ABC News Exclusive: Iran Nuclear Bomb Could Be Possible by 2009

[Purveyor]

Source: ABC News

April 02, 2007 6:15 PM

Iran has more than tripled its ability to produce enriched uranium in the last three months, adding some 1,000 centrifuges which are used to separate radioactive particles from the raw material.

The development means Iran could have enough material for a nuclear bomb by 2009, sources familiar with the dramatic upgrade tell ABC News.

The sources say the unexpected expansion is taking place at Iran's nuclear enrichment plant outside the city of Natanz, in a hardened facility 70 feet underground.

---
The addition of 1,000 new centrifuges, which are not yet operational, means Iran is expanding its enrichment program at a pace much faster than U.S. intelligence experts had predicted.

Read more: http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/04/exclusive_iran_.html

[WindRavenX]

1. Don't we have like 100K nukes?

I find it rather hypocritical that the US be condemning other countries that develop nuclear technology.

And really, we should be disarming.

[coalition_unwilling]

21. We are required to disarm by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty -n/t

[Tesha]

24. 10K to 20K nukes for us, 100 to 200 for Israel.

But if Iran gets even one, then it's...

*PANIC*, *PANIC*, *PANIC*!!!!

Tesha

[Wilms]

39. Did you mean *PNAC*, *PNAC*, *PNAC*!!!!?

:D

[Tesha]

44. Sorry, my typo. ;-). (NT)

[lakeguy]

2. i'd be more interested to hear the current prediction of when

iran will no longer be able to export oil without the use of nuclear energy. 2012 maybe?

[Raven]

3. Where did ABC get this information???? From the WH and Rove?

How do these juicy little tidbits just manage to drop on us at just the right time. I am so suspicious, so mistrusting of my government that I would believe anything is possible. Sad, sad, sad.

[IndianaGreen]

5. They got it from a CIA source called "Curve Ball"

The same source that told us Saddam had the bomb.

[IChing]

6. Hate week officially starts April 4th

Hate Week is officially celebrated from April 4th to April 10th.
The events during that time include waxwork displays, military parades,
speeches and lectures. New slogans are also coined and new songs are written.
The theme of the Hate Week is called the Hate Song.

It is mentioned that a unit from the Fiction Department was assigned to make atrocity pamphlets
(falsified reports of atrocities committed by Oceania's enemies against her)
designed to stimulate Oceania's populace further into enraged frenzy against all enemies.
The aggregate effect of Hate Week thus is to excite the populace to such a point that they
"would unquestionably have torn to pieces" if given the opportunity.

[Purveyor]

10. Tel Aviv would be my guess... eom

[kurtyboy]

46. Thats right! Our Intel community gets it wrong--AGAIN!!!

"Iran is expanding its enrichment program at a pace much faster than U.S. intelligence experts had predicted."

Umm, lemme se here--Intel right on WMD in Iraq, Judy Miller wrong.
Intel right in warning of 911 attacks, Presidential response wrong.
Intel points out that 911 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, Adminstration goes after Iraq--Wrong again.

Jathink there's a pattern developing?

[anotherdrew]

4. let them have some nukes - the 'balance of terror' is the best way to keep the peace

it's got a proven track record of working

they're weapons would only be a deterrent threat anyway

[whistle]

7. HOLY SHIT! BOMB THE BASTARDS NOW THEN, or at least by

...April 6, 2007 at no later than 00:40 hours:scared:

[Janice325]

8. So does that mean we're supposed to be scared and elect a

Repuke for President in 2008????:sarcasm:
Terra,terra,terra.
Fuck terra.

[Sequoia]

9. And Good Friday is.......coming.......up!

[cali]

11. I call bullshit on ABC

No credible expert gives that date. None.

[John Q. Citizen]

19. they didn't say they could build a bomb by then, just that they could produce

enough enriched uranium for a device.

I'm skeptical of even that.

[msedita]

28. I don't know why people think Iran can't make a bomb that quickly

The U.S. built its bombs from scratch in just a few years and that was over 60 years ago. No one even knew if it was possible then, now you can buy Nuclear Weapons Designs for Dummies at Borders. Even North Korea, as bankrupt as they are, developed the weapons in short order.

