0 votes

Iranian Nuclear Technology... and they call us conspiracy theory junkies...

AllahPundit at HotAir has a blog post titled 'Ron Paul on Iranian nukes: “I wouldn’t do that much about it”'

They seem to buy into the narrative that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons to trade with the more bellicose allies of theirs.

So now I want to provide you with a more informed narrative, coming from someone who understands nuclear technology.

In fact, AllahPundit probably hasn't the slightest clue about nuclear technology, but the abstraction provided by government bureaucrats or the media he consumes is certainly a useful fear string to pull. Now he uses the same fear to reiterate and re-enforce the "Ron Paul is crazy" story, since Ron Paul is too rational-minded to buy the US story that Iran is wasting effort on nuclear weapons. The IAEA has said that Iran does not seem to be developing weapons, though the US thinks so despite this. Unlike my friends at HotAir, I understand how Iran's latest heavy water reactor works (I work on a similar one) and why heavy water reactors allow Iran to make their uranium enrichment programs (required for bombs) obsolete. Unfortunately, heavy water reactors are also used for the creation of plutonium; this is the sort of development that is closely watched and audited by third inspectors like the IAEA or probably some guys at the CIA with a close-source super-duper-secret Google Maps plugin.

Frankly I can't imagine an Iranian engineer would have any desire to mess with large quantities of bomb material, your risk of being killed goes up by a factor of 1000000 just for being in that room, no rational engineer in "today's word" would be involved with that in any way. The goal for the US should be to support Iran and potentially find a vested economic interest in the development of safe, secure, and MONITORED civilian infrastructure. If we distance ourselves with an isolating policy of "sanctions" then we only increase the threat that they will attempt to rationalize the development of a deterant.

Most Americans probably don't know that we actually helped the Iranian people develop their original Nuclear infrastructure in the 50's. Perhaps someone can explain why a country like Iran would have an interest in starting nuclear war--for some crazy irrational purpose huh? It is impossible for a room full of dimwits to put together a nuclear reactor. When a group of engineers who don't speak English actually do it, why does it seem like the Americans who can only speak fear always go berserk. And they call us conspiracy theory junkies!!

The striking issue is that none of these anti-Pauls have a clue about nuclear technology and seem to like to just go back and forth with the "Ron Paul is crazy" or "Ron Paul's supporters are crazy" meme like they're just exchanging, well, "hot air" and not much content. One of the comments even talks about "electromagnetic pulses" with a simple step-by-step plan on how it'll happen like they learned about this shit from Hollywood movies instead of an MIT lecture hall. How does the rational voice compete against this widely accepted narrative?

paultard.com | ronulan.com

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Israel is a nuclear power

They never signed the NPT.

No IAEA inspector has ever been allowed within a 50 mile radius to their nuclear installations at Dimona.

They would lose their status as only nuclear power in the Middle East.
The famous quote (I think it was from Sharon) "They got the oil, but we got the matches" would lose its powerful meaning.

If Iran would produce its own nuclear weapons, a kind of status quo in the ME would be the result.
And Israel is trying to avoid this by all means.

BTW,in March 1974, the Shah envisioned a time when the world's oil supply would run out, and declared, "Petroleum is a noble material, much too valuable to burn"

and President Gerald Ford signed a directive in 1976 offering Tehran the chance to buy and operate a U.S.-built reprocessing facility for extracting plutonium from nuclear reactor fuel. The deal was for a complete 'nuclear fuel cycle'.

At the time, Richard Cheney was the White House Chief of Staff, and Donald Rumsfeld was the Secretary of Defense. The Ford strategy paper said the "introduction of nuclear power will both provide for the growing needs of Iran's economy and free remaining oil reserves for export or conversion to petrochemicals."

Iran, a U.S. ally then, had deep pockets and close ties to Washington.

only because this

would get flagged on CL. ha ha

Canada Loves Ron Paul

Canada Loves Ron Paul

Here's One everybody should see!!!

Scott Ritter is the guy that said back in 2003 Iraq had no significant weapons of Mass Destruction...so I think he's credible. He has also said Iran is 7-10 years from a Nuke but this is a real warning for starting a war with Iran
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1048183541547339458...

Mike
Ron Paul is my HERO!!!

Mike
"Fire Team for Freedom"
visit www.mikeandjake.com

excellent points! The IAEA

excellent points!

