international community. At the time we invaded Iraq, they were cooperating also. Saddam Hussein had allowed weapons inspectors to do their jobs, and provided the US with a list of his weaponry... which turned out to be accurate... None of this spared him or his country from Bushes invasion. This is deja vu all over again.
Reply -
67%
mr2041 year ago
-
100%
jovial1 year ago
-
-
100%
reallypsst1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Lets speculate ,it would have been a nice peaceful thing for us to sit on the sidelines and watch the middle east solve its own problems if the jackass mr bush didn't drag our ass into Iraq.also there are factors here Kuwait ,Saudis,Israel and oil. we should have backed out after kuwait and then watch and listen,but let me say the middle eastern people have been at war with each other for years even with all the wealth from oil you would think that some of them would have any common sense as to rebuild and bring some kind of human kindness to their lives but they tribal instincts still rule.I want to see what they do when the oil runs out !
Reply-
Neutral
djn3nunez31 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The latest debacle in Iraq is the culmination of many year of interventionism in the ME.
Reply
"Ancient History": U.S. Conduct in the Middle East Since World War II and the Folly of Intervention
by Sheldon L. Richman
Sheldon L. Richman is senior editor at the Cato Institute
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=1019=1
-
-
100%
janesmom1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hold on everybody----I thought the Europeans were going to show us stupid, war-mongering Americans how diplomacy works. They said that they could get this problem solved by the use of their skillful diplomatic techniques. Let the Europeans solve it and make the world a safer place.
Reply-
33%
hyperbola1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually the europeans are more and more fed up with US incompetency in the "war on terror".
Reply
Just the other day I was reading news reports in the spanish and german media about how US incompetency in Afghanistan is destroying the peace and progress in the areas where spanish and german troops and other "reconstruction" efforts had achieved a large degree of success in calming their regions of Afghanistan, rebuilding and establishing new alternatives for the local population.
The Spanish were particularly scathing about the results of our steroid militarism. Only days after the US indiscriminately bombed a village and killed large numbers of women and children in the Spanish region, their troops came under attack (two killed, four wounded) for the first time in over a year.
-
-
-
67%
joe-schmo1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I like some of what Iran has been doing. They brought Muctad Assader (SP?) under control and took over direct control of his militias and therefore Iran played a large part in the success of the serge and the lessening of violence this past year. Not to mention that Iran is the most stable country in the middle east.
Reply
http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.ht... -
100%
joe-schmo1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What nobody seems to talk about is that Iran basically won the Iraq war once we allowed the voting to take place. The Iran Shia were elected to control the Iraq government. They are building a pipeline and have all sorts of economic reasons and aspirations that make the idea of them bombing anyone ridiculous. They are building an economic empire. War is not in their best interest.
Reply -
-
0%
samptax1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Progressive, I assume you're talking about President Jimmy Carter, who pronounced the word as "nu-cu-lar" as well. Since no one complained having an ignoramus as president then, hard to do so now without being hypocritical. Fact is, that's a regional pronunciation from the South. I have heard it from any number of people in Texas, many of them well-educated.
Reply -
-
Neutral
PainGoddess1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
They don't have the capability yet. They will just like Korea. Most of the countries on this planet will eventually. Even in places like Africa where people love killing each other for invisible values. Then the holy wars will start with the rest of us and the less radioactive will win. It is a prediction or maybe a good story plot of mine....
Reply -
Neutral
mrlecher1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That story is whole cloth bullcrap. Iran has enriched Uranium only to barely fuel-grade, about 5% which is about the best they could do. Weapons-Grade is 93%+ and would take years to produce and needs much better equipment than Iran has.
Reply -
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.