Iran Catch-All | IRAN WAR

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 4K
  • Views: 123K
  • Politics 
OK, let me be clear: there is absolutely nothing that has happened in the last week in regard to Israel, Iran, and the United States that will turn out well for the United States. And by "not well" I mean even worse than what the functionally illiterate, trust-fund baby that we elected to be President, twice!, would have otherwise done. That said, I did find the following quote from Israel funny: "That tactical edge also helped when Iran struck a building that belongs to the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad. "Iran claims to have attacked a Mossad building with missile strikes," the post read. "Fortunately, no one was there ... everyone is in Iran.""

Link: MSN
 
superrific said:
Out of curiosity, what do you know about nuclear physics to make you confident in this claim? It's actually not tremendously complicated, which is why we were able to develop one in the 1940s, when nuclear physics was in its infancy and we didn't even really understand how it worked.

It just takes a while to enrich the uranium. The process is not particularly complicated.
Click to expand...
I am going to push back on your statement that nuclear physics was in its infancy in the 1940s. By then, we knew a whole lot about nuclear forces, processes etc. Also, I am fairly confident that it wasn't the physics that was the hard part in building the bomb. After the engineering challenges were figured out, I believe the process was fairly streamlined.
 
ZZLPHeels said:
That's not my link, that's an0maly's link. I already stated that I didn't think the "one week away" claim was accurate.
Click to expand...
But you quoted it - you might want to read it. Or alter your
ZZLPHeels said:
I don't think the risk of China invading Taiwan is tied to our strike on Iran's nuclear program. I do agree that is a risk of an isolationist foreign policy which is why I am generally not supportive of that philosophy.
Click to expand...
It strengthens both Putin's unilateral invasion of Ukraine and bolsters the claim that China could also act unilaterally. Of course.
 
stankeylegjones said:
I am going to push back on your statement that nuclear physics was in its infancy in the 1940s. By then, we knew a whole lot about nuclear forces, processes etc. Also, I am fairly confident that it wasn't the physics that was the hard part in building the bomb. After the engineering challenges were figured out, I believe the process was fairly streamlined.
Click to expand...
We had no idea until testing whether the chain reaction could or would be contained. We had an hypothesis.
 
ZZLPHeels said:
You should absolutely be proud of being what you are good at, but you should also know when certain things come across as rude or condescending. I realize that may not have been your intention, but to me it came across that way. Anyways, I'm happy to move on from that particular discussion if you are.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm aware that certain things can come across as condescending. It's much harder for me to know when. That's part of being on the spectrum.

How about you cut me some slack? After all, that's what my post was doing. You don't know Edward Said. In my line of work, that would be a demerit, and in certain fields an absolute embarrassment. But not your line of work. You have no reason to know Said, and that's fine because honestly we need more firefighters than people who can converse about Orientalism. So I actually try not to speak in overly academic terms, because it's unfair and useless (unless I'm having a discussion in that particular style, which happens here mostly with Paine). But I just fundamentally do not comprehend why people have the reaction you had, and that's not something I'm going to fix. Live and let live, or don't, but it's a two way street.
 
stankeylegjones said:
I am going to push back on your statement that nuclear physics was in its infancy in the 1940s. By then, we knew a whole lot about nuclear forces, processes etc. Also, I am fairly confident that it wasn't the physics that was the hard part in building the bomb. After the engineering challenges were figured out, I believe the process was fairly streamlined.
Click to expand...
Well, it's not an important point but I suspect that our greater knowledge of nuclear forces eases the engineering challenges. The neutron was discovered in 1932 and I don't think we can meaningfully talk about nuclear physics before that date. So that puts the field at age 10 in 1942. It is now 90+ years old. I think that counts as infancy, but more importantly it doesn't matter.

The point is, as you say, that the physics is not terribly complicated, and the engineering problems have mostly been solved. It's just a question of running the centrifuges.
 
Duke Mu said:
But you quoted it - you might want to read it. Or alter your
Click to expand...
So the problem is not with the person who posted the link and argued for its veracity, but with the people who responded to that poster? This is the problem with some posters here. They don't care about the facts or the discussion as a whole, just the posters. For example, I'm not the one who claimed that Iran was a week away from getting a nuke, yet I'm getting bombarded because I pointed out that another poster argued this fact.
 
