flghtr65: Iran will be able to produce a nuclear weapon after 15 years. On Page 26, Item #25, The item reads that Iran cannot produce or purchase highly enriched uranium-235 at (20% concentration) or plutonium for 15 years. After 15 years this restriction is lifted.
From the text of the agreement:
"Iran will begin phasing out its IR-1 centrifuges in 10 years. During this period, Iran will keep its enrichment capacity at Natanz at up to a total installed uranium enrichment capacity of 5060 IR-1 centrifuges. Excess Centrifiges and enrichmen t-related infrastructure at Natanz will be stored under IAEA continuous monitoring, as specified in Annex I." -- Page 6 of 159 of the Iran nuclear agreement.
What's the big deal about IR-1 centrifuges?
http://www.nti.org/analysis/articles...el-collection/
April 15, 2015
The IR-1 is the workhorse of Iran's enrichment program, with over 15,000 installed at the Fuel Enrichment Plant (FEP) at Natanz and 2,710 installed at the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant. The IR-1 is Iran's first centrifuge, and is based off Pakistan's P-1 machine supplied via the A.Q. Khan black-market network in the 1980s and 1990s.
Based on what the Iranians are willing to admit to, and what is suspected, the IR-1 is centerpiece in their suspected nuclear program. Without the IR-1, no nuclear weapon... unless you're willing to entertain the reality that exists in 3rd world countries and what they're willing to do relative to what is traditionally done by governments and by western civilization.
They must start dismantling their IR-1 centrifuges in 10 years. Many of the, "Iran will not seek.... " Comments have a shelf life of 15 years. Don't you think that maybe, just maybe, they're estimating that it'd take up to 5 years to completely phase out these centrifuges? And it so happens that they're limiting Iran for 15 years because the negotiators anticipate that the Iranians "wouldn't" have any centrifuges by that time?
Which brings us to my question...
How the holy God dammed fuck, based on your own arguments and the above facts, as well as the contradictory comments you made as recorded in my last reply to you regarding this, are they going to generate a nuclear weapon?
Unless, you're willing to look at the reality of what people in 3rd World countries are willing, and able, to do relative to what governments traditionally do? Again:
Which brings me back to my earlier question to you. WHERE, in the TEXT of the agreement, does it specifically state that the objective of the agreement is to prevent Iran from detonating a nuclear bomb until after 15 years? WHERE?
flghtr65: There are only two substances that can be used to make an Atomic Bomb like the ones used at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The substances are:
U-235 at enriched at 20% or Plutonium. Jackie S, talked about this in one of his posts.
And like I said throughout this thread. The agreement is based on what the Iranians are willing to admit, and what they're been verified to have. It's not based on what the Iranians aren't willing to admit to having. Also, its success depends on the Iranians being 100% honest, as well as they're willingness to restrict themselves to what's in the agreement.
Outside of what they're willing to admit to having, and outside of what the inspectors know exists, the agreement is meaningless, and doesn't impact when the Iranians would ultimately detonate their first nuclear bombs.
flghtr65: After 15 years Iran can try to purchase these substances or try to make it themselves from the Uranium ore that they have in the ground.
And create a nuclear bomb with what, assuming that we're in a perfect world and the agreement captures everything that exists, and the Iranians were honest, and will abide completely by the agreement? By the time 15 years rolls around, assuming that we're in a perfect world, the Iranians would've phased out all of their IR-1s. That's what I got from going through the text of the agreement.
If you go through the document, you'd find that they attempted to set things up to prevent Iran from ever detonating a nuclear bomb. After they assume that the Iranians wouldn't have enrichment capability, or enough of it to create a nuclear bomb, of course they're going to put down, "for 15 years."
Perhaps I'll find the text about the number of kitchen sinks that we have to send to Iran before I come across the one that says that the intent of this deal was to push out their ability to detonate a nuclear bomb sometime after 15 years.
flghtr65: Harold Brown is correct in what he said in post #1.
[REPEAT POINT]
No, he's wrong, just like I've argued throughout this thread. The way the agreement is written, it assumes that the Iranians are honest, and will be honest and abide by the deal. It also assumes that they have everything covered, based on what the Iranians are willing to verify that they have. Harold Brown failed to factor in the operational/tactical/logistical variables that'd make this agreement useless.
The way it's written, it doesn't prevent Iran from detonating a nuclear bomb when it would otherwise have detonated a nuclear bomb, whether it's in the next 5, 15, 20 years. In a perfect world, where the Iranians admit to everything, and do everything that they're supposed to do, the agreement would "prevent" them from ever creating a nuclear weapon. But, we know how that'd work out with the Iranians. In the real world, with all the variables at play, that agreement doesn't do much to prevent Iran from eventually having a nuclear weapon.
flghtr65: Here are the only two nuclear fission reactions that can produce the fission fragments material needed for an Atomic Bomb. These reactions must be run in a NUCLEAR reactor. If you try to run this in the oven in your home, you will just BURN your house down.
