Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How Close Is Iran, Really, To Nuclear Weapons

Posted by samzenpus on from the big-boom dept.

Lasrick writes "A Reuters blog post by Yousaf Butt explains the science, or lack thereof, behind recent claims that Iran is closer to building the bomb. Butt has been writing in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, most recently blasting the unsourced AP 'Iranian graph' that claimed to show nuclear testing activity as well as the Washington Post story about Iran's alleged order of 100,000 magnets for their centrifuges."

3 of 299 comments (clear)

  1. The IAEA has no actual evidence by maweki · · Score: 5, Informative

    Last year in an IAEA report they said that iran doesn't refine its uranium to weapon's grade but to a metallic form that can be used in reactors but can not be refined further. Now Aljazeera writes: The IAEA's report showed "no evidence of diversion of material and nuclear activities towards military purposes,"
    http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/02/2013221224353882956.html

    It seems that the IAEA has in all their reports strong indications that the nuclear program is peaceful. So IAEA officials have been denied access to military installations which are not covered by the Nuclear non proliferation treaty. And even then, Iran has allowed inspections at a later date even though the IAEA has no right to do so (it wouldn't have in any other nation as well).
    I have the distinct feeling that western media is very biased. But it was with Iraq's WMDs (or lack thereof) as well.

    1. Re:The IAEA has no actual evidence by khallow · · Score: 5, Informative

      Last year in an IAEA report they said that iran doesn't refine its uranium to weapon's grade but to a metallic form that can be used in reactors but can not be refined further.

      No such form exists. You can always react it with fluorine, do the centrifuge thing, and thereby increase the concentration of uranium 235. And since it is a higher grade than what Iran started with, it requires less energy to close the gap to weapon grade.

      It seems that the IAEA has in all their reports strong indications that the nuclear program is peaceful.

      No it doesn't. The statement you quote "no evidence of diversion of material and nuclear activities towards military purposes," just means that Iran currently isn't diverting that material to military purposes. That will come later when they have enough material and otherwise working fission bombs to use that material.

      You don't admit you have nukes until you set one off openly. That's how several of the other nuclear powers did it.

    2. Re:The IAEA has no actual evidence by goldstein · · Score: 5, Informative

      It is really a stretch to describe Iran as a country "awash in oil". Production peaked decades ago ( http://crudeoilpeak.info/irans-2nd-and-last-oil-peak ) and there is the obvious point that reducing internal oil consumption will help extend the life of existing oil fields and/or maximize exports. It might be noted that Saudi Arabia has plans to build 16 power reactors ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Saudi_Arabia ).