The (Next) Persian Gulf War begins.

Dilandu wrote:

The E wrote:My source is the person overseeing the iranian nuclear programs, whereas your source is stuff you assume.

Tell us, what exactly is the basis for your assumptions? Is it your extensive experience with the nuclear industry? Is it your extensive knowledge of Iran?

And where did you find evidence that the Saudis purchased nukes from Pakistan?

There are rumors, that Saudi helped to pay for the Pakistan nuclear program in exchange of being under Pakistan "nuclear umbrella". I.e. in case of real emergency for any of participants, some Pakistan nuclear forces would be relocated to Saudi Arabia. But only rumors & suspicions, never confirmed.

These rumors are extremely credible because Pakistan's economy simply should not be capable of funding a nuclear program. Saudi Arabia's economy is twice as large and has ten times the GDP per capita. Saudifunding and political support of Pakistan would explain why President G W Bush didn't nuke Pakistan into the stoneage in retaliation for Pakistan's surrogates hosting the perpetrators of the 9-11 attacks. Any retaliation against Pakistan rather than its Afghan Taliban lackies would have resulted in an oil embargo. The US was heavily dependant on oil imports at the time. An embargo would have devastated a US economy that had already been compromised by the terrorist attacks. An embargo would have also devastated the economies of US allies.

Two decades later the situation is radically different. The US is energy independant and the US is no longer so committed to its allies that it would reflexively wage war to protect their oil supply. President Trump might wage such a war only to keep Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan as allies against China. However; the US might allow a disruption in world oil supplies to discourage China from providing oil to North Korea in violation of sanctions. Trump might even exploit such a crisis as an opportunity to offer Kim US oil in return for normalizing of relations and disarmament. Heck, Trump might even allow a disruption of oil supplies to ravage China's economy.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:And you expect them to tell the truth.

Certainly more than I trust you.

The E wrote:

TFLYTSNBN wrote:And you expect them to tell the truth.

Certainly more than I trust you.

Prooving once again why the US should withdraw from NATO.

The E wrote:My source is the person overseeing the iranian nuclear programs, whereas your source is stuff you assume.

Tell us, what exactly is the basis for your assumptions? Is it your extensive experience with the nuclear industry? Is it your extensive knowledge of Iran?

And where did you find evidence that the Saudis purchased nukes from Pakistan?

Knowing how to do the math.

Do you understand the concept of Seperative Work Unit?

https://urenco.com/swu-calculator

TFLYTSNBN wrote:

The E wrote:My source is the person overseeing the iranian nuclear programs, whereas your source is stuff you assume.

Tell us, what exactly is the basis for your assumptions? Is it your extensive experience with the nuclear industry? Is it your extensive knowledge of Iran?

And where did you find evidence that the Saudis purchased nukes from Pakistan?

Knowing how to do the math.

Do you understand the concept of Seperative Work Unit?

https://urenco.com/swu-calculator

Perhaps you could explain it in detail and how you came to the conclusion of your assumption then? It should be quite easy since you obviously has all the information and have already done the math.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:Knowing how to do the math.

Which we already know you don't, Mr "I don't know what a statistical majority is".

Do you understand the concept of Seperative Work Unit?

https://urenco.com/swu-calculator

You said: "Iran is weeks, not months, away from nuclear weapons!"

I say: "The experts in charge of overseeing the iranian nuclear weapons programs says 6 to 9 months".

Now, after you were pressed on it, you link to this calculator site, which appears to be a calculator for some properties for separating U235 and U238.

Now, this may not have occurred to you, but having enriched Uranium and having a functional nuclear weapon are not the same thing. Iran has never tested a nuclear weapon, therefore putting a "weeks not months" sort of timeline into play here is completely unsubstantiated by facts; If they had done a successful test, I would agree with you, as that would imply that they had a design and the engineering done. As it stands, they don't.

The E wrote:
Now, this may not have occurred to you, but having enriched Uranium and having a functional nuclear weapon are not the same thing.

Actually... it is. If you went for the gun-type oralloy bomb, you could assemble it as soon as you have enough uranium. Those things are really simple. You may recall, that "Little Boy" bomb was NOT tested before the drop - because nobody have any doubts that it would essentially work (most concerns was that it may fizzle)

The major problem would be to produce enough oralloy, because gun-type bombs are really inefficient.

Dilandu wrote:

The E wrote:
Now, this may not have occurred to you, but having enriched Uranium and having a functional nuclear weapon are not the same thing.

Actually... it is. If you went for the gun-type oralloy bomb, you could assemble it as soon as you have enough uranium. Those things are really simple. You may recall, that "Little Boy" bomb was NOT tested before the drop - because nobody have any doubts that it would essentially work (most concerns was that it may fizzle)

The major problem would be to produce enough oralloy, because gun-type bombs are really inefficient.

I was not aware of this, thank you.

Still: I trust someone with a known background and who has actually been doing investigations more than I trust Fly and his shaky understanding of math, physics and geopolitics.

It would appear that Iran's deniability is becoming increasingly implausible.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/14/politics ... index.html

In other news, the US is putting the world on notice that the US response might be to pop popcorn.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-buil ... d=63722041