The IAEA is the one inspecting Iran's nuclear facilities...
So where does the US GOVT get its "evidence"? Same place where they got the "evidence" used to justify the Iraq invasion? Fool me once....

don't forget, also, that there is only ONE country in the entire world, in the last 60+ years, which has actually dropped a nuclear bomb on any other country.

The United States, of course.

Working for US policy in the mideast that serves AMERICA's interests http://www.councilforthenationalinterest.org/

Iran is a real threat

Iran is a real threat to the U.S. Most probably from an EMP strike high in the atmosphere above the US. An EMP strike could fry every electronic circuit and send the US back 100 years.

Do your homework. Start here:

http://www.missilethreat.com/archives/id.2008/detail.asp

At this website, be sure and check out the "About" tab to see who is on the board of directors. People that know their stuff.

I love Ron Paul, I campaign for him, and I will vote for him, but Iran cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons. But...if we wait around long enough, Israel will be forced to make a move.

Kill all who could hurt you?

So can Russia, China, Israel, UK, France and probably India too. And any reasonably developed country in the world within a year or two if they wanted.

Should the US invade the whole world?

There exists absolutely no contradictory interest at all between Iran and the US (were it not for the US interventionism in the Middle East). Au contraire, Iran is as a big oil producer a natural trading partner with exporters of services and goods lke the US.

Besides, the christian right and the iraniam mullahs both believe in the same God and hail Jesus as a divine creature. So you religous guys on both sides have a million times more in common, than you have with the atheists and Godless people in for example Japan and China. Obviously, it is easier to hate the people who are most like oneself...

EDIT: I do not mean to adress you personally on the religion issue, straight shooter!

The mullahs pararded them recently

When Ahmedinehad visited NYC, and there was all this talk of nukes. There's rogue nukes floating around from the Soviet disbandment. Pakistan and North Korea have nukes. Iran is already capable of damaging the US or "an ally" but fact is they have not and likely won't. The US is capable of reacting swiftly and leveling Iran, and they know this. There have been numerous attempts to talk with us and negotiate, and they have been rebuffed again and again.

Israel clamors for war from time to time, and they haven't because the US has refused to support it. They may refuse to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and that is my biggest concern. If India doesn't then Israel may use it as an opportunity to follow suit and then launch a devastating and unnecessary attack against Iran thus ushering in WWIII or WWIV as the neocons call it.

Events may work out that Iran halts its nuclear enrichment program, which I actually believe is for benign purposes, on the condition that Israel disarms theirs. It's a big step for a peaceful Middle East and one I'm not holding my breath to see.

Canada Loves Ron Paul

Canada Loves Ron Paul

wolfe's picture

Can we say NORAD... :)

Ok, something a lot of people forget is that first, if Iran could develop nuclear capabilities, which no one but us thinks so. They would have no way to deliver it. Trans contintental delivery is a little more difficult than firing off a rocket. That's right, I said rocket. They don't even have strong long range missle capabilities and we are talking about them going halfway around the globe... lol...

And then, last but not least... We DO actually have defenses in place for this sorta thing. Little things. Like NORAD... Which can see a gnat on an elephants ass and react accordingly.

And no, NORAD was not helpful during 9/11 but I will not even point out the actual facts presented by truthers on why not. I will say that even if those things were ignored, the reason we were taken by surprise and NORAD was sitting on it's hands is because they were commercial american jets and we had grown soft because of not having been attacked in a very long time.

An enemy plane or missle heads our way and you can be damned sure, they'll do something about it.

The Philosophy Of Liberty -
http://www.thephilosophyofliberty.com/

A Aerial detonation

Could be much worse than a impact detonation. The EMP from a aerial detonation won't do the collateral damage that a ground level detonation will do, and very few casualties will result, however depending on the yield of the warhead all electronics withing hundreds, maybe thousands of miles will be fried. When I was in the Navy we did Aerial detonation drills, and trust me it wasn't fun. All electronics that were powered up would have been overloaded, radar, radio, even weapons systems would have been useless until repaired. In a best case scenario just getting hit by the em pulse we'd be running blind, worst case half the crew dead from the radiation, other half with heavy radiation poisoning, all systems fried and the ship DIW (dead in water) with no way to call for help except for signal flares. Is it likely that we'd get attacked by missile from Iran no. If an Iranian nuclear missile was fired at us would it actually hit is, not very likely. As wolfe said Norad. A terrorist with a suitcase nuke on the other hand is the only way nuclear attack would hit us. On a scary thought only 2% of all goods coming into our country are inspected.

