AP: "Even one nuclear bomb would take years for Iran"

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/259643_iran16.html?dpfrom=thead

By CHARLES J. HANLEY
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

The Iranians may have an atom bomb within two years, the authoritative Jane's Defense Weekly warned. That was in 1984, two decades ago.

Four years later, the world was again put on notice, this time by Iraq, that Tehran was at the nuclear threshold, and in 1992 the CIA foresaw atomic arms in Iranian hands by 2000. Then U.S. officials pushed that back to 2003. And in 1997 the Israelis confidently predicted a new date -- 2005.

Now, as 2006 wears on, and a global focus sharpens on Iran's nuclear ambitions, the coming of any Iranian doomsday arsenal looks to be years away, experts say. Those past predictions consistently underplayed the technological challenges of a bomb program.

... In fact, the latest estimate from the CIA and other U.S. intelligence agencies sees no Iranian bomb before the next decade. Israeli defense experts agree, speaking of a 2012 date.

more

For some reason it does not bother the US.

no Iranian bomb before the next decade.

IF Iran actually decides to go for the Bomb and IF they work full out 24/7 the next 10 years and IF nothing whatsoever goes wrong or delays them.

OMG BETTER BOMB THEM & KILL TENS OF THOUSANDS OF HUMAN BEINGS NOW!!!

And GIVE RICE that $75 MILLION of OUR MONEY to CATAPULT BUSH'S PROPAGANDA in Iran while bush's budget CUTS MILK for American kids and CUTS FOOD for American elderly and CUTS MEDICINES & TREATMENT for American poor and while FRANCE & other nations pay for rebuilding New Orleans coz bush won't!!!

:scared: :D

Ok, Let's assume that Iran has the ability to enrich enough plutonium to actually accumulate enough material to produce a nuclear weapon. They would have spend billions of (dollars??) on development and... now comes the "testing phase". How will they know it would work? The U.S. has detonated hundereds of the things in an effort at perfecting the detonation sequence and yield. These yahoos are going to get it right the first time?

Next: What about a method of delivery? There is NO such thing as a "suitcase" nuclear weapon. One of the smallest nuclear warheads (by weight and size) is the W-80, the warhead (nuclear package) used on the Alcm II Cruise missle.

Here are it's specs:
W-80 Characteristics
Available Yields (Kt) 5 / 150
Weight 290 lbs
Length 31.4 in
Diameter 11.8 in
Number In Service Mod 0 (SLCM) 350
Mod 1 (ALCM) 1000
Mod 1 (ACM) 400


It's almost one yard long, 12 inches in diameter, and it weighs 290 pounds!
Even California's Governor would find it a bit exausting to lug that thing around in his suitcase.

And, it's a sure bet that the Iranians will NOT be able to duplicate (on their first try) the compact size and weight the U.S. has achieved only after 40+ years of testing and modifying.

I'm not losing any sleep over Iranian nukes.
They could get more bang for their buck by investing in Bio weapons.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

How dare you ignore my paranoia in an attempt to appeal to my intellect? :silly: