Realistic solutions for dealing with the Iran problem

[Karmashock]

Most threads are made to express a perspective, but I'm more interested in people's thoughts as to what should be done with Iran... or for that matter any of the other parties in this conflict. I don't care what you think of the various parties good or bad. I don't care if you think they're baby killers or saints. I also don't want a history lesson or some long recitation of what SHOULD have been done or not done. Lets live in reality... reality is today... right now. Yesterday is a memory and tomorrow is an assumption. Just practical solutions of what can be done now to fix it.


All are welcome. Please just state your objectives with your solution as most people have different objectives to go along with their solutions. For example some people might want Iran to suffer and some might want the US to suffer. That should be stated prior to offering the solution resolve any confusion.

I'll wait a day or so and then post my thoughts on the issue

 

[Tashah]

First, some current reality.

London, Apr. 03 – Iran may be able to produce its first nuclear bomb by 2009, the U.S.-based news channel ABC News reported on Monday.

The report said that Tehran had more than tripled its ability to produce enriched uranium in the past three months, adding some 1,000 centrifuges which are used to separate radioactive particles from the raw material.

The development meant Iran could have enough material for a nuclear bomb by 2009, it quoted sources “familiar with the dramatic upgrade” as saying.

The unexpected expansion is taking place at Iran's uranium enrichment facility in Natanz, the report said.

Iran had previously informed the United Nations nuclear watchdog that it had 320 centrifuges running in Natanz.

A spokesperson for the International Atomic Energy Agency said that there was an "extreme sensitivity" in the situation with Iran.

Previous predictions by U.S. intelligence had cited 2015 as the earliest date for Iran to be able to develop a nuclear weapon.

Iran maintains its enrichment facilities are only meant to produce fuel for nuclear power reactors. But the uranium they are enriching could not be used in the Russian nuclear power reactor they are currently building, the report added.

ABC News: Iran may produce first nuclear bomb by 2009

Secondly, knowledge in three critical areas is necessary to understand this complex situation.

1) A technical understanding of the nuclear fuel cycle for power generation.
2) A technical understanding of methods to enrich uranium and plutonium.
3) An understanding of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and methods used by the IAEA to detect NPT violations.

Most posters at DP lack this knowledge-base and technical expertise.

 

[Vader]

First, some current reality.


ABC News: Iran may produce first nuclear bomb by 2009

Secondly, knowledge in three critical areas is necessary to understand this complex situation.

1) A technical understanding of the nuclear fuel cycle for power generation.
2) A technical understanding of methods to enrich uranium and plutonium.
3) An understanding of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and methods used by the IAEA to detect NPT violations.

Most posters at DP lack this knowledge-base and technical expertise.

My thought is that we need to strike all of Iran's nuclear facilities BEFORE they get the bomb.

A nuclear armed Iran is unacceptable.

 

[rivrrat]

Solutions for what?

 

[Red_Dave]

First, some current reality.


ABC News: Iran may produce first nuclear bomb by 2009

Secondly, knowledge in three critical areas is necessary to understand this complex situation.

1) A technical understanding of the nuclear fuel cycle for power generation.
2) A technical understanding of methods to enrich uranium and plutonium.
3) An understanding of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and methods used by the IAEA to detect NPT violations.

Most posters at DP lack this knowledge-base and technical expertise.

But would Irans having on nuclear bomb be that much of a threat? More developed nuclear powers have tens of thousands so surely it would take Iran a while to reach that level?

 

[GarzaUK]

But would Irans having on nuclear bomb be that much of a threat? More developed nuclear powers have tens of thousands so surely it would take Iran a while to reach that level?

If Iran gets a nuclear bomb it will set off a nuclear arms race in the ME. With Shia Iran getting one, the Sunni Saudi Arabia and Eygpt are going to want one to rebalance the Shia/Sunni power struggle.
And given the political stability and climate of the ME, I would have to say a nuclear arms race in that region would be a very BAD idea.

 

[Iriemon]

But would Irans having on nuclear bomb be that much of a threat? More developed nuclear powers have tens of thousands so surely it would take Iran a while to reach that level?

The biggest threat from a Iran with nukes would be Israel. It is implausible to me that the Govt of Iran would just fire it off at Tel-Aviv, unless they have a national death wish.

However, the threat they could do that will give Iran much greater security for agressor nations in the ME; primarily us at the moment.

 

[Billo_Really]

Why can't we cut a deal like we did with Cuba?

We promise not to attack if they give up their nuclear bomb ambitions.

Or they stop all enriching uranium and we can guarantee their safety.

Put them under our umbrella. Then we have a reason to stay in the area with them feeling safe, Israel feeling safe. Everybody feeling safe.

Win Win all the way around. No losers.

What's the chance of that if we decide to start talking to Iran?

Or we could talk through the Russians.

We need to talk more and saber rattle less.

