[CreepingDeth]

Very interersting. Play.

Physicist: Saddam's Uranium Stockpile Enough to Yield 142 Nukes

Five hundred tons of yellowcake uranium ore stored at Saddam Hussein's al Tuwaitha nuclear weapons research laboratory near Baghdad could have been enriched to produce 142 nuclear weapons, a prominent British physicist has determined.
Addressing the claim by British intelligence last year that Iraq had sought uranium in Niger, Norman Dombey, professor of theoretical physics at the University of Sussex, argued, "Iraq already had far more uranium than it needed for any conceivable nuclear weapons programme."

In an op-ed piece for London's Evening Standard, Professor Dombey explained that standard yellowcake ore consists of 99 percent Uranium 238 [U238], "which is radioactive but is not used in normal nuclear weapons as it cannot sustain a chain reaction."

To cause a nuclear chain reaction, he noted, "you need U235, which only makes up less than 1 percent [0.7] of natural uranium."

After doing the calculations, Professor Dombey explained, "You have a warehouse containing 500 tons of natural uranium; you need 25 kilograms of U235 to build one weapon. How many nuclear weapons can you build?

"The answer is 142."

Though most reporters continue to insist that Iraq had abandoned its nuclear weapons program after the first Gulf War, chief U.S. weapons inspector Charles Duelfer told Congress earlier this year that the Iraqi scientists were "preserving and expanding [their] knowledge to design and develop nuclear weapons."

One laboratory at al Tuwaitha "was intentionally focused on research applicable for nuclear weapons development," the top weapons inspector revealed.

Iraq War critics have argued that Saddam's uranium stockpile was safe because it was subject to once-a-year inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

But the IAEA was also in charge of monitoring North Korea's nuclear program right up until 2002, when Pyongyang announced it would begin producing nuclear weapons.

[Zimphire]

Iraq War critics have argued that Saddam's uranium stockpile was safe because it was subject to once-a-year inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

But the IAEA was also in charge of monitoring North Korea's nuclear program right up until 2002, when Pyongyang announced it would begin producing nuclear weapons

Indeed.

[zachs]

Source?

[CreepingDeth]

NewsMax-from op-ed-from physcisict.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by zachs:
Source?

Doesn't matter the source. The part I quoted is true.

[CreepingDeth]

Would anyone trust the bastard with more than blanks?
The possibility that this guy could build nuclear arms was bad enough. That's like popular sovereignty. The chance of slaves being in a state is bad as-well.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
Very interersting. Play.

Making the bomb (1991)

Iraq's bomb: Blueprints and artifacts

Iraq: A necessary war?

Finally there was the question of Saddam’s intent to use whatever weapons he may have had. The Gulf war documents make clear there was close control over the Iraqi arsenal. Kamel told the CIA in 1995 that the use of weapons of mass destruction had been raised several times within the Iraqi high command, but always rejected. [28] Saddam was cited elsewhere as believing the United States would have retaliated with tactical nuclear weapons if he had used his biological ones. [29] The agency itself concluded that Saddam considered the biologicals his strategic retaliatory force. Most recently, on October 7, 2002, Director Tenet sent a letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee declassifying the “senior intelligence witness’s” statement that in response to a U.S.-initiated attack that put Saddam in danger of defeat, the chances of his use of weapons of mass destruction were “pretty high, in my view.” [30]

What is clear from intelligence reporting is that until about 1998 the CIA was fairly comfortable with its assessments on Iraq, but from that time on the agency gradually buckled under the weight of pressures to adopt alarmist views. In fact, the looming threat of the day—Iran—has gradually been eclipsed even though it, like North Korea, had—and has—more questionable and more highly developed programs in several areas than had Iraq.

After mid-2001 the rush to judgment on Iraq became a stampede. It is fair to suspect that CIA analysts did not approve of the cast being given to their reporting.

Conversely, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld had little real need to create his own in-house intelligence staff to furnish threat information on Iraq—George Tenet’s CIA had already been hounded into doing just that. The Iraqi threat was nothing like the Soviet one, but intelligence had been manipulated just the same.