[John Q. Citizen]

36. If you read up on it I think you might understand why the worlds nuclear

scientists, enginners and intel services generally agree that Iran is a lot farther away than 20 months from producing a bomb.

I think the story in the OP is wrong anyway.

[psychopomp]

40. NK was helped by Pakistan

Seymour Hersh, "The Cold Test: What the Administration knew about Pakistan and the North Korean Nuclear Program," The New Yorker, January 27, 2002

on edit: sorry, link broken, but here is a quote:

"But the document's most politically sensitive information was about Pakistan. Since 1997, the C.I.A. said, Pakistan had been sharing sophisticated technology, warhead-design information, and weapons-testing data with the Pyongyang regime. Pakistan, one of the Bush Administration's most important allies in the war on terrorism, was helping build the bomb."

Pakistan, in turn, was helped by China. The Chinese were helped by the Soviets, who stole the technology from the Manhattan Project.

[harun]

52. ABC = All Bullshit Channel

[indepat]

55. or maybe All Bushit Channel?

[MasonJar]

12. Isn't that the same ABC, which ran the lies about Clinton and Albright

just before the 06 election? Yes, I thought so! Isn't it owned by Disney? Yes, I thought so! I suggest that every country in the world, including the good ole USA, get rid of all world destroying nuclear weapons... and spend the money on climate control...so that species do not die and man does not disappear for another million years.

[ben_meyers]

13. Pelosi to Knesset "Iran must not be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon.

I don't know about ABC's report, but I don't think it would be a good thing.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3192621

[RC]

14. 2009, huh? January 20, 2009?

Right after the inauguration?

[Canuckistanian]

50. Hah! My thought exactly.

At about 1:00 in the afternoon, I think.

[Eugene]

15. Here's another Iran getting nukes article from today...

Source: Reuters

Russian expert says Iran can make nuclear weapons

By Guy Faulconbridge
Reuters
Monday, April 2, 2007; 11:51 AM

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia's leading nuclear scientist said on Monday
that it was just a question of time before Iran developed a nuclear
weapon and it should be stopped.

The Islamic republic, facing a showdown with the United States over its
nuclear ambitions, clearly has the know-how to make atomic weapons,
said Yevgeny Velikhov, a leading physicist and close associate of Russian
President Vladimir Putin.

"From a scientific point of view of course they could create nuclear
weapons," Velikhov, president of Russia's Kurchatov Institute, told
reporters. "When they could do it is a more difficult question."

"If you remember, U.S. scientists expected the Soviet Union would only
be able to create a nuclear bomb by around 1954 at the earliest," he said.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/02/AR2007040200618.html

[Oak2004]

62. The "know-how" is easy to come by

A number of years ago someone ran an experiment to see if physics undergrads could design nuclear weapons that would likely work. The answer was a resounding yes (obligatory disclosure here: I'm a former physics undergrad).

The Russians beat the predicted date of nuclear success because A) US officials were then far too confident in their ability to conceal scientific fact from the rest of the world (science isn't classifiable because the natural world, and human curiosity, are not classifiable, and America's nuclear scientists were warning the government as much at the time); but, more importantly, the Soviets had a network of very effective spies within the Manhattan Project, who handed the Soviets the bomb on a silver platter.

On the other hand, good bomb-grade nuclear material is not easy to come by. And packaging the device so that it can be delivered is another substantial hurdle.

It is conceivable that Iran could very quickly cobble together something that goes kaboom using whatever fissionable material they could chemically refine (chemistry is comparatively easy; isotope separation is a bear). Such a device could be exploded in the desert and used to scare the world, by or even before 2009 (I'd think an all-out, damn the IAEC, effort by Iran could build a crude bomb in a matter of months, something true for many countries with operating nuclear reactors). A device so made would not be particularly sophisticated (not that it would need to be, given the power of even a "small", inefficient atomic bomb), nor would it necessarily be deliverable. I suspect the North Korean nuke is/was a crude nuke of this sort.