 

[Voidwar]

 

[Karmashock]

Solutions for what?

for the crisis with Iran... everyone is going to see the problem in a different way... so say what you see as the primary problem and what you think the best way to fix it is...
=========================================

But would Irans having on nuclear bomb be that much of a threat? More developed nuclear powers have tens of thousands so surely it would take Iran a while to reach that level?

You tell me, if Iran having nukes isn't a problem for you, then certainly you should see something wrong with the current issue in Iran no matter what your perspective is... cite that perspective and then cite your solution.

 

[rivrrat]

for the crisis with Iran... everyone is going to see the problem in a different way... so say what you see as the primary problem and what you think the best way to fix it is...

I don't see a problem with Iran. They have as much right to nuclear power as any other country does.

 

[RightOfCenter]

I don't see a problem with Iran. They have as much right to nuclear power as any other country does.

No, Iran having nuclear weapons is the probably the worst thing that could happen to the world. It's a fanatical country led by a demagogue. It would add more chaos to an already destabilized region.

 

[Karmashock]

I don't see a problem with Iran. They have as much right to nuclear power as any other country does.

then you must see a problem with the UN sanctions and the insistence by the US that they not have nuclear weapons.


So that would be YOUR problem. What is your solution to that problem?

 

[rivrrat]

then you must see a problem with the UN sanctions and the insistence by the US that they not have nuclear weapons.


So that would be YOUR problem. What is your solution to that problem?

The US and UN to stop. It's quite simple.

I don't think anyone should have nuclear weapons, but since some of us do... all of us should.

 

[Karmashock]

The US and UN to stop. It's quite simple.

I don't think anyone should have nuclear weapons, but since some of us do... all of us should.

Ok, so you started saying that Iran should have nuclear power, now you say that they should have nuclear weapons as well... and that everyone should have them too...


Ok. So just have the US and UN leave the whole area and do nothing? That would in your opinion solve everything?


Oh, and what about those nuclear weapons? I mean... why waste money and time having people make their own... why not just hand them out? Just a thought.

 

[rivrrat]

Ok, so you started saying that Iran should have nuclear power, now you say that they should have nuclear weapons as well... and that everyone should have them too...

Because no matter how much I say "nuclear power", people always turn it into "nuclear weapons". Figured I'd save them the trouble.

As it is, they want nuclear power. They have every right to develop power for their country. The same right as any other country on this planet.

But, people say..."Oh noes! They will make nuclear weapons with it!"

Well, maybe they will, maybe they won't. For one thing, why don't we deal with that if and when it happens instead of trying to predict the future?

And yes, I think think that the more people who have said weapons the less likely it is that anyone will use them.

Ok. So just have the US and UN leave the whole area and do nothing? That would in your opinion solve everything?

I don't see what there is to 'solve'. They are developing nuclear power. *shrugs* What's there to solve?

Oh, and what about those nuclear weapons? I mean... why waste money and time having people make their own... why not just hand them out? Just a thought.

I don't believe in handouts. You want something... work for it.

 

[Karmashock]

Because no matter how much I say "nuclear power", people always turn it into "nuclear weapons". Figured I'd save them the trouble.

Don't assume what people think. Say what you mean.


If you don't mean nuclear weapons then say nuclear power. I'll take you at your word. That doesn't mean I'll trust the Iranians of course, but I'll believe YOU that that's where you stand.

I don't believe in handouts. You want something... work for it.

perhaps that's even better, we could sell them nuclear weapons. I mean, no one makes a better a bomb then the US... We can advertise!


*In the voice of Samuel L Jackson*When you need to kill every last single mother ----- Buy american nukes, accept no substitutes. :rofl

 

[rivrrat]

Don't assume what people think. Say what you mean.

If you don't mean nuclear weapons then say nuclear power. I'll take you at your word. That doesn't mean I'll trust the Iranians of course, but I'll believe YOU that that's where you stand.

My stand is the same on both

perhaps that's even better, we could sell them nuclear weapons. I mean, no one makes a better a bomb then the US... We can advertise!


*In the voice of Samuel L Jackson*When you need to kill every last single mother ----- Buy american nukes, accept no substitutes. :rofl

Well, we already sold them other weapons, so why shouldn't we?

But no, as I said... I don't agree with handouts. If they want to *develop* nuclear power and weapons, then *they* need to *develop* them. I see no reason to stop a country from having nuclear power or weapons, but I also see no reason to hand them over to them.

 

[Vader]

The US and UN to stop. It's quite simple.

I don't think anyone should have nuclear weapons, but since some of us do... all of us should.

I don't agree with that. 3rd world islam-o-nazi hellholes like Iran and Syria should NEVER have weapons more powerful than spears and sling shots.

These states are known to fund, sponsor, and train terrorist insurgents. While this is going on, these countries need to remain disarmed.

In fact, until these 3rd world apes learn to separate their government from their religion they should be banned from having weapons of any type.

Just my opinion.

 

[Tashah]

Firstly, there is a quantum difference between nuclear power generation and developing nuclear weapons of mass destruction. All nations have the right to develop nuclear power for energy purposes. Indeed, the IAEA will assist any nation in this effort. However, nuclear research and development for the purpose of acquiring nuclear weapons is another thing altogether. Nuclear proliferation serves no higher purpose, and is of no benefit to mankind.

