How should the United States and its allies prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons?

Question

Can we stop them?

Should we stop them?

Answer 1

Lets's see... The US has thousands of nukes, the Soviet Union has about the same. Israel has nukes, France and England have nukes. North Korea has nukes. A nuclear capable Iran makes about as much sense as any country, no matter how unstable we all may think they are. If Iran fired off a nuke, as stupid as they would be to do so, do you seriously believe that they are stupid enough to believe that no one would fire back? No one wins a nuclear war, no one. It would be smarter to help them develop the technology safely out in the open. If the US can talk with North Korea after all the rhetoric of the last year or so, then why stop Iran? Their nutcase of a leader is no better or worse than some others and to guarantee that no nutcase uses nukes is impossible unless you plan on turning the entire world into a parking lot which is the only way to guarantee anything. Which sounds better, a parking lot of another nuclear capable country? For my grandchildren's children, I choose the latter.

Answer 2

UK and USA and Russian intelligence verifies that Iran is building a water reactor in Arak. The only such reason for such a reactor is to produce plutonium... a far cry from the nuclear energy it claims Iran is striving for. And why in the world does Iran need nuclear power... it sits right on top of a vast oil reserve that could sustain Iran for two hundred years.

Answer 3

It's too late. Iran is only months away from putting together a nuclear device. Will they test it and how, that's the question everyone is waiting to see. Even though Iran said it is close to having nuclear power, it still has to test it. That's when the situation should start to get really mean and ugly.

Answer 4

if they had them then the Israelis might think twice about using there's,they have at least a hundred of them.with nuclear weaponed subs and missiles. .i do not think if they got them they would use them i sure don't think we should bomb them just because there honest people ,because my neighbour doesn't like me doesn't mean i shoot the entire family for Gods sake.they haven't started a war in over two hundred years ,if they did nuke someone they would be turned to glass, there entire country, we have 5000 nukes and bush wants more.many country's have nukes, all this is is an excuse for us are the Israelis to bomb them into submission
they say they only wish for nuclear power, anyway.
but war will come.and there persians not arabs and will fight to the last man and boy child.

Answer 5

And what proof do you have that Iran is actively seeking to build nukes--when it is nowhere near that stage in the first place?

Or are we going to start the next war based on a THEORY rather than concrete facts?

It worked with Iraq so well, didn't it?

Answer 6

Gee, I guess because those weapons would most likely be used on Israel and possibly the US!

Answer 7

why stop them, it evens the playing field.

Answer 8

NO, we cant stop them and we shouldnt stop them

Answer 9

Can Iran be stopped from making nuclear weapons? Possibly. It will not be easy.
Should we stop them? Probably. Iran does not respond to diplomacy.

****Can Iran be stopped****..........

The U.N. Security Council unanimously voted to expand sanctions on March 24, 2007. The new resolution 1747 calls on Iran to comply fully with all previous UN resolutions and join negotiations to reach agreement so as to restore international confidence in the peaceful nature of its nuclear program. Full transparency and cooperation with the IAEA are required. Suspension of Iran’s banned nuclear activities will elicit the parallel suspension of sanctions. The package of incentives offered Tehran last year for its cooperation remains on the table. The full text of the draft of resolution 1747 appears at this website:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6455853.stm

Military confrontation may be on the horizon.

Iran's key nuclear sites.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4617398.stm

In addition to the British frigate HMS Cornwall, there is a multi-national strike force in the Persian Gulf. Furthermore, there are British naval vessels stationed at the Diego Garcia atoll in the Indian ocean. The British Royal Navy may take action with its Special Boat Service (SBS) , the British Royal Navy's special forces unit. The service's motto is "By Strength and Guile". It forms part of the United Kingdom Special Forces, alongside the Special Air Service (SAS), Special Reconnaissance Regiment (SRR), and Special Forces Support Group (SFSG).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Boat_Service

