Comments (22) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   attyush said, 6 months ago

   For the interested and/or the uninformed
   http://www.cfr.org/publication/18570/iranmayachievecapabilitytomakeanuclearweapon_in_2009.html

2. 

   attyush said, 6 months ago

   And methinks this one is quite funny…and daresay on the mark too.

3. 

   sablebrush5 said, 6 months ago

   A hypothetical: Suppose the Taliban took over Islamabad and came into possession of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal and missiles. Would Obama have the nerve to attack Pakistan militarily to prevent them from ever even thinking about using such weapons?

   The answer is who knows? Only Obama and Jimmy Carter would think twice about such a move. Any other president would certainly attack.

4. 

   wndrwrthg said, 6 months ago

   Just think of the faked tests done by that lying, thieving, murdering piece of excrement little georgie. There is no defense for an ICBM. The Star Wars program was just a figment of rayguns addled mind.

5. 

   Jaws2z said, 6 months ago

   Why worry about the military, His Obamaness will just talk them to death.

6. 

   gbrucewilson said, 6 months ago

   wndrwrthg, Sorry, but I know for a FACT that we have an antiballistic missile system that has been test dozens of times and it works. So you are wrong on this one.

7. 

   pschearer said, 6 months ago

   At age 18 I was a Nuclear Weapons Assembyman in the U.S. Army. I could take apart and re-assemble about 15 models of Army non-thermonuclear atomic rocket warheads, cannonshells, and demolition munitions.

   As opposed to the newer weapons which were factory-sealed, the older weapons could be dismantled to a very low level, including removing the 96 detonators and the uranium and/or plutonium interchangeable cores.

   What I came away with from this experience (besides a respect for a military that could make it safe to have 18-year-olds do this sort of stuff) was that while the implosion-type warheads (like Nagasaki) were pretty hi-tech, the gun-assembly-type weapons (like Hiroshima) were surprisingly simple. (It is thought the few weapons South Africa had were of this type.)

   Give me 100 lbs. of weapons-grade uranium, two lbs. of gun powder, some good steel stock, and a machine shop, and I could build a bomb probably powerful enough to take out lower Manhattan. The hard part is the enrichment. Once that is done, your only problem is delivery. I suspect the method of choice in the future will be shipping container.

   So much for the people who think that because the bad guys don’t have nuclear capability today that it means they won’t have it in the future or that not having done anything substantial about it for 8 years is a reason never to do anything about it ever. Nukes in the hands of insane nations like Iran or North Korea are a threat to the entire world. Too bad Obama will not see it that way until something disastrous happens.

8. 

   pschearer said, 6 months ago

   Talk, talk, talk. Why can’t we all just get along?

   We were talking with the Japanese when they bombed Pearl Harbor. And can you remember why we don’t have an embassy in Tehran? They invaded our embassy, kidnapped our diplomats and held them hostage for 444 days! Talk to reasonable people, not these lunatics. (No Holocaust, eh? Death to America, eh?)

   Do you think we should have talked with Hitler? Maybe negotiate a lower number of victims to slaughter? What makes some people believe in the magical power of “Talk” to make everything perfect and wonderful?

9. 

   pschearer said, 6 months ago

   Satipera: Which part is nonsense? That I could build it? I could. That it would have a nuclear yield? It would.

   That it could take out lower Manhattan? OK, so make it 200 pounds of HE-uranium, throw in some beryllium and polonium for a neutron generator, and maybe add some tungsten for the tamper. But even if the 100-pound version were a fizzle, it would still generate the equivalent of hundreds of tons of TNT, way beyond the truck-bomb first attempt on the World Trade Center, more than enough to destroy everything for blocks and contaminate for miles more. Jokes aside, that would be the end of Wall Street. And that bomb could be built in someone’s garage, let alone the weapons lab of even a poor country.

   Gun-assembly atomic weapons are surprisingly simple, which is why we didn’t need to test the Little Boy Hiroshima bomb. And they are even simpler if you have no concern for safety.

   I know whereof I speak. How many atomic warheads have you ever handled? Unless you have some nuclear weapons expertise you would like to share with us, you have no grounds to say my claim is nonsense.