If there was one thing I could ask Dr Paul it would be is the Department of Commerce one of the offices he keeps and if so is he going to mandate more thorough inspections of our imports. If so then the benefits would be threefold, 1. It would create more jobs 2. It would increase our security and 3. It would decrease illegal human cargo.

wolfe's picture

You make a VERY good point...

Ron Paul needs to stop focusing on what he would get rid of! He needs to start focusing on where some of that saved money would go, and some new jobs would be created! He has stated he would increase *defense* spending, and reduce *offensive*(pun intended) spending.

He needs to step up and list the Departments that are valid or can accept a new mission.

1) Increased funding for new technology and equipment for NORAD so that multiple strikes can be managed even better than now. He needs to focus on pointing out that this is how we prevent another 9/11 and potential missle strikes. etc.

2) Department Of Commerce recieves funding to be able to monitor and track incoming containers. A better use of technology would be to to do that instead of xraying innocent Americans.

Anyone else have any ideas on how we get defense beefed up without atatcking any country who disagrees with us?

He needs to provide a list of HOW we can beef up our defenses. I hope this thread get's monitored... :)

(This is how he can win over the people falling for the NeoCon line, is true to what he will do, and spreads the message better.)

The Philosophy Of Liberty -
http://www.thephilosophyofliberty.com/

I agree but unfortunately

I agree but unfortunately 72% of gallup poll voters don't know anything about Ron Paul. He needs to use his air time for name recognition first, then in later crucial debates wow the audience by setting a course of action with the funds we would be saving from our imperial warmongering.

As do you my friend

For a start instead of building military bases overseas we should start building them closer to border towns. The benefit of this is as everyone knows where there is a base there is a booming economy. Servicemen and women love to get off base to shop, eat, watch movies, ect and ect. This will also significantly decrease illegal immigration, knowing that there is a base nearby means that a majority of the people living there are most likely servicemenbers, and a majority of servicemembers have conciled carry permits or own long guns, such as riffles and shotguns and are highly trained to use them.

Then we could build more oil refineries on closed down bases, this will also create new jobs. Next start building new power plants, be it clean cole, natural gas, solar collectors, wind farms, even nuclear powers plants. Nuclear power plants are by far the safest, and cleanest and cheapest power plants developed. The greatest thing is we allready have more than enough enriched uranium! Old warheads that have degraded and are no longer weapons grade can be used in new and are all ready are being used in existing nuclear power plants.

wolfe's picture

All excellent ideas..

Not a fan of nuclear myself... But all the ideas you present make sense, and would serve to help us transition from our Empire to a safer country.

(My beef with nuclear isn't the same as anyone else's beef with nuclear. And my reasons would take way to long to explain... lol)

The Philosophy Of Liberty -
http://www.thephilosophyofliberty.com/

Wolfe I'm not too keen on it either..

..but on average nuclear powers is around $1.75 per kilowatt hour, it has no carbon or greenhouse emissions and with the latest Nuclear Fission technology we have its much, much, much safer than it was in the 70's.

one thing you might check

China offered sophisticated ballistic missles to the Saudis back in the 90s. The Saudis turned them down. China is active in Iran now and spreading influence through the mid-east. You can be sure that Iran's missles have been upgraded to far better than the old scuds.

hahaaha ....

thats all i am gonna say....

wouldn't be so fast to laugh on that

Jane's is a very reputable organization for analyzing military developments worldwide and has been known for very accurate assessment.

Great post, amirh

When you look at the rest of the candidates and the sheeple who buy into Faux News, you see how little common sense has to do with anything. Conservative voters as the world would have us know them are willing to support ideas which are entirely liberal: maybe abortion, definitely anti-gay or any other civil rights, pro-war, high taxes, exorbitant spending and capital punishment. Crazy by their definition makes me feel sane.

You raise some really good points. (1) By imposing harsh economic sanctions like we did with Iraq where at least half a million people starved, WHO is really an isolationist? (2) Democratic candidates (namely Barack Obama) are trying to adopt Ron Paul "talking points" about the free market and trading with other countries and diplomacy before war... although "nothing is off the table." WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE? I wish they could hear themselves.

Canada Loves Ron Paul

Canada Loves Ron Paul

All Comments

hey, you guys is SMART!

what a great site. thank you all!!

another newbie

don't you mean "y'all"?

Canada Loves Ron Paul

Canada Loves Ron Paul

I understand that the bomb

I understand that the bomb which Iraq began to develop in the 1980s was actually a copy of the first nuclear bomb ever made, back in 1945! That's big piece of equipment (4 tons) and not something you put an a normal fighter airplane or any missile that Iran has access to.

