Thursday, April 13, 2006
Nuke news
LEAVE THIS PAGE THE MOMENT YOU FINISH READING THIS POST and watch this computer animation produced by the Union of Concerned Scientists. You will discover the hard truth about "bunker-buster" nuclear weapons:
1. The blast cannot reach many underground targets.
2. Because the missiles do not bore so deeply as many presume, the radioactive cloud could spread as much as one thousand miles. Three million people may be killed, while another thirty million will be at increased risk of cancer. The victims will be Iranians (the ones we suposedly hope to liberate), Afghans (the ones we supposedly liberated), Pakistanis (our supposed ally) and Indians (another ally).
3. Using nukes on a chemical weapons cache will spread toxic gasses, thereby increasing the death toll.
And why does Bush propose to use commit genocide? To prevent Iran -- a country which has never attacked us or any of our allies -- from acquiring nukes. Iran cannot be trusted with nukes. Bush can. Or so we are told.
You've heard a lot of hooey about Iran being "16 days" away from producing a nuclear bomb. Here's the truth, according to Juan Cole:
1. The blast cannot reach many underground targets.
2. Because the missiles do not bore so deeply as many presume, the radioactive cloud could spread as much as one thousand miles. Three million people may be killed, while another thirty million will be at increased risk of cancer. The victims will be Iranians (the ones we suposedly hope to liberate), Afghans (the ones we supposedly liberated), Pakistanis (our supposed ally) and Indians (another ally).
3. Using nukes on a chemical weapons cache will spread toxic gasses, thereby increasing the death toll.
And why does Bush propose to use commit genocide? To prevent Iran -- a country which has never attacked us or any of our allies -- from acquiring nukes. Iran cannot be trusted with nukes. Bush can. Or so we are told.
You've heard a lot of hooey about Iran being "16 days" away from producing a nuclear bomb. Here's the truth, according to Juan Cole:
Despite all the sloppy and inaccurate headlines about Iran "going nuclear," the fact is that all President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Tuesday was that it had enriched uranium to a measely 3.5 percent, using a bank of 180 centrifuges hooked up so that they "cascade."America, fueled by religious hatred, will soon commit the greatest atrocity the world has seen since the Third Reich. Every decent human being in this country must spend at least some part of every day trying to prevent the coming catastrophe.
The ability to slightly enrich uranium is not the same as the ability to build a bomb. For the latter, you need at least 80% enrichment, which in turn would require about 16,000 small centrifuges hooked up to cascade. Iran does not have 16,000 centrifuges. It seems to have 180. Iran is a good ten years away from having a bomb, and since its leaders, including Supreme Jurisprudent Ali Khamenei, say they do not want an atomic bomb because it is Islamically immoral, you have to wonder if they will ever have a bomb.
The crisis is not one of nuclear enrichment, a low-level attainment that does not necessarily lead to having a bomb. Even if Iran had a bomb, it is hard to see how they could be more dangerous than Communist China, which has lots of such bombs, and whose Walmart stores are a clever ruse to wipe out the middle class American family through funneling in cheaply made Chinese goods.
# posted by David @ Thursday, April 13, 2006 
