US intelligence agencies lying about Iran?

[MrJonno]

Iran only a year away from nuke!

Is there any industrialised country that couldn't produce a nuclear weapon in a year if it wants one ?

Yes. But, Iran is a third world county, and they want one.

and, apparently the Obama Administration is concerned about it, and is promising not to let it happen. But, this is contrary to what they were selling during the campaign in the fall, because then they were laughing off the idea of nuclear Iran.

They might possible struggle to do it in secret but how hard can it really be to do with modern manufacturing techniques and knowing for a fact that it actually works

So, no big deal then.

Personally I would flog them a couple in exchange for some oil, if Iran doesn't get the bomb it will eventually get nuked by Israel just a matter of time.

[Jason]

[JimC]

Iran only a year away from nuke!

Is there any industrialised country that couldn't produce a nuclear weapon in a year if it wants one ?

They might possible struggle to do it in secret but how hard can it really be to do with modern manufacturing techniques and knowing for a fact that it actually works

Given a supply of highly enriched Uranium, and some fairly high-tech timers, quite doable.

However, the process of enriching enough uranium to make a bomb is the hard part, requiring cascades of expensive centrifuges.

[MiM]

Iran only a year away from nuke!

Is there any industrialised country that couldn't produce a nuclear weapon in a year if it wants one ?

They might possible struggle to do it in secret but how hard can it really be to do with modern manufacturing techniques and knowing for a fact that it actually works

Given a supply of highly enriched Uranium, and some fairly high-tech timers, quite doable.

However, the process of enriching enough uranium to make a bomb is the hard part, requiring cascades of expensive centrifuges.

Or Plutonium, with a high enough content of Pu-239. Similar problem arise, creating pure enough Pu-239 requires running power plants with very short refuelling, unless you have something like a Candu, of course.

[Jason]

Candu - the little Canadian reactor that won't fuel nuclear weapon proliferation.

[Coito ergo sum]

Iran only a year away from nuke!

Is there any industrialised country that couldn't produce a nuclear weapon in a year if it wants one ?

Yes. But, Iran is a third world county, and they want one.

and, apparently the Obama Administration is concerned about it, and is promising not to let it happen. But, this is contrary to what they were selling during the campaign in the fall, because then they were laughing off the idea of nuclear Iran.

They might possible struggle to do it in secret but how hard can it really be to do with modern manufacturing techniques and knowing for a fact that it actually works

So, no big deal then.

Personally I would flog them a couple in exchange for some oil, if Iran doesn't get the bomb it will eventually get nuked by Israel just a matter of time.

this casting of Israel as the aggressor is laughable --

Arabs attacked during the 1948-49 war.
Arabs attacked via the Fedayeen in the 1950s.
arabs attacked during the six-day war
War of Attrition - initiated by egypt
Arabs initiated the Yom Kippur war
etc etc.

Iran has been calling for the eradication of Israel, as has the PLO/Fateh/Hamas/Islamic Jihad/Hisb'Allah forces....

Yet it's ISRAEL that is the risk to nuke Iran.

Fucking laughable.

[MiM]

Candu - the little Canadian reactor that won't fuel nuclear weapon proliferation.

Yep, but it has some properties that are very interesting for safeguards. Mainly online refuelling and running on natural uranium.

[MrJonno]

this casting of Israel as the aggressor is laughable -

Not casing it is as the aggressor is laughable its a European/American settler state dedicated to genocide. Never mind wanting to wipe a people out Likud doesn't even recognise the existence of the Palestinians and unlike Iran actually has the ability to carry it out. The threat of mutually assured destruction is exactly what is required to ever make any progress there

[Coito ergo sum]

this casting of Israel as the aggressor is laughable -

Not casing it is as the aggressor is laughable its a European/American settler state dedicated to genocide. Never mind wanting to wipe a people out Likud doesn't even recognise the existence of the Palestinians and unlike Iran actually has the ability to carry it out. The threat of mutually assured destruction is exactly what is required to ever make any progress there

LOL - dedicated to genocide -- but, it doesn't commit genocide, and the Arabs openly call for genocide of the Jews, and have started several wars trying to accomplish it, and even have flags with mushroom clouds on them to representing nuking Israel....

The Palestinians don't recognize the existence of Israel dude. The only parties dedicated to genocide here are the fucking Arab Muslims. That's why they tried to obliterate Israel several times.

Lord -- there is no end to folks ignoring history and just making shit up. Genocide? By ISRAEL? Where do you even get that from? Maybe it's just more Euro Jew-baiting.

