Originally posted by GVChamp
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Geneva deal reached
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Firestorm View PostSaudis don't need to do that. They have a source of completely built nukes - Pakistan.
Pakistanis haven't even tested a PU device yet. The ones they are sure of working, they will not give it to Saudis.
Always thought If Iran wants to have nukes, it is to deter the Pakistanis. Iran knows Israel is more sensible than Arabs or Pakistanis.
If Iran geninuely thinks there is a real nuke threat to it from Saudi/ Pakistan, it will go nuclear, it will not care about American bombing threats.
And Saudis using nukes is also humbug. Cozy billion dollar palaces and the pleasures of petro dollars, versus getting converted in waste land ! It is no brainer.Last edited by n21; 07 Apr 15,, 20:15.
Comment
-
Originally posted by GVChamp View PostNone of what you just listed is an insurmountable obstacle.Chimo
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostHere's one. Where are they going to get their designs? I mean the reactor designs. None of the NSG is going to supply them with reactors to make weapons and any reactor they supply will be iron locked with IAEA watchdogs. Design their own? Yeah, good luck with that one.
The other point is that the US promised Arab allies that they would defang Iran. The UAE gave up domestic enrichment capacity on that promise. The Arab nations are making a lot of moves right now and we'll see how this plays out in the coming years. If it means losing the alliance otherwise, the US will relax guidelines for the Saudis, just like it relaxed guidelines for Israel, for India, for Vietnam, for....hell, the list goes on and on."The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck
Comment
-
Originally posted by GVChamp View PostPakistan has suitable reactor designs.
Originally posted by GVChamp View PostThey don't need to go the plutonium route anyways, they can import uranium from Jordan and enrich it domestically.
Originally posted by GVChamp View PostThe other point is that the US promised Arab allies that they would defang Iran. The UAE gave up domestic enrichment capacity on that promise. The Arab nations are making a lot of moves right now and we'll see how this plays out in the coming years. If it means losing the alliance otherwise, the US will relax guidelines for the Saudis, just like it relaxed guidelines for Israel, for India, for Vietnam, for....hell, the list goes on and on.Chimo
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostThey're Chinese, grandfathered before the Chinese signed the NPT. Pakistan has no right to re-export.
You're missing the point. Since Smiling Buddha, controls on weapons grade material has been stiffling. Even for the N5. While the N5 is allowed weapons grade material, every gram is accounted for.
Oh for freak's sakes, the Gulf States was counting on the US to do the dirty work for them, not that they want to spend the money and the years to buy nukes. Libya had Chinese nuke designs for over 2 decades (through AQ Khan) and made zero moves to actually build one.
If it wasn't such a big deal, the Security Council would not have been insisting on Iran stopping enrichment, the US wouldn't have insisted on UAE giving up enrichment, and the US wouldn't be pressuring Jordan right now into the same deal, and the US wouldn't have insisted on Iran limiting the number and type of centerfuges. It's an infrastructure that takes years to build, which means allowing every nation in the region that ability takes years off an arms race.
It's a big deal.
As for Pakistan not having the right to export reactor knowledge, you have to catch them (which is the easy part) and then you have to enforce sanctions against them, and Saudi Arabia. Good luck with that."The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck
Comment
-
Originally posted by GVChamp View PostI get your point, I just don't think it's relevant to mine. There are additional safeguards in place, but those don't matter at all if in 15-20 years, Egypt, Iran, and Saudi Arabia all kick out the IAEA inspectors. It also doesn't matter if the nations choose to violate them and international sanctions fail at some point. It also doesn't matter if your sanctions can't actually disrupt their nuclear program.
Originally posted by GVChamp View PostIf it wasn't such a big deal, the Security Council would not have been insisting on Iran stopping enrichment, the US wouldn't have insisted on UAE giving up enrichment, and the US wouldn't be pressuring Jordan right now into the same deal, and the US wouldn't have insisted on Iran limiting the number and type of centerfuges. It's an infrastructure that takes years to build, which means allowing every nation in the region that ability takes years off an arms race.
It's a big deal.
Originally posted by GVChamp View PostAs for Pakistan not having the right to export reactor knowledge, you have to catch them (which is the easy part) and then you have to enforce sanctions against them, and Saudi Arabia. Good luck with that.Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 08 Apr 15,, 15:16.Chimo
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
You really think Pakistan would risk pissing off China for the sake of Saudi Arabia?
Every lesson Pakistan has got from the west is cheat and you will be rewarded. They're not particularly nefarious, it just we've trained them to be so.In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.
Leibniz
Comment
-
Originally posted by GVChamp View PostNone of what you just listed is an insurmountable obstacle. I understand your point, but if you are honestly of the opinion that a Middle East where every state has their own well-developed nuclear infrastructure is just as safe as Year-2000 Middle East where there was no nuclear infrastructure at all outside Israel, I sincerely doubt your sanity.
What happened to egypt's nuclear program or algeria's. Did not get very far.
That was a much scarier era. There were around 27 countries around the world with the knowledge to go nuclear that did not in the end.
Who makes the biggest noise about israel's nukes ? Iran. And Bibi returns the favour.