You missed the point behind my bringing that up. I repeatedly stated, throughout this thread, that people living in the 3rd world are capable of doing things, on a simpler scale, to what governments do on a more complex scale.
If you read the article that I linked to earlier in this thread, the guy freaked out over what it did on his stove top. This, as with any other attempts to mess with science, has led to changes in how they did the same thing the next time. Would he have tried to do that on his stove top the next time? Based on his reactions, no. He would've gotten together with someone, with knowledge on how to handle something that's as hot as what the first guy observed, and they would've came up with something clever. Then, the first guy would've ran his experiment again and, based on that, would've came up with adjustments.
Do you see the trend that's happening here? People in Third World countries do things in a simple environment what people in the west would do in controlled, advanced, environments. Some of it isn't wise, but others are simply better ways of doing things.
Now, translate this to a government entity that goes this route. The Iranians weren't completely honest about what they had. What's in the agreement represent known infrastructure. You're not going to detect unknown infrastructure by just pointing a satellite at all of Iran. You have to know exactly where to look at in order to catch their other infrastructure.
flghtr65: Iran will have the ability to run either of these reactions AFTER 15 years and will be able produce an Atomic Bomb.
[REPEAT POINT]
From the text of the agreement:
"Iran will begin phasing out its IR-1 centrifuges in 10 years. During this period, Iran will keep its enrichment capacity at Natanz at up to a total installed uranium enrichment capacity of 5060 IR-1 centrifuges. Excess Centrifiges and enrichmen t-related infrastructure at Natanz will be stored under IAEA continuous monitoring, as specified in Annex I." -- Page 6 of 159 of the Iran nuclear agreement.
What's the big deal about IR-1 centrifuges?
http://www.nti.org/analysis/articles...el-collection/
PrintShareEmailTwitterFacebook LinkedIn
April 15, 2015
The IR-1 is the workhorse of Iran's enrichment program, with over 15,000 installed at the Fuel Enrichment Plant (FEP) at Natanz and 2,710 installed at the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant. The IR-1 is Iran's first centrifuge, and is based off Pakistan's P-1 machine supplied via the A.Q. Khan black-market network in the 1980s and 1990s.
Based on what the Iranians are willing to admit to, and what is suspected, the IR-1 is centerpiece in their suspected nuclear program. Without the IR-1, no nuclear weapon... unless you're willing to entertain the reality that exists in 3rd world countries and what they're willing to do relative to what is traditionally done by governments and by western civilization.
They must start dismantling their IR-1 centrifuges in 10 years. Many of the, "Iran will not seek...." Comments have a shelf life of 15 years. Don't you think that maybe, just maybe, they're estimating that it'd take up to 5 years to completely get rid of these centrifuges? And it so happens that they're limiting Iran for 15 years because the negotiators anticipate that the Iranians wouldn't have any centrifuges by that time?
Which brings us to my question...
How the holy God dammed fuck, based on your own arguments and the above facts, as well as the contradictory comments you made as recorded in my last reply to you regarding this, are they going to generate a nuclear weapon?
Unless, you're willing to look at the reality of what people in 3rd World countries are willing, and able, to do relative to what governments traditionally do? Again:
Which brings me back to my earlier question to you. WHERE, in the TEXT of the agreement, does it specifically state that the objective of the agreement is to prevent Iran from detonating a nuclear bomb until after 15 years? WHERE?
flghtr65: The U235 used must be highly enriched to 20% or the bomb will be a dud.
Again, in a perfect world where the Iranians admit to everything, and are completely honest, and the agreement captures everything there is to be captured, this'd be the case. But, this isn't a perfect world, the Iranians were even caught cheating during the negotiations. They're going to cheat this one as well. Also, given that they wouldn't admit to everything that they have, the unknown infrastructure is what could deliver where the known infrastructure won't be able to deliver.
flghtr65: HFC, You have just lost your first on-line argument. Study up.
Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf? Comical Ali? Is that you? 
As you can see, the facts indicate that I remain undefeated in these online debates. How does your ass taste? I had a greater time shoving it down your throat in this post than I did in the previous posts. 
However, the mere fact that you would hold that opinion suggests that even you recognize that I win these debates. If you want to get an idea of how I saw your, ROTFLFAO, claim of "beating" me, watch this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfAeMtcURg0