Ready to assist are the American aircraft carrier strike group aircraft carrier CVN-73 USS John C. Stennis (deployed January 20), the American aircraft carrier strike group CVN-69 USS Dwight D. Eisenhower and the French nuclear carrier Charles de Gaulle and its task force are all in close appoximation in the Persian Gulf. A 3rd carrier group, the CVN-68 USS Nimitz (deployed March 30) was scheduled for its WESTPAC07 deployment to replace the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower which was deployed December 2006. But accounts indicate that all three strike groups still remain in the Persian Gulf.
http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=3961
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/navy/batgru-68.htm
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070330/pl_afp/usmilitaryirannavy_070330160111;_ylt=Annlx2.rLEDDrJgz9RYaNIcUewgF
Amphibious ready group LHD-5 Bataan ( USS Oak Hill, USS Shreveport). In carrying out its primary mission, BATAAN would transport and land ashore not only troops, but also the tanks, trucks and other vehicles, artillery, ammunition, and complete supplies necessary to fully support the assault. LHD-5's armament system includes the NATO Sea Sparrow Surface Missile System (NSSMS) for antiair warfare protection, two Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) Systems and two Phalanx Close-in Weapon System (CIWS) mounts to counter threats from low flying aircraft and close-in small craft. Six missile decoy launchers augment LHD-5's antiship missile defenses. LDH-5 was scheduled back on April 4 and was evidently kept in the Persian Gulf due to circumstances in the area.
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1265
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/navy/lhd-5.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/navy/marg.htm
The US may have deployed 4 or 5 carrier groups in the Persian Gulf
http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20070328/62741920.html
Hmmmmm
The big "E" CVN-65 Enterprise ready strike group
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/navy/batgru-65.htm
Maybe CVN-76 Reagan was deployed
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/navy/batgru-76.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/where.htm
Maybe CVN-72 Lincoln?
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/navy/batgru-72.htm
Is CVN-77 Bush ready?
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/cvn-77.htm

More details about military options can be found here:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iran-strikes.htm

On Tuesday, March 27, 2007, the two US strike groups, USS Dwight D. Eisenhower and the USS Stennis, along with guided-missile cruiser USS Antietam, conducted military exercises in the Persian Gulf. The participants included 15 warships and more than 100 aircraft..

Each carrier carries an air wing of F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet fighter-bombers, EA-6B Prowler electronic warfare aircraft, S-3 Viking refueling and anti-submarine planes, and E-2C Hawkeye airborne command-and-control aircraft.

Also taking part were six guided-missile destroyers, the Anzio, Ramage, O'Kane, Mason, Preble and Nitze; the frigate Hawes; amphibious assault ships Boxer and Bataan; and the minesweepers Scout, Gladiator and Ardent.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2007-03/28/content_838185.htm

The Isfahan plant is above ground, but Natanz is more than 50ft below and would require either a tactical nuclear missile or a conventional bunker-buster bomb to destroy it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,1753223,00.html.

Iran's Shahab-3 ballistic missiles are capable of carrying a nuclear warhead and can be detonated by a remote-control device while still in high-altitude flight as electromagnetic pulse weapons - even one of which could knock out America's critical electrical and technological infrastructure, effectively sending the continental U.S. back to the 19th century with a recovery time of months or years. Iran will have that capability – at least theoretically – as soon as it has one nuclear bomb ready to arm such a missile
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43956

****Should Iran be stopped****..........

In defiance of the UNSC and the IAEA, Iran not only continues to enrich uranium but has gone from 3 arrays of 164 (P-1 slow) centrifuges to 18 arrays of (P-2 fast) centrifuges (=2952) in its underground facilty at Natantz. The facility was built to hold up to 60,000 centrifuges.

ISIS was skeptical of the Natanz FEP (fuel enrichment plant) being fully operational with 3,000 centrifuges by May 2007 to produce HEU which could be combined with the plutonium production at the "heavy water" facility at Arak and make a nuclear weapon.

Iran's President Mahmoud Admadi-Nejad announced on Monday, April 9, 2007 that the Natantz FEP plant had indeed installed the 3,000 centrifuges as was enriching uranium on an "industrial scale". This is in defiance of the UNSC expanded sanctions imposed on March 24, 2007. Leading Iranian nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, indicated that Iran would quit the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty rather than comply with the demands of the IAEA. Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani announced, "The Islamic republic of Iran has installed 3,000 centrifuges and begun feeding them with uranium hexafluoride gas."