Carter offered to shield the saudis when khomeni was getting his revolution thing on.
The saudis are in a paranoid state right now, they're going to say a lot of things and attempt things as well. Not all very smart.
The idea & hope behind this agreement is the Iran we get in ten years will be different to the one we've dealt with in the last ten.Last edited by Double Edge; 09 Apr 15,, 01:39.
Comment
-
About the deal we are seeing right now (that actually was not fully agreed yet) is being shown in the media both by the Neocons and by the Progressive Left in the wrong way.
Iran is not having gaining much for this deal, actually it is hardly good for them at all. It is just the least worse option for them. The devil always is in the details:
Iran will not be able to process their fuel anymore, what makes future sanctions even more dangerous for them, since even though is true that they have a lot of oil, they are still dependent on fuel importation for 30% of their consumption.
This was starting to diminish since they were augmenting their national fuel production;
One of the most important nuclear reactors in Iran is localized in a very isolated geographical area that is said to be impossible to fall short to any airstrike. Guess what? They will be not allowed to use it for 15 years.
Israel bombed nuclear power plants in Iran before, they can always do it again;
There will be even more restrictions to their low level nuclear enrichment program, when they already allow nuclear inspections, are not even close to go possible to manufacture a nuclear bomb and even the intelligence services of the United States said they have no evidence whatsoever that they intend in building a nuclear weapon.
This entire deal is "supposed" to increase the time necessary for Iran to construct a nuclear weapon - if they really wanted to - and prevent a nuclear arms race with Saudi Arabia. This is mostly because the United States made a compromise with Saudi Arabia to defend their monarchy in exchange for them to continue supporting the petrodollar. Israel face no treat at all. Israel has hundreds of nuclear weapons, as well as United States, satellites are in position right above Iran and if they ever lunched a nuclear weapon they would be completely eradicated of the map by automatic nuclear weapon attacks both by Israel and the United States.
The nuclear age ended with the turn of the century. Since Hiroshima and Nagazaki there were no more nuclear strikes and United States and Russia entered in many different wars without ever using them. Nuclear weapons are so overkill, and the danger of retaliation is almost 100% so only a completely insane person would order a nuclear attack. This entire possible deal will only lift some small sanctions on Iran for the immediate future and secure Obama a "legacy" of doing "something" that no one can quite describe what it is.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Vargas View PostAbout the deal we are seeing right now (that actually was not fully agreed yet) is being shown in the media both by the Neocons and by the Progressive Left in the wrong way.
Iran is not having gaining much for this deal, actually it is hardly good for them at all. It is just the least worse option for them. The devil always is in the details:
Originally posted by Vargas View PostIran will not be able to process their fuel anymore,
Originally posted by Vargas View Postwhat makes future sanctions even more dangerous for them, since even though is true that they have a lot of oil, they are still dependent on fuel importation for 30% of their consumption.
This was starting to diminish since they were augmenting their national fuel production;
Originally posted by Vargas View PostOne of the most important nuclear reactors in Iran is localized in a very isolated geographical area that is said to be impossible to fall short to any airstrike. Guess what? They will be not allowed to use it for 15 years.
Originally posted by Vargas View PostIsrael bombed nuclear power plants in Iran before, they can always do it again;
Originally posted by Vargas View PostThere will be even more restrictions to their low level nuclear enrichment program, when they already allow nuclear inspections, are not even close to go possible to manufacture a nuclear bomb and even the intelligence services of the United States said they have no evidence whatsoever that they intend in building a nuclear weapon.
Originally posted by Vargas View PostThis entire deal is "supposed" to increase the time necessary for Iran to construct a nuclear weapon - if they really wanted to - and prevent a nuclear arms race with Saudi Arabia. This is mostly because the United States made a compromise with Saudi Arabia to defend their monarchy in exchange for them to continue supporting the petrodollar. Israel face no treat at all. Israel has hundreds of nuclear weapons, as well as United States, satellites are in position right above Iran and if they ever lunched a nuclear weapon they would be completely eradicated of the map by automatic nuclear weapon attacks both by Israel and the United States.
Originally posted by Vargas View PostThe nuclear age ended with the turn of the century. Since Hiroshima and Nagazaki there were no more nuclear strikes and United States and Russia entered in many different wars without ever using them. Nuclear weapons are so overkill, and the danger of retaliation is almost 100% so only a completely insane person would order a nuclear attack. This entire possible deal will only lift some small sanctions on Iran for the immediate future and secure Obama a "legacy" of doing "something" that no one can quite describe what it is.Chimo
Comment
-
Originally posted by citanon View PostBarack Obama confirmed to NPR this weekend that Iran's breakout time could shrink to zero after 13 years. I no longer think this deal is the least bad option.
- Deal or no, technology will march on, and as computers continually increase in power, designing a successful nuke becomes ever easier.
- Without a deal, breakout time goes to zero in what? A year or so rather than a decade?
- Sanctions clearly haven't stopped Iran from acquiring the infrastructure to build a nuke. Time to try something different.
- The military option is unaffected by any deals.
Comment
- Deal or no, technology will march on, and as computers continually increase in power, designing a successful nuke becomes ever easier.
Comment