Such a nuclear program would be immediately detected for exactly what it is by the international community. There are many, many controls in place under the NPT to detect crude programs of exactly this sort. No international monitoring group is saying that they are detecting such a program.

But even if one conceded that such a nuke is being made and that it would be, somehow, immediately mass produced and weaponized, there is no reason to think that Iran would then lob their new toy at anyone else in the world. Iran and its leaders know that some combination of the US, Russia, or China (depending upon where they lobbed their bomb) would promptly turn Iran into a smoldering, cockroach-occupied, heap. No purported Koran passages promise 99 virgins for stupidly inciting and losing a nuclear war, thus causing the deaths of millions of faithful Muslems. If Kim Jung Il can get it that his new toy is for show only, Iran's much saner (IMO) leadership would certainly get the picture.

As to terrorists getting the bomb-- it is a very big leap to believe that a sovereign state would voluntarily hand a bomb to terrorists. Why? If one were used it would quickly be traced back to its nation of origin (cue "smoldering, cockroach-infested, heap"). But more importantly, nation-states need to maintain, if not an utter monopoly on force, at least overwhelming superiority of force vis-a-vis their citizenry and any client states and organizations they may manage. Handing a nuclear weapon to a non-state group gives up that superiority in a very dangerous manner.

There's a difference in temperament between people in government, even authoritarian/totalitarian government, and members of extremist groups. Government leaders of all stripes have to govern, i.e. solve practical problems and make functional compromises, and leaders had to have successfully navigated cutthroat internal politics to get to the top (i.e. leaders are not naive, but cunning). Extremists don't need to bother with practical governance, and can rise in influence by becoming ever more extreme. Every government with client extremist groups understands perfectly well that the people they exploit to further their own agenda today are likely as not going to wake up tomorrow and decide that their sponsors are the real enemy for not being pure enough.

A fine example of how nation states don't hand out bombs is Pakistan and Al Qaeda. Virtually all of the people who have access to Pakistan's nuclear arsenal have close ties to Al Qaeda, yet it does not appear that Pakistan has turned a bomb over to the group. Al Qaeda may yet get their hands on a Pakistani bomb, but it likely will never be because the government of Pakistan knowingly and willfully gives it to them.

But all of the above might obscure the real truth here: No international body has said that Iran is trying to build a crude bomb. Everyone, the US included, says they are engaged in isotope separation, a component part of a sophisticated nuclear weapons program, but also something that can generate reactor fuel. It is known to everyone, international agencies included, that Iran has had a breakthrough with their centrifuge program. Yet no international agency, knowing this, has stated that an Iranian bomb is now imminent. Until a recognized international authority with on-the-ground information says Iran is about to build a bomb, I'm not believing it.

Russia has its own motives here: Iran hasn't paid them for some nuclear-related work Russia did for them. Russia has seemingly gotten on Bush's "nonproliferation" bandwagon (though Bush spells "nonproliferation" A-M-E-R-I-C-A-N H-E-G-E-M-O-N-Y) ever since Iran skipped out on it's payment. Watch: if and when Iran pays its bills, this same Russian expert will be telling us all that Iran isn't even trying to build a weapon and needs to be left alone to pursue it's dreams of environmentally sound energy or something.

What would the US really know about the matter of Iran's nuclear ambitions that international nonproliferation agencies don't know, anyway? We don't have good intelligence from there anymore: Cheney took down Brewster-Jennings.

[Benhurst]

16. Possible? Sure. Anything is. Probable? Not likely. NT

[dweller]

17. So F~c#ing what?

it's not like they are the only ones with them.

You got a problem with Iran's nukes? Then get rid of ALL of the nukes. Learn to live in Peace for a change.

dp

[youngdem]

18. That's gonna be tough to do without any fuel

since Russia won't sell them any.

But don't let that stop you, ABC. You go right ahead and do the master's bidding.

Best warmonger this year gets to sit next to Bush at his lame duck Correspondent's Dinner.