Furthermore, in defiance of the UNSC travel ban, Gen. Mohammad Baqer Zolqadr, an Iranian Revolutionary Guard general, made a 6-day trip to Russian boasted his trip showed "the ineffectiveness of the resolution."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070410/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_nuclear_32;_ylt=AoupblV5rt4R4WRxOmkgGo.tOrgF
http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=4045
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6538957.stm

In the enrichment process, uranium hexafluoride gas is pumped into centrifuges, which spin and purify the gas. Enriched to a low degree, the result is fuel for a reactor, but to a high degree it creates the material for a nuclear warhead. The aim of enrichment is to increase the proportion of fissile uranium-235 atoms within uranium. The slightly denser isotope u-238 (see depleted uranium) is separate from the lighter u-235 (fissile uranium).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/sci_nat/05/nuclear_fuel/html/enrichment.stm

On Tuesday, April 10, 2007 Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Reza Aqazadeh said that "industrial scale enrichment" means Iran is proceeding to install and operate the complete array of 50,000 centrifuges for maximum capacity of uranium enrichment.
http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-24/0704102262112737.htm
.
Prior to 2002 there were several NPT violations. Since the 2002 construction of the underground facility at Natanz, Iran has made steady progress to producing weapons grade material

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/natanz.htm
2002 - Iran builds underground plant at Natanz.
At a 13 December 2002 briefing, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher told reporters the facility was being built partially underground, and as such is inconsistent with Iran's claims that its nuclear intentions are peaceful: "It appears from the imagery that a service road, several small structures, and perhaps three large structures are being build below grade, and some of these are already being covered with earth. Iran clearly intended to harden and bury that facility. That facility was probably never intended by Iran to be a declared component of the peaceful program. Instead Iran has been caught constructing a secret underground site where it could produce fissile material." Based upon what Boucher termed "hard evidence," Iran appears to be constructing a uranium enrichment plant at Nantaz, as well as a heavy water plant. "The suspect uranium-enrichment plant ... could be used to produce highly-enriched uranium for weapons. The heavy-water plant could support a reactor for producing weapons-grade plutonium. These facilities are not justified by the needs of Iran's civilian nuclear program," he said. By mid-2004 the Natanz centrifuge facility was hardened with a roof of several meters of reinforced concrete and buried under a layer of earth some 75 feet deep.

2002 - Davood Aqajani, director for the Natanz heavy water project, also manages Kala-Electric which is developing the capability to make separated plutonium and highly enriched uranium, the two main nuclear explosive materials

2003 - It was reported on August 26, 2003, that the IAEA had found particles of highly enriched uranium in environmental samples taken at Natanz

http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iran/irannptviolations.pdf
2004 - Iran did not declare to the IAEA the existence of a pilot enrichment facility at the Kalaye Electric Company Workshop, and laser enrichment plants at the Tehran Nuclear Research center and at Lashkar Ab’ad. Because experiments at these sites involved the use of nuclear material in equipment, Iran was obligated to report them to the IAEA. Iran continues to deny the IAEA access to equipment and areas of the Physics Research Center at Lavisan-Shian and elsewhere for environmental sampling, and despite repeated requests, has not made available for interview one of the center’s former directors. IAEA entry to another site, Parchin, was granted only after repeated requests and under circumscribed conditions. Iran recently balked at a request by the IAEA to visit the underground halls at Natanz. As noted below, Iran has refused outright to discuss sensitive issues related to alleged high explosives testing, the design of a missile re-entry vehicle and apparent linkages between its nuclear program and Iran’s military.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/nuke.htm
2004 (Using only P-1 centrifuges)...... By some time in 2006, Iran could be producting fissile material for atomic bombs using both uranium enriched at Natanz and plutonium produced at Arak. The Natanz facility might produce enough uranium for about five bombs every year, and the Arak facility might produced enough plutonium for as many as three bombs every year.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4336559.stm
2005 - Pakistan has confirmed that the former head of its nuclear weapons programme, AQ Khan, on the nuclear black market, sold centrifuges for enriching uranium to Iran.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/08/25/news/nuke.php
2006 - Iran Centrifuge Technology Company has built at least 15 (P-2) advanced uranium enrichment centrifuges. Iran has already been enriching uranium with slower P-1 centrifuges, made from an older design.

http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iran/continuedprogress.pdf
Nov 2006
Iran is progressing in its work at the Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant (PFEP) at Natanz, and continues to deny IAEA requests to resolve outstanding questions in a number of areas. The IAEA states that between August 13 and November 2, 2006, Iran reported that approximately 34 kg of UF6 was fed into the centrifuges and enriched to levels below 5 percent U-235. HEU contamination was reported in the IAEA’s August 2006 report. The plutonium is a new finding

http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iran/IAEAreport14November2006.pdf
Since 31 August 2006, centrifuges in the single machine test stand, and the 10-machine, 20-
machine and first 164-machine cascades at the Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant (PFEP) have been run, mostly under vacuum, with UF6 being fed during intermittent periods. The installation of the second 164-machine cascade was completed and, on 13 October 2006, testing of the cascade with UF6 gas was begun. Iran has not provided the Agency with full access to operating records at PFEP.

