Iran and nuclear weapons: know your history
posted by CS | 2:58 PM 
Ken Timmerman doesn't share the view that the current conflict in Israel and Lebanon is World War III.
It is telling to note the shift of Arab states away from rote support of Hezbollah. It really does seem that Iran is the puppet master of this not-ready-for-prime-time charade. Could it be they do actually have nukes and are close to the ability to use them? It just may be so.
Personally, I do not fear a rogue state with a handful of small nuclear weapons. What I fear more is the ability to deliver them. North Korea does not scare me as it would were I a South Korean. I fear for our servicemen in the Middle East, given the weapons Iran perhpas possesses, but still not for Americans at home.
What of the case of the nuclear weapon concealed in a ship? The yield of such a weapon is going to be limited by the physics of detonating it so close to the ground. This is of little consequence to those near the blast - and truly this is a weapon of terror - but in realistic terms, such a weapon is not utterly devastating. The yield of any nukes Iran might possess would be generally small to begin with - on the order of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima - perhaps greater if they've obtained refined plans. But recall that the U.S. dropped the nuclear bombs on Japan from the air - not solely because it was an effective delivery option. The bombs were exploded not on the ground by impact but in the air well before reaching the ground. This is to maximize the effect of the blast.
“This is more like the Spanish Civil War,” says Daniel Seaman, an Israeli government spokesman. “What we are seeing is a series of conflicts that foreshadow a future world conflict, just as the Spanish Civil war prefigured the Second World War.”Check out his piece for an interesting analysis of what may come.
It is telling to note the shift of Arab states away from rote support of Hezbollah. It really does seem that Iran is the puppet master of this not-ready-for-prime-time charade. Could it be they do actually have nukes and are close to the ability to use them? It just may be so.
Personally, I do not fear a rogue state with a handful of small nuclear weapons. What I fear more is the ability to deliver them. North Korea does not scare me as it would were I a South Korean. I fear for our servicemen in the Middle East, given the weapons Iran perhpas possesses, but still not for Americans at home.
What of the case of the nuclear weapon concealed in a ship? The yield of such a weapon is going to be limited by the physics of detonating it so close to the ground. This is of little consequence to those near the blast - and truly this is a weapon of terror - but in realistic terms, such a weapon is not utterly devastating. The yield of any nukes Iran might possess would be generally small to begin with - on the order of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima - perhaps greater if they've obtained refined plans. But recall that the U.S. dropped the nuclear bombs on Japan from the air - not solely because it was an effective delivery option. The bombs were exploded not on the ground by impact but in the air well before reaching the ground. This is to maximize the effect of the blast.
If we fight a war and win it with H-bombs, what history will remember is not the ideals we were fighting for but the methods we used to accomplish them. These methods will be compared to the warfare of Genghis Khan who ruthlessly killed every last inhabitant of Persia. -- Hans A. BetheIt would seem Iran is bent on payback.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home