Do you know what charecteristics a "first nuke" would have if developed by a third-world country like Iran or North Korea?

And according to Cheney they were going to use...

what amounted to a "large" radio-controlled airplane to drop it on the US...

Yeah, right.

No one with any knowledge about nuclear weapons OR knowledge about RC airplanes believed any of that crapola.

But it made for a good "scary-story" on Faux News -- my parents were convinced by the pictures until I explained the weight of the bomb, they "minuscule" carry capacity of an balsa-wood plane (my dad's a private pilot for gosh sakes... he KNOWS the carrying capacity of a REAL single engine airplane with a 180hp engine is measured in HUNDREDS of pounds, not thousands!) -- AND then finally that "RC" control of a model is good for maybe a mile or two at best -- the curvature of the earth would prevent anything being flown beyond the horizon unless it was "satellite controlled" and last I knew, Iraq (and Iran) can't even break atmo, much less put up a bunch of military control satellites! Jeesh!

But "scare tactic" propaganda works when it hits people's emotions and fears -- makes them somehow disengage their brains and forget everything the know about the real world. And THAT is what we are combating.

the saddest commentary

on this Iran war rhetoric is that, Iran society is one of the most westernized in the Arab world. They lead the world in nose jobs, from watching American MTV. They lead the Arab world in college degrees, and their intellectual community is vocal in their politics. It is not the Taliban running Iran.

Democracy would have bubbled forth from Iran, as they have an insatiable desire for all commodities Western. The mullahs in charge shout a lot of rhetoric, but so do our American mullahs. They go about their business shopping, and buying Ipods. Just like we do.

There is open dissent over their president's running of the economy, and he could be replaced. The media would have to train Americans to hate the new guy.

Our current administration has emboldened their radical leadership, as they now fear American bombs from the sky. It's just such a sad thing, and it is a missed opportunity for peace, and real statesmanship.

Liberty and Freedom are a beacon; not a bullet.

not only that

I think Lebanon leads the Arab world in nose jobs, btw. Moving right along, Iran has a 79% literacy rate. 2/3 of the population is under 30 years old. Iran places fourth among countries most active in the blogosphere. It is a very modern and dynamically growing coutry.

Absolutely, the US created the current regime. I wish more people understood that the CIA has only been around since the Truman administration, as well as the role this organization has played in wrecking geopolitics and creating our enemies abroad. We could easily do without it.

Canada Loves Ron Paul

Canada Loves Ron Paul

a big fat bump

hear him (or her)

Yes, I'm sure that the

Yes, I'm sure that the Iranian middle class hopes for similar development as they see around themselves in their region in countries like India and Turkey with "tiger economies" and integration with the west (like Turkeys nearing to the EU). The fanatic militant islamist and the provocative president are hardly popular in their eyes, but American threats makes it "unpatriotic" for Iranians to not unite behind their leader (recognize that line of propaganda?)

About Turkey and the EU

It is unlikely to happen anytime soon. My husband lived in Istanbul for the past year and a half. His best friend is the son of a UN ambassador from Turkey to the US. The economic development in the country hinges on a diplomatic treaty with the US and Israel. Despite what you hear about air bases and the Iraq war, it really has more to do with the Ceyhan-Tblisi-Baku (BTC) oil pipeline and a water distribution agreement between Turkey and Israel.

There was much controversy about how this treaty came to pass. Most Turks are against cooperating in a war for oil and a threat to an Islamic identity. The tourism and trade is actually better with the Turkish lira as opposed to the euro.

What stands in the way of Turkey joining the EU is a daunting poverty rate and an abominable human rights record. Europe will never let Cyprus go. The Turks must acknowledge it and apologize for it. That goes for the Armenian genocide, too. The ADL and the US pretending it never happened carries little weight given the track records for the countries involved. Sadly...

Canada Loves Ron Paul

Canada Loves Ron Paul

and as they ramp up the propaganda machines

they leave out a lot of facts concerning the politics of what is happening. They constantly talk about how Iran is involved in Iraq yet ignore that the Saudis are doing the same thing in support of the Sunni factions. They ignore the parts of the IAEA reports which establish that the Iranian centrifuges can not be brought on line to the degree that is necessary to refine weapons grade uranium. I don't really know that much about atomic energy, but I can read the reports and see that we are being fed a barrage of half truths, inuendo and blatant lies

bump!

bump!

Canada Loves Ron Paul

Canada Loves Ron Paul