[klr]

...

this casting of Israel as the aggressor is laughable --

Arabs attacked during the 1948-49 war.
Arabs attacked via the Fedayeen in the 1950s.
arabs attacked during the six-day war
War of Attrition - initiated by egypt
Arabs initiated the Yom Kippur war
etc etc.

Iran has been calling for the eradication of Israel, as has the PLO/Fateh/Hamas/Islamic Jihad/Hisb'Allah forces....

Yet it's ISRAEL that is the risk to nuke Iran.

Fucking laughable.

Er ... hold on. Didn't Israel attack first in the Six-Day war? Although it be classified as a pre-emptive strike.

this casting of Israel as the aggressor is laughable -

Not casing it is as the aggressor is laughable its a European/American settler state dedicated to genocide. Never mind wanting to wipe a people out Likud doesn't even recognise the existence of the Palestinians and unlike Iran actually has the ability to carry it out. The threat of mutually assured destruction is exactly what is required to ever make any progress there

Israel "dedicated to genocide"? Either the definition of genocide has changed since I last checked, or else Israel is doing a piss-poor job of it. Had it been another group of Muslims oppressing the Palestinians to the extent the Israelis are, you'd be hearing very little about it. In fact, that's not a hypothetical situation. It has been and continues to be the case.

[Coito ergo sum]

...

this casting of Israel as the aggressor is laughable --

Arabs attacked during the 1948-49 war.
Arabs attacked via the Fedayeen in the 1950s.
arabs attacked during the six-day war
War of Attrition - initiated by egypt
Arabs initiated the Yom Kippur war
etc etc.

Iran has been calling for the eradication of Israel, as has the PLO/Fateh/Hamas/Islamic Jihad/Hisb'Allah forces....

Yet it's ISRAEL that is the risk to nuke Iran.

Fucking laughable.

Er ... hold on. Didn't Israel attack first in the Six-Day war? Although it be classified as a pre-emptive strike.

Sure - it attacked the forces massing on its border, in the context of having been already attacked at least twice in its then 20 year existence.

this casting of Israel as the aggressor is laughable -

Not casing it is as the aggressor is laughable its a European/American settler state dedicated to genocide. Never mind wanting to wipe a people out Likud doesn't even recognise the existence of the Palestinians and unlike Iran actually has the ability to carry it out. The threat of mutually assured destruction is exactly what is required to ever make any progress there

Israel "dedicated to genocide"? Either the definition of genocide has changed since I last checked, or else Israel is doing a piss-poor job of it. Had it been another group of Muslims oppressing the Palestinians to the extent the Israelis are, you'd be hearing very little about it. In fact, that's not a hypothetical situation. It has been and continues to be the case.

And worse.

[MrJonno]

UN definition of genocide covers it

Article 2 of this convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."[3]

I'm afraid the Israeli's being brave beacon of light against the nasty Arabs is an illusion that you wont' find outside the US

Lots of shits in the middle east but the only ones with nuclear weapons are the Israeli's, they wouldn't hesitate to nuke Tehran as quite simply the US would protect them from retaliation if they did

[klr]

UN definition of genocide covers it

Article 2 of this convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."[3]

I'm afraid the Israeli's being brave beacon of light against the nasty Arabs is an illusion that you wont' find outside the US

Lots of shits in the middle east but the only ones with nuclear weapons are the Israeli's, they wouldn't hesitate to nuke Tehran as quite simply the US would protect them from retaliation is they did

That definition is so wide that it would cover anything from an outright extermination attempt on the one hand (which the Jews have recent first-hand experience of) to - say - the conditions endured by Catholics in Northern Ireland in the last century.

[Coito ergo sum]

UN definition of genocide covers it

Article 2 of this convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."[3]

I'm afraid the Israeli's being brave beacon of light against the nasty Arabs is an illusion that you wont' find outside the US

Coming from a Yerpeein, we can always be a bit skeptical about your positions on Jews.... The ones who committed the acts defined in above are the Arabs, though.

Lots of shits in the middle east but the only ones with nuclear weapons are the Israeli's, they wouldn't hesitate to nuke Tehran as quite simply the US would protect them from retaliation if they did

If they wouldn't hesitate to nuke Tehran, then why is Tehran not nuked?

Is it because the Israeli's won't do it unless they are attacked and are backed into a an existential corner?

You are, quite literally, so far afield here, it's not even funny. You are not even basing your view on reality. You think the country that has NOT initiated the multitudinous wars over the last 60 years is the country that wants to commit genocide and is committing genocide over the countries/peoples that (a) have started many wars against Israel, and (b) have announced their intention to destroy Israel.

From that, you glean that Israel is genocidal.

If that works for you, I guess that will just have to be it.

[klr]

In the interests of debunking stereotypes on both sides, I should point out that I'm a European.