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Focus/IaeaIran/index.shtml
2007 - UNANIMOUS VOTE - The UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1747 on 24 March 2007. As reported by the UN press office, the resolution imposes further sanctions on Iran and reaffirms that Iran must take the steps required by the IAEA Board.

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Transcripts/2007/ft190207.html
We know that they have two 164 centrifuge cascades above ground in the "R&D" facility at Natanz. They have also said but sometimes denied that they have two further 164 centrifuge cascades below ground in in Natanz.
19 February 2007 - ElBaradei - six months away - since the country has already acquired considerable technical knowledge from enriching uranium in a "research and development" facility.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1167467763039&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Jan 18, 2007 Iran is ready to start assembling 3,000 centrifuges to produce enriched uranium - a possible pathway to nuclear arms - after finishing most preliminary work on an underground facility housing such machines, a diplomat and a UN official said Thursday... Iran's leaders have suggested those machines would be in place by March 20, the end of the Iranian year.

http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iran/ArakConstruction20March2007.pdf
Feb 25, 1007 GeoEye’s OrbView-3 satellite imagery of Arak 40 MW Heavy Water Reactor construction. When fully operational, the reactor is estimated to be able to produce about 9 kilograms of weapon-grade plutonium per year.

http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iran/AlbrightTestimony15March2007.pdf
March 15, 2007 - Iran intends to have one of the largest nuclear fuel cycle programs in the developing world..with the capability to produce highly enriched uranium (HEU) and weapon-grade plutonium for nuclear weapons. Natanz - Urenco’s “P1” (slow) and “P2” (fast) centrifuges - In January, Iran started to install about 3,000 centrifuges underground in the FEP. The centrifuges are slated to be organized into eighteen 164-machine cascades that operate together under a common control system to produce low enriched uranium, what Iran calls a “module.” The underground halls of the FEP can hold about 17-18 modules, for a total of about 50,000 to 53,000 centrifuges.

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/profiles/Iran.pdf
Energy: Iran ranks second in the world in natural gas reserves and third in oil reserves. Nevertheless, in 2005 Iran spent US$4 billion dollars on fuel imports, mainly because of inefficient domestic use. Oil industry output averaged 4 million barrels per day in 2005, compared with the peak output of 6 million barrels per day reached in 1974. In the early 2000s, industry infrastructure was increasingly inefficient because of technological lags. Few exploratory wells were drilled in 2005.
In 2005 a large share of Iran’s natural gas reserves were believed to remain untapped. By 2004 the addition of new hydroelectric stations and the streamlining of conventional coal- and oil-fired stations increased installed capacity to 33,000 megawatts. Of that amount, about 75 percent was based on natural gas, 18 percent on oil, and 7 percent on hydroelectric power. In 2004 Iran opened its first wind-powered and geothermal plants, and the first solar thermal plant was to come online in 2009. Demographic trends and intensified industrialization have caused electric power demand to grow by 8 percent per year. The government’s goal of 53,000 megawatts of installed capacity by 2010 is to be reached by bringing on line new gas-fired plants financed by independent power producers, including those with foreign investment backing, and by adding hydroelectric and nuclear power generating capacity. Iran’s first nuclear power plant at Bushehr, scheduled to come on line in 2002 but not completed as of early 2006, has received international criticism because of concerns that its enriched uranium and spent fuel can be diverted for the production of nuclear weapons. In 2005 Iran’s electricity imports were greater than its exports by about 500 million kilowatt-hours; exchanges were made with all neighboring countries except Iraq.

While the 15 British sailors and marines were being detained in the Persian Gulf on March 23, 2007, by Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Iranian President Mahmaoud Ahmadinejad abruptly cancelled his appearance before the U.N. Security Council and sent stead, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki to speak. He indicated that Iran was willing to continue negotiations but without the precondition that uranium enrichment must be halted.
Mottaki appeared before the UN on March 24 and said, "the world has two options to proceed on the nuclear issue: continued negotiations or confrontation. Choosing the path of confrontation ... will have its own consequences. "
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070325/D8O3E7J00.html