Iran and the Bomb

[Haggis@wk]

IRAN: New Middle East Won't Include Zionists

Yeah, that's going to calm the Israelis. I can hear the spooling of the jet engines now.

[analog]

Somebody else musta heard 'em spooling.....

http://www.debka.com/article/8665/

Obama recalls bunker-buster bomb kits to bar Israeli strike on Iran
DEBKAfile Special Report March 20, 2010, 6:54 PM (GMT+02:00)

Tags: bunker-busters Israel Obama
Advanced BLU-100 recalled by President Obama

Shortly after Vice President Joe Biden's Israel visit ended on March 11 in high dudgeon over the approval 1,600 new homes in East Jerusalem, US president Barack Obama ordered a consignment of Joint Direct Attack Munition- JDAM already on its way to Israel to be diverted to the US Air Force base on the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia. This step, the pointer to a US arms embargo for preventing Israel attacking Iran's nuclear sites,.....

good grief it's almost a month old.
I guess that's why Netanyahu opted out of the arms talk in Washington?

[Haggis@wk]

I guess that's why Netanyahu opted out of the arms talk in Washington?

Probably this.

Obama Administration Denies Visas to Israeli Nuclear Scientists.

“This could be yet another flashpoint in the increasingly sensitive relations between the administration, the American Jewish community, and Israel.”

Face it, Israelis — he just doesn’t like you that much, but the American Jewish voter is overwhelming Democrat, go figure.

[dai bread]

If the American Jewish vote is overwhelmingly Democrat, it can safely be taken for granted. The Israelis have lost the PR war.

[Haggis@wk]

I guess that's why Netanyahu opted out of the arms talk in Washington?

Probably this.

Obama Administration Denies Visas to Israeli Nuclear Scientists.

“This could be yet another flashpoint in the increasingly sensitive relations between the administration, the American Jewish community, and Israel.”

Face it, Israelis — he just doesn’t like you that much, but the American Jewish voter is overwhelming Democrat, go figure.

Correction

This visa problems did not begin with the Obaama Administration, they started after 9/11.

[Haggis@wk]

Secret Gates memo warns that U.S. has no strategy for dealing with a nuclear Iran.

Of course they didn’t prepare alternatives. How could they possibly fathom that diplomacy might fail?

[dai bread]

What's secret about not having such a plan? Now if there really was a plan for dealing with nuclear-armed Iran, that would be a secret.

[Haggis@wk]

Dai,

Militaries prepare contingency plans for just about everything. I used to write, and re-write, then re-re-write contingency plans for the USAF's Air Mobility Command, primarily for evacuating American embassies and other American groups from every country in the world, including evacuation under combat condition as well as civil unrest, natural disaster, etc. the list of potential circumstances that would force some form of evacuation is almost limitless and is only restricted to situation we couldn't think of. I don't recall if there was a plan for the hostile evacuation of the American embassy in London under combat conditions but I can guarantee that there’s a hostile evacuation plan for damn near every other country, including NZ, in the world. The joke among contingency planners is there's a secret group of contingency planners that were dedicated to planning for the invasion of Britain.

Against this backdrop the discovery that there is no contingency plans in the event that Iran gets the bomb is enormous and has to be a political decision. Contingency planning is as close to a perpetual motion machine that exists. The only time that a contingency is not planned for is because someone above their pay grade told them not to do it.

When I heard that, that faint thud you heard that night down in NZ was my jaw hitting the desk

[dai bread]

Thanks, Haggis.

I'm intrigued to know what the plans would be for evacuation from a hostile NZ. If NZ is hostile, Oz almost certainly will be too, so that leaves Fiji as the only relatively handy place with a reasonably sizeable airport.

I think any Americans in a hostile NZ would be best advised to join the local Resistance.

[piqaboo]

Swim, folks, swim!

[Haggis@wk]

Thanks, Haggis.

I'm intrigued to know what the plans would be for evacuation from a hostile NZ. If NZ is hostile, Oz almost certainly will be too, so that leaves Fiji as the only relatively handy place with a reasonably sizeable airport.

I think any Americans in a hostile NZ would be best advised to join the local Resistance.

Well, consider that there was more than a little tongue in cheek in my original remarks. But wearing the contingency planner's hat I would expect one, probably two, aircraft carriers off the coast. Since we only have a presence in Wellington then we might set up a FOB somewhere on the South Island or Fiji as you suggested. Where would the South Island be in your hypothetical hostile situation?

In the event of a complete breakdown, ala Iran I would expect the ambassador and his staff would surrender to the dominant power and release the Marine guard to do whatever it wants to do.

I remember that one of the Marines taken hostage during the Iran takeover remark that if he had began shooting into the crowd of the students he would have probably prevented the 20 plus years of terrorism against the U.S. and that would have been worth dying for.

Sadly, I suspect he was right.

I never did any planning for the Marines but after Iran I suspect that there is a secret order at every embassy guard force that after the ambassador surrenders they are permitted to fight to the death, surrender, or join the resistance, care to give me your phone number so I can pass it on??