Iran is one of the original signatories (1970) to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. As such, they voluntarily and willingly promised to abide by the NPT. Articles III and IV of the NPT specifically forbid acquiring or transfering nuclear weapons technology. The IAEA has found Iran to be in violation of the NPT, hence the sanctions imposed by the United Nations.

One way to enrich uranium to weapons-grade is by using a centrifuge to separate highly-enriched-uranium (HEU) from uranium hexaflourine (UH6). The IAEA will allow pilot programs in enrichment as long as the program is small and enrichment does not exceed around 35%.

Iran initially began with a small enrichment program (360 centrifuges). Iran is using P2 and P3 centrifuges of a design (European) provided them by the Khan organization of Pakistan. These centrifuges are linked together, and they form what is known as a centrifuge-cascade. However, swipe samples obtained by the IAEA returned an enrichment factor well in excess of what is allowed.

Folks, pay attention. Iran now admits to having a 1000 unit centrifuge-cascade. You have to understand that this is an enormously complex and expensive undertaking. No one goes to all this trouble and expense to enrich uranium to 35%. Uranium enriched to 35% will not perform properly in Iran's light-water nuclear reactors. Weapons-grade HEU is 90+%. Once you have the technical ability to operate a 1000 unit casacde successfully however, it is not difficult to enrich uranium to weapons-grade.

Almost any physicist with knowledge in this area will tell you plainly that a 1000 unit UH6 centriguge-cascade has no purpose whatsoever... other than to enrich uranium to weapons-grade.

To propose that Iran is solely interested in nuclear power for energy generation contradicts the evidence collected thus far. Let me repeat this so you understand. The ONLY purpose of a 1000 unit UH6 centrifuge-cascade is to enrich uranium to weapons-grade... and produce it in quantities sufficient to obtain the fissile material necessary for nuclear weapons. There is no other purpose for possessing and implementing this unique technology.

 

[Karmashock]

I see no reason to stop a country from having nuclear power or weapons, but I also see no reason to hand them over to them.

I'm not handing anything over... I'm selling them to make a tidy profit.


Why let the russians get all the nuclear proliferation money... Why not let america get in on that action? Unless you think there's something wrong with the spread of nuclear weapons?

 

[Vader]

I'm not handing anything over... I'm selling them to make a tidy profit.


Why let the russians get all the nuclear proliferation money... Why not let america get in on that action? Unless you think there's something wrong with the spread of nuclear weapons?

It is not acceptable to sell nuclear technology to pro-terrorist countries. PERIOD.

Shame on you for putting my life at risk so you can make a quick buck.

Russia's moron leader (yes, I know this is ironic coming from an American) needs to be removed from the Kremlin. He is a disgraceful jackass who is doing his very best to bring back the cold war.

Russia needs to be told POINT BLANK "Stop selling nuclear materials to Iran", if they fail to adhere to this standard, we need to start arming the Chechnian rebels.

If Russia wants to arm terrorists in a position to do us harm, we should repay that act by doing the same.

:doh

 

[ARealConservative]

the first solution is we need to position our self as an actual neutral party here.

Israel has nukes - where's the hand wringing?

We need to convince the world that American policy does not equal Israeli policy - and to do that, we need to enforce non-prolifieration equally - or not at all.

Next - we need to cease giving foreign aid to the region - which of course is primarily going to Israel.

Lastly - no more duel citienship status.

Fix those things - and then we can talk with other parties in the ME as a nuetral party - and fight harder for non-proliferation.

 

[bus]

Me? I say let Iran do what it wants. Leave them alone for the time being, albeit, leave them with a very strong warning that if they mess up, we (The US) will destory them.

If they dont mess up, if they dont cause catastrophe and they are responsible with their nuclear amibtions, continue to leave them alone.

If they do mess up, they do cash in on the rest of western worlds fears, crush them. I'm not talking about how we are dinking around in Iraq, I'm talking carpet bomb, target mosques, target schools, level the whole country worse than has ever been seen in history. Do not help rebuild. Leave the message that you will not cause problems on a global scale and be left unscathed.

 

[cherokee]

the first solution is we need to position our self as an actual neutral party here.

Israel has nukes - where's the hand wringing?

We need to convince the world that American policy does not equal Israeli policy - and to do that, we need to enforce non-prolifieration equally - or not at all.

Next - we need to cease giving foreign aid to the region - which of course is primarily going to Israel.

Lastly - no more duel citienship status.

Fix those things - and then we can talk with other parties in the ME as a nuetral party - and fight harder for non-proliferation.

Israel doesn’t call for Iran destruction...(like I do)

No we cant. NO appeasing the sob's.
Israel is the ONLY friend we have in Middle (chit) East.
You people need to understand its not just the U S who doesn’t want Iran to have Nukes it’s the entire fooking region.


If they want nukes so bad send them a few....