Saturday, December 09, 2006
Counting centrifuges
Back in April, we elaborated on the report that Iran had announced that it would install 3,000 new centrifuges for the purpose of enriching uranium by the end of 2006. Princeton's Professor Frank von Hippel, by no means a hawk, confirmed to me by email then that, if configured properly, 3,000 centrifuges could enrich enough uranium for one bomb in less than a year.
According to former embassy-occupier Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Islamic Republic is right on schedule.
11 Comments:
By 
Purple Avenger, at
Sat Dec 09, 02:44:00 PM:
We are going to lose a CVBG. If they hit that, they know we won't retaliate against civilian targets.
By Dawnfire82, at
Sat Dec 09, 05:06:00 PM:
If they hit a Carrier group (successfully... the threat of nuclear attack against concentrations of ships isn't a new problem and the Navy has countermeasures) with an atomic weapon... well, that's a nightmare scenario. Standing US policy is to respond to WMD attacks in kind, and soon thereafter Iran will cease to exist as any kind of cohesive society.
By William, at
Sat Dec 09, 05:55:00 PM:
Indeed, the fear is not that they use the nuclear weapon, rather just that they have it.
Were the Iran mullahs to use a nuclear weapon, or even have a proxy use one, the rather callous military backlash would leave the US as the uncontested hegemonic power in the Middle East. The short term human losses would be unacceptable, but the long term consequences would be quite strategically favorable for the US. Not so much for the Mullahs.
Merely having the ability, on the other hand, greatly increases their maneuvering room. The only card we have left at this point with Iran is military action, and nuclear arms would effectively take that off the table.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure if we have any means by which to stop them. We're all sanctioned out, and tied down in Iraq. Furthermore, the high price of oil gives them an inordinate amount of influence. Finally, Russia and China, the powers that could make a difference, have already let North Korea by. On top of all that, we have a basically lame duck President.
I would advocate a strong carrot-stick approach (keep nukes- get bombed, give up nukes- no more sanctions), but I don't see that happening.
By 
, at
Sat Dec 09, 06:27:00 PM:
They want to tidy things up before the 12th Iman arrives. Obliterate Israel, bring the infidels to their knees, that sort of thing. Can't let the Iman thing they've been napping.
By Final Historian, at
Sat Dec 09, 07:52:00 PM:
I am not one of those who thinks that Iran plans on nuking Israel right away. Rather, I expect a nuclear Iran to start supporting Shi'ite insurgency groups the world over. Think Hizb'allah, all over the Islamic world. And then some.
By Purple Avenger, at
Sat Dec 09, 08:07:00 PM:
the fear is not that they use the nuclear weapon, rather just that they have it.
These people do NOT think like the Soviet. When they have it, it will be used. They have told us as much.
By Dawnfire82, at
Sat Dec 09, 08:22:00 PM:
Concur. Communists are atheists, and in the end they like their time on earth. Muslims fully expect an eternal place in paradise if they die in the way of god. You can't deter someone who wants to die with the threat of violence; you have to actually remove their ability to harm you.
I often think that no one in the proverbial halls of power actually understand that.
By William, at
Sun Dec 10, 01:46:00 AM:
Fanatics do not rule, fanatics are manipulated. Every time. Who was Stalin? A communist? No. No one has killed more communists than Stalin. Someone with an undeniable lust for power? Yes. No one has assembled as much pure power in one place as Stalin. In the rare instance where fanatics do come to the helm, they either burn out or are taken over. Hitler would be a burn out. Muslims have definitely been taken over.
The mullahs might advocate the destruction of Israel, but they do it to augment poll numbers and mask the economic deprecation the rest of the country is held in while they hold onto 30% of the GDP.
Greedy men rule Iran, and greedy men can be insanely rational. They do not want to lose their power and they do not want to lose their lives. Using a nuclear weapon will cost them both. Merely having one will augment their power greatly.
By Gary Rosen, at
Sun Dec 10, 04:32:00 AM:
"Fanatics do not rule"
Ya ever hear of that guy Hitler?
By William, at
Sun Dec 10, 08:34:00 PM:
"In the rare instance where fanatics do come to the helm, they either burn out or are taken over. Hitler would be a burn out."
Please at least read the comment before being snide.
By Gary Rosen, at
Mon Dec 11, 02:32:00 AM:
Hitler did, I believe, do a minor amount of damage before he, uh, "burned out". But it's no skin off your nose if you're wrong. Of course, you never are.