Weapons of Miller's Deception

A call for a truly public public hearing

The Niger forgeries. Apparently, documents used to back up the claim that Iraq was trying to purchase uranium from Niger were known forgeries, but I must leave it to others to shed light on how widely known the Niger story was before the war.

Whether true or false, though, the story made no sense. Why would Iraq want to import natural uranium (00.3 percent uranium 235 instead of the 90 percent 235 needed for a weapon) from Niger, and how would that demonstrate the urgency of the nuclear threat?

If genuine, this deal would be another signal that Iraq was starting again from scratch, not that it was anywhere near having actual weapons. But even more basic is the question of why Iraq would bother. Iraq has its own uranium deposits. Why would it risk discovery by buying the one thing abroad it had a supply of at home?

Oil: The illusion of plenty

About 65 percent of the increase came from just two countries, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait; Saudi Arabia alone contributed more than half and probably controls what remains of any spare production capacity.

The critical role that OPEC, in particular Saudi Arabia, plays as the swing producer for the world oil market is clearly evident from this episode, which allows one to quantify the ability of the Saudis to affect the world oil market and the world economy.

The U.S. assault on Iraq has not undermined the power of OPEC and Saudi Arabia. On the contrary, it has if anything enhanced that power. This will not change until Iraqi oil production significantly exceeds its pre-invasion level. Thus, even in the short term, and on the most cynical level, U.S. Iraq policy vis-à-vis oil has been a failure.

Oil supplies are finite and will soon be controlled by a handful of nations; the invasion of Iraq and control of its supplies will do little to change that. One can only hope that an informed electorate and its principled representatives will realize that the facts do matter, and that nature--not military might--will soon dictate the ultimate availability of petroleum.

Game over.

[tie]

However, the fact is that we had Iraq well-contained. The sanctions and inspections successfully prevented them from being able to advance their nuclear program. So I'm not sure what the argument here is.

Both Iran and North Korea had more advanced and more aggressive nuclear weapons programs, but the US is relying on diplomacy to deal with North Korea and on Europe to deal with Iran. Meanwhile, the US has scuttled expanded nuclear inspections (which NK would never agree to, but would have included Pakistan, a major nuclear arms proliferator).

[angaq0k]

smackdown

As Jon Stewart of the Daily Show asked recently about the administration’s attitude toward the American public, “Do they think we’re retarded?”

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
smackdown

Eh, that site is about as unbiased as newsmax.

[CreepingDeth]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
smackdown

I can count the number of times I've laughed at that man on…uh…well I've never laughed. He's never funny, never clever, and just acts like a complete ass.

[delco]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
Would anyone trust the bastard with more than blanks?
The possibility that this guy could build nuclear arms was bad enough.

The only reason Iran and NK can even think about it is because they have nuclear plants, something Iraq didn't have and had no chance of building. Since it was physically impossible for Iraq to enrich the uranium, it was not a concern to anyone (well, except those with brain damage).

[CreepingDeth]

Don't you think there are other ways to get that job done. *wink* *wink*
Besides, the guy was a murderer as-well, if that's not enough.

[MacGorilla]

Its a long way from Uranium to bomb. You need parts and know how.

[CreepingDeth]

Collaboration™

[delco]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
Collaboration™

With whose help, the palestinians?

[CreepingDeth]

No, but Saddam did pay for suicide bombers.

[delco]

Do you have ADHD or something?

[Demonhood]

play nice

[CreepingDeth]

Originally posted by delco:
Do you have ADHD or something?

No.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by MacGorilla:
Its a long way from Uranium to bomb. You need parts and know how.

The know-how is not common, but is easy to get if you know where to look; in most parts of the world the knowledge needed for a primitive nuclear weapon (which is all you really need, if you're just starting out) isn't even restricted. As for the parts, setting up a machine shop capable of producing these, while harder than building your average machine shop, is certainly within the resources of even a small nation's government.

The only thing that's really difficult about making a nuclear weapon nowadays is getting weapons-grade uranium or plutonium. Compared to that, the rest is a walk in the park.