[dai bread]

You've forgotten about the Deep Freeze staff in Christchurch, and the Consulate in Auckland.

In my hypothetical hostility, the South Island is with the North. It is conceivable (about as conceivable as the rest of this scenario) that they have broken away in order to keep their electricity to themselves and grow their industrial base. They could well ask for American aid, in which case you have a base at Christchurch, and all the Americans in the North Island have to do is get themselves to a safe place to be picked up.

I like Piq's suggestion for escape from NZ. All visitors should pack waterwings.

I have my doubts about that Marine guard's comment, but he was the man on the spot, and I'll take his word for it until I can confirm or contradict it. I think at the moment that if he'd opened fire he would have inflamed anti-American sentiment and contributed to the queues of suicide bombers.

[DavidS]

2 Germanys, 2 Chinas, 2 Koreas, 2 Vietnams, 2 (or 3) Israels...why not 2 NZ's?

[dai bread]

If some Maori have their way, that will happen. They'll come crying to us for Aid, of course, because their tax base won't be anywhere near big enough to support them in the style to which they would like to be accustomed. Most Maori will stay with us, or go to Australia. Ngati Ahiteraria are quite numerous already, and they have children born there.

[Haggis@wk]

Iran strikes secret nuclear mining deal with Zimbabwe's Mugabe regime

[Haggis@wk]

Time to ask tough questions about terrorists

The two pieces of sub-critical HEU will slam together after one is fired down an artillery tube at the other. The bomb will yield between 10 and 15 kilotons (about the power of Little Boy, dropped on Hiroshima and based on the same design) and will erase (if detonated in Times Square) everything up to about 50th Street and down below 34th Street, with fires and flying debris reaching at least 72nd and 14th Streets and probably crossing the Hudson to the west and reaching the East River in the other direction. Since the device would be detonated at ground level, fallout would be immense and the extent and dispersal patterns would depend on the prevailing winds that day and for the next 48 hours. Manhattan would be uninhabitable, potentially for years. At least 100,000 people would die, probably many more, and untold more would be injured or suffer radiation poisoning or deadly mutation.

There are a non-trivial number of people in the world who would very much like to do this to us. It won’t be easy, and they may never get the chance. They may also be caught in the act of trying at any of the various stages of the plot. These people are, however, probably not deterrable.

This much the conventional wisdom on terrorism has right. But there are also a handful of states that would like to see this happen, or at least would not object, and may lend a hand in helping it happen, especially if they calculate that their role in the act will appear sufficiently ambiguous to minimize the chance of American retaliation. And then there are the surrounding societies that by turns and to various degrees support, oppose, or look the other way at the terrorist and ancillary activities that go on in their midst every day.

Are these actors also utterly undeterrable? The conventional wisdom says yes. Stephens suggests, maybe not. One thing is certain: As a nation, we haven’t asked. Our foreign policy and security establishments have not explored and debated. The issue is simply one that cannot be spoken of.

[Shapley]

John Minnery's How To Kill books provide a couple of chapters on building nuclear weapons, if I recall. The nuclear part is fairly simple, as your post mentions. The triggering mechanism can be a bit more complex but, if you dont' mind dying with the rest of us, you could simply drop half the nuclear pile down a chimney onto the other half. The difficulty in acquiring the necessary fissionable material is probably the only thing that has kept the world from seeing a terrorist nuclear weapon exploded.

As you note, that may change as the number of nuclear nations continues to grow. We've always had nations unfriendly to our interests, even nuclear nations unfriendly to our interests, but they've always been ruled over by men fearful of the consequences of triggering a nuclear holocaust. I'm not sure that will always be the case.

[analog]

The difficulty in acquiring the necessary fissionable material is probably the only thing that has kept the world from seeing a terrorist nuclear weapon exploded.

agreed 100%.
A good "Junkyard Warrior" could probably rig up electronics to set off the explosives. There's lots higher tech stuff inside consumer products now than in 1944.

The huge machinery involved in enriching uranium pretty well assures there's educated, thinking people running things.
A bunch of cave kooks trying to build one from scratch doesn't worry me.

But that Arnold movie "True Lies" seems prescient with its black market bombs no bigger than an outboard motor.... I pray the real ones are all accounted for and i wish they'd find that one that fell off the B52 into the swamp mud off North Carolina.
When you consider there's basketball sized torpedo warheads, briefcase sized two man deployable "concealed carry" nukes, and thermos bottle sized nukes for five inch artillery,,, the outboard motor sized ones in Arnold's movie seem outlandishly awkward.

Probably it's wise to mentally prepare oneself for the possibility -- what will I do here if it happens there?

a.

[dai bread]

In these days of suicide bombers, surely all you need is 2 sub-critical masses and 2 backpacks?

[BigJon]

In these days of suicide bombers, surely all you need is 2 sub-critical masses and 2 backpacks?

But they'd have to be world-class sprinters and wear the backpacks in front of them, surely that would raise SOME suspicions . . .