CDZ The Iranian nuclear deal: a deeper look

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by PhilosphyBeforeParty, Jul 18, 2015.

?

Do you think that the deal was beneficial overall?

  1. Yes

    6 vote(s)
    33.3%
  2. No

    12 vote(s)
    66.7%
  1. irosie91
    Offline

    irosie91 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Messages:
    53,234
    Thanks Received:
    3,996
    Trophy Points:
    1,815
    Ratings:
    +14,970

    you are very naïve. ------think a bit more----no one knew about the MANHATTAN PROJECT-----where it was and what it was and who was in
    on it. Ask some elderly aunt if she knew. Did Germany know? Did
    Japan know?
     
  2. PhilosphyBeforeParty
    Offline

    PhilosphyBeforeParty Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2015
    Messages:
    193
    Thanks Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    46
    Ratings:
    +41
    that is not even remotely similar to the situation with Iran. Germany and Japan and your elderly aunt didn't know because the IAEA wasn't closely inspecting the USA to make sure that they weren't building a bomb. besides, it is hard to find out that somebody is trying to build a nuclear bomb when nuclear bombs do not yet exist. also, we have much better technology to detect radioactive materials and much more knowledge about them than WWII Germany and Japan and your aunt did.

    P.S. please stop using excessive dashes and ellipses. it doesn't make you look smart or dramatic.
     
  3. RoccoR
    Offline

    RoccoR Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2010
    Messages:
    7,008
    Thanks Received:
    1,855
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Reynoldsburg, OH
    Ratings:
    +4,258
    PhilosphyBeforeParty, et al,

    It has just been over a decade that the US had its last major intelligence failure concerning the nuclear capacity of a potential enemy. We need to be careful. The only significant difference in the intelligence collection capability is more bureaucratic then relevant. And layers of added bureaucracy do not improve operational collection capabilities.

    (COMMENT)

    You must remember that the IAEA was all over Iraq before the intelligence community came back and declared:
    • Attempts to acquire uranium
    • Aluminum tubes and magnets for use in a gas centrifuge-based uranium-enrichment program
    • Hussein was meeting with top nuclear weapons experts and that Iraq maintained the scientific know-how to produce nuclear weapons.
    There is no real reason to assume that there has been a significant improvement in the ability of the US IC to effectively direct, collect, process, analyze and disseminate reliable intelligence on this subject matter has taken place. No reason what-so-ever.

    Yes, it is true that technology has made some advancements in the packaging and sensitivity of some of the technical surveillance equipment, the leadership and use of HUMINT to collect and gain critical inside information has no real improvement. It take years and years to establish a set of HUMINT collection systems that can operate effectively behind the line of security protection and countermeasure systems employed by a totalitarian Islamic State.

    I remember --- oh so very distinctly --- how Secretary Rumsfeld boasted about how he knew this and how he knew that. ("We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad." - Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003) When, in reality he "knew" nothing of the sort:

    NYT By Brian Knowlton Published: January 29, 2004: David Kay, the former chief U.S. weapons inspector for Iraq, told a keenly attentive Senate hearing Wednesday that "we were almost all wrong" in believing before the war that Saddam Hussein possessed banned weapons.​

    We have to be cautious on both sides of the equation: What we actually know about their program, --- and --- what we do not know about their program; or even if they have a viable program.

    Most Respectfully,
    R
     
  4. irosie91
    Offline

    irosie91 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Messages:
    53,234
    Thanks Received:
    3,996
    Trophy Points:
    1,815
    Ratings:
    +14,970
    your
    your response is dim. -----there is nothing wrong with my use of dashes. My aunts are all dead andnone knew anything about fusion, fission, or radioactivity and neither do you. A bomb TEST might produce detectable radioactivity -----ie enough to be a means of surveillance. but the making of a bomb in some remote
    area of a large country will not. I do not know you David Kay was or is----but the issue was not entirely about"banned weapons" -----It was about MASS DESTRUCTION-----there is no question that Saddam did engage in MASS DESTRUCTION-----he did not do it with a toothpick. He did have people working extensively on biologicals-------I am not even sure that his huge stash of NITROGEN MUSTARD GAS was " illegal "----try to
    learn something-----ALKYLATING agents are used in making medicines and dyes (you may have no idea what an alkylating agent is. ---you do not seem to understand the term
    "mass destruction" . You seem to imagine that it is synonymous with fission and fusion bombs. Pol pot, stalin and adolf used neither
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2015
  5. PhilosphyBeforeParty
    Offline

    PhilosphyBeforeParty Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2015
    Messages:
    193
    Thanks Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    46
    Ratings:
    +41
    while what you say is true, this is still a different situation than any of the ones you mention. inspection teams will have access to all of Iran'd nuclear sites, from the mines to the reactors, and it sis impossible to erase traces of radioactive materials. to build a bomb in secret, Iran would have to create and entirely new supple line in secret, meaning mines, conversion facilities, refineries, and reactors.
     
  6. RoccoR
    Offline

    RoccoR Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2010
    Messages:
    7,008
    Thanks Received:
    1,855
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Reynoldsburg, OH
    Ratings:
    +4,258
    PhilosphyBeforeParty, et al,

    I appreciate your confidence in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Inspection Team; but, they are not in a position to provide credible assurance about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran. That information has to come from other compartmented national level assets; usually from somewhere within the P5+1.

    (COMMENT)

    Theoretically, if everyone is playing according to Hoyle, the IAEA Inspection Team (divorced of any US Inspection Representative) will have access to all the various locations crucial to the Critical Nuclear Weapons Design Information (CNWDI) Programs, and production and testing facilities. But I don't think for a minute that Iran is going to permit snap/spot inspections beyond their ability to manage or allowed to pursue an un-vetted inspection regiment; but they may allow a compromise of a short notice roll-out. And I do not think that Iran is ever going to permit the Inspection Team access to facilities or materials that are not in the best interest of Iran's future. We will have to see exactly how this is actually implemented.

    Now do I think that Iran is going to forge ahead with the prohibited aspects of the Basic Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and the modified (3.1) Additional Protocol? No --- at least not immediately. Iran's best interest at the moment are re-entering the economic mainstream and being able to exploit the commercial aspects of their foreign trading partners.

    The Intelligence Community (the IC) simply is not in a position to determine the Launch Vehicle Capability and the or Plutonium Production either for nuclear delivery or EMP deployment. And their is no reason to think that the intelligence resource will improve over the next 36 months. The US Technical capacity is on a downward slope. The nations that once put a man on the moon now has to hitchhike into space. And the US HUMINT capacity is not all that strong.

    Most Respectfully,
    R
     
  7. I amso IR
    Offline

    I amso IR "Well Yea, Duh"!

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2015
    Messages:
    1,189
    Thanks Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Ratings:
    +473

    I amso IR responds

    Hi Phil, seems this thread has hit a dead end. About the other "essay" you offered to post, why not go ahead and do that. It might gain yourself a bit more support on your way to a Nobel Peace Prize. How is that making friends with Iran thing working out for you? Good talking to you.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

page 16 of the iranian deal