[azurnoir]

20. That means we have to get them before thewy they get

Israel, cause we all no that the first thing they will do five minutes or less after they have da bomb is nuke Israel, their president said so kind of sort of, or at least MEMRI says so, we all no they crazy Arabs or Persians --- or or Islamofacists who are all willing to dye:sarcasm:




sorry ratchet up fatigue

[IsItJustMe]

22. Didn't they also say that Iraq had WMD? Like I'm suppose to believe them. Give me a break.

[w4rma]

23. Booga booga booga (nt)

[Warren Stupidity]

25. Good for them. nt.

[roamer65]

26. So fucking what, ABC?

If they used it, we'd level every city in their country. I think Iran understands what would happen if they used it. What evidence is there that they really sre pursuing one, anyway? Don't trot out the same, lame-asses that said Iraq had WMD.

[Marie26]

27. They are racheting up the propaganda.

That's disturbing.

[Delphinus]

29. Yes,

it is VERY disturbing.

[Marie26]

37. Lamest sourcing ever

They used to at least give a hint who their "unnamed sources" were. ("Senior Administration official", etc.) But the only source for this story is "a source familiar with the dramatic upgrade". Meaning, the person who made it up.

[Doctor_J]

30. All Bush Channel catapults the Rovaganda

:yawn:

[Generator]

31. Take that Rosie!

Your propaganda station overlords are working overtime to make sure we have permanent war.

[hedgehog]

32. When will we stop worrying about nuclear weapons Iran MIGHT

have in 2 years and start rounding up all the ones left lying around the old Soviet Union the last 10 years? Oh wait, wasn't that one of the things Valerie Plame and Brewster-Jennings were doing?

[truthisfreedom]

33. Blah blah blah threat blah war blah nuclear blah enrichment blah terror blah danger blah fear

fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear

[MrSlayer]

34. It could be, if they had started enriching 10 years ago.

But they didn't and it isn't. This is bullshit.

[EFerrari]

35. Good. Our "intelligence experts" can't seem to predict for sh#t.

This must mean, go fishing and forget about it.

Really, how transparent can these war profiteers be?

YOU ARE NAKED ALREADY!

[Doremus]

38. Somebody had to take over for Judith Miller. n/t

[Dover]

41. EXACTLY what they said in the run up to the Iraq invasion. Remember?

Same script.

[MrPrax]

49. Which they? The GOP? Bush? Clinton?

Remember? Same Script...!

[NuttyFluffers]

42. and cold fusion could be possible in my ass by 2008

come close ABC and study the process at work, and while you're behind there give me a kiss on the cheek. :*

[Algorem]

43. fuck abc.

[Tesha]

45. Be sure to use a condom; they've been hanging out with some...

> fuck abc.

If you do, be sure to use a condom; they've been hanging out
with some pretty sleezy characters lately and you wouldn't
want to catch anything.

Honestly, they started pandering to the religiously insane,
what, a couple of years ago and their news has been worthless
since then; every night, there's at least one story planted
to appeal to that demographic.

Tesha

[gravity]

47. Hopefully the Dems will be in office by then

so we can deal with the issue using diplomacy, a foreign concept to this administration.

[Bragi]

48. That changes everything. Bomb everyone.

And the last thing we need is any delay trying to confirm what the White House has already told ABC news. Bombs away!

[underpants]

53. That is one evil post

#666

"The One Percent Doctrine" by Ron Suskind

What is the one percent doctrine? It is Cheney calculation of who to hit first to show that we will and to change the behavior of other nations-IF there is at least a 1% chance that a country could attack us or harbor someone who does HIT THEM FIRST. Yes your math is right, 1% would include Canada and Greenland.

[kaal]

51. Hear we go again with more BS to stir a panic

BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS

[bdamomma]

54. more BS for the American public

these journalists should be rounded up with the WH thugs too.

[mhatrw]

56. ABCIA

Information is only as good as its source.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

57. Bush wants them to have a nuclear bomb

so that he can justify having a war with them.

[Acadia Blue]

58. I guess that means Bush will nuke them first.

[Megahurtz]

59. Said By The Country That Dropped The First One.

:rofl:

[HuffleClaw]

60. nice propaganda

completely at odds from what they were saying not so long ago of course.

[ohio2007]

61. ...yet the draft talk seems to be on the minds of congressman

....always simmering just below the surface