   (BTW, there are no secrets here. Everything I have said can be found all over the Internet. Wikipedia has an excellent article on Little Boy that makes several references to the gun-assembly design’s simplicity and reliability.)

10. 

    Ian Valenzuela said, 6 months ago

    Missile Defense? Do you really think there’s any threat of missile attacks on the US from North Korea or Iran? Defense against nuclear terrorism is a huge priority of the Obama Administration, but they recognize that missile defense is worse than useless in this pursuit.

11. 

    bmonk said, 6 months ago

    @pschearer, as various experts have said repeatedly, once you prove something is possible, you’re most of the way to being able to build it. When it comes to nukes, and you have the fissionable material, all you need is a few really good engineers, and a few years, and you’ll be able to build one. The hard work – like figuring out the necessary amount and the most effective kind of designs, is already done.

12. 

    boozoothatswho said, 6 months ago

    OK. This is hilarious. Where to start. How about the fact that Missile defense has eaten up about a $trillion and it can’t hit anything.

13. 

    attyush said, 6 months ago

    MatthewJB:
    It is very interesting that you bring up the Mohammed Reza Pahlavi incident of 1953. Both British and American Governments thought that this was the smartest thing to do. And we see the consequence of it even today.
    My point is that government gets so many things wrong (after all they are human - right?), so what is to say that the various domestic intervention policies that are being devised are not the result of misdiagnosis?

14. 

    Tigger said, 6 months ago

    Hmm Yet The Right was deafly Silent when ‘W’ did nothing to Halt North Koera and Iran’s Neculear Threats. ‘W’ Allowed India and Pakistain to Obtain Nukes. Why not blast ‘W’ for his ineptness?

15. 

    kellykid said, 6 months ago

    I don’t know - Doing nothing was really good when when carter was Prez. It would be good to see again - better than the current wrongs being done daily.

16. 

    attyush said, 6 months ago

    Tigger:
    India and Pakistan have a completely different equation and no force in the world will be able to resolve their problem. Pakistan is very unstable and India is way tolerant. That is one of the reasons why the situation has not escalated to mammoth proportions. No amount of diplomacy would resolve their crisis.

17. 

    jmworacle said, 6 months ago

    I believe the next nuclear strike will be done by a third world country against another third world country. This will happen regardles the occupant in the Oval Office. I don’t believe Iran will be able to excerise their nuclear capabilities because Isreal despite the wihes of “Barack the Benevolent” will take the matter into their hands. Sadly the only time a jihadist is willing to negotiate is when they are losing and know that their advesary is willing to talk thus giving themselves a chance to re-group and re-orangize.

18. 

    attyush said, 6 months ago

    satipera:
    Apologize for not clearly stating my position. What I was alluding to is the fact that India and Pakistan did not start on the nuclear path in the last decade. Their quest to acquire nuclear weapons started long back.

19. 

    Parson1 said, 6 months ago

    Ah the internet were everyone is either a nuclear weapons expert, a navy SEAL,or a expert on abortions.

20. 

    nlal13 said, 6 months ago

    It would be funny accept for the fact that right now, both countries are not viable threats to us citizens

21. 

    Miserichord said, 6 months ago

    satipera says:

    “Pschearer
    The design sounds simple. Join two lumps of uranium together to achieve critical mass. There is the maths to do, the machining of the warhead to do and all the other specialised knowledge that is required. ”

    Very little math needed, high school shop level is enough, using info readily available.
    Two sand cast components, a little basic work on a lathe that could be done by a high school auto shop.

    The specialized knowledge is doing this without dying from exposure to radiation and heavy metals.

    Easy enough to train a 16 year old kid to do the work, just tell him he’s dying for a Cause.

    100 lbs weapons grade uranium, about 10 kilotons explosion, set off at ground level in SoHo, would rip the center out of lower Manhattan, trash most of it, and still be strong enough to blow out windows in Times Square, about 3.5 miles fom the detonation point.

22. 

    boozoothatswho said, 6 months ago

    You people are loonies. If anybody uses nukes, it’s going to be the only country in the Middle East that actually has nukes.