ZZLPHeels said:
That's fine if they want to retaliate. Wanting to and being able to are two different things. I want to have a threesome with two supermodels. I would really enjoy that. But at the end of the day I'm probably not going to be able to do that. That's where probabilities come into play. Let's say that if we did nothing there was a 1% chance that Iran would somehow detonate a nuke in Israel by 2035. We have over 700,000 US citizens living in Israel. So, odds are nothing would happen to them, but that 1% chance of a bad outcome would be REALLY bad if it came to fruition. Let's also say that by striking Iran we incur a 30% risk that Iran kills 100 Americans in a terrorist attack over the next two years, but the odds of them detonating a nuclear weapon by 2035 go down to 0.05%. I'd argue that we'd be stupid not to take those odds.
Click to expand...
You can reach any conclusion if you get to make up probabilities. I think the evidence strongly suggests that the odds of a nuclear Iran bombing Jerusalem is far, far less than 1%. Since nobody has ever used a nuke outside declared war, and that was 80 odd years ago, the odds of Iran breaking that streak despite its obvious irrationality has to be considered far less than 1%. It's infinitessimal.
 
ZZLPHeels said:
That's not my link, that's an0maly's link. I already stated that I didn't think the "one week away" claim was accurate.
Click to expand...
Was this you?

As an0maly graciously pointed out, Iran was "less than a week" from being able to develop a nuclear weapon
 
lawtig02 said:
Israel’s goal is almost certainly regime change though.
Click to expand...

Paine said:
That doesn’t make it better though, it makes it worse. At least the Iraq war pretended to be about democracy. This is an open admission that we’re willing to destroy a nation’s infrastructure purely to maintain our global power advantage. That’s not some perverse moral clarity, it’s just imperialism without euphemism.

Preemptively bombing a sovereign state to prevent them from acquiring a deterrent is not a narrow, tactical objective. It’s a declaration that only certain states are allowed to feel secure. And it all but guarantees the exact escalation we claim to be avoiding.

Again, we’ve seen this logic before: destroy capacity now, deal with blowback later. It’s how we got ISIS after destabilizing Iraq. It’s how we turned Libya into a failed state. Saying “Trump isn’t trying to help Iranians” doesn’t make the strike more honest, it just makes it openly lawless.
Click to expand...
For the record, I don’t disagree with anything you said.

I was not advocating for the approach Trump is (or may be) taking.
 
superrific said:
You can reach any conclusion if you get to make up probabilities. I think the evidence strongly suggests that the odds of a nuclear Iran bombing Jerusalem is far, far less than 1%. Since nobody has ever used a nuke outside declared war, and that was 80 odd years ago, the odds of Iran breaking that streak despite its obvious irrationality has to be considered far less than 1%. It's infinitessimal.
Click to expand...
Forgive me from citing Wikipedia, but you can see why Israel doesn't think that is a risk worth taking. See the section on "Destruction of Israel in Iranian policy." The threats made over the past couple of decades have been consistent and have been alarming.

en.wikipedia.org

Iran–Israel relations - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Since my aunts already texted me because Iran is going to close the Strait of Hormuz, I figured a separate thread to discuss responses and impact and political fallout might make sense.
 
ZZLPHeels said:
Seems like projection, once again. And once again, this seems like a pretty straightforward statement:

At the Fordow plant, located near the city of Qom, the Iranians have enough centrifuges (including IR-6s, their more advanced type) and uranium hexafluoride gas to produce several nuclear weapons. They could probably produce enough weapon-grade (90 percent) enriched uranium for one nuclear weapon within five to six days.

I even made the portion in question bigger for you in case you missed it the first 3 times. Hope this helps.
Click to expand...
That's interesting and all, but modern nuclear weapons are not made from uranium. I very much doubt Iran is trying to recreate the Hiroshima bomb, which was the only nuke I'm aware of that was made from enriched uranium. Fat Man was plutonium, as are pretty much every nuclear weapon produced these days. I think Pakistan has only assembled a uranium bomb but they have plutonium in reserve in case they are planning to actually use them.

North Korea uses plutonium, as do all Western countries and China.
 
Invest heavily in renewable energy sources, like, NOW.

China gets something like 50% of their oil through the Strait of Hormuz. They are not going to be happy.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top