English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Iran's leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has announced that Iran now has 3000 uranium enrichment centrifuges running throughout Iran. Does anyone have any idea how long it will be before Iran acquires a nuclear bomb?

Do you believe Iran should be allowed to be a nuclear power?

2007-09-03 06:20:53 · 12 answers · asked by anonymous 3 in News & Events Current Events

From what I know, with 3000 uranium centrifuges, and more to come it will be a matter of 3-4 years before they get their first nuclear weapon, although that depends on how many new centrifuges they add.

2007-09-03 06:32:32 · update #1

Israel, according to the news sources does not have enough firepower on its own to take out all of Iran's nuclear facilities, so Israel can't make sure Iran won't get nuclear weapons by itself.

2007-09-03 19:43:15 · update #2

I believe that NO country in the Middle East should have nuclear weapons right now because of how volatile that part of the world is right now, this includes India, Pakistan, Iran, and Israel.

2007-09-09 13:31:26 · update #3

12 answers

I will take quite a few years to develop a bomb and a heck of a lot longer to find the means to delivering the thing. Long before that you will know their intentions because they have to test it first.
The other question, do I believe Iran should be a nuclear power. The answer is no, along with every other country in the world. However, the ones that have it don´t want others to have it.

2007-09-03 07:52:38 · answer #1 · answered by soñador 7 · 0 0

I find it interesting that the United States and the European Union, as well as the United Nations are perfectly content to vilify Iran's attempt at nuclear power, whether for peaceful or militant means. Yet Israel is believed to have possibly up to 200 nuclear weapons and has NEVER allowed inspections of its Dimona facility (believed to be a nuclear facility), nor has Israel signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Considering the animosity between Israel and its neighbors, why WOULDN'T they want nuclear weapons if Isreal itself has them? Oh yes, Muslims= bad, Isreali Jews= good. I do NOT support either country having nuclear weapons. It is dangerous enough that Pakistan & India have these horrific weapons considering the fundamentalist religious fanaticism alive in BOTH countries. The more the UN, EU, & U.S. antagonize Iran & turn a blind eye to the Isrealis, the more likely beligerent Islamic militants will gain power and, God help us all, create nuclear weapons & USE them.

2007-09-08 18:35:14 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Iran, along with other countries in that area has massive deposits of oil. It is not likely that Iran would risk its oil revenues by playing around with a nuke. You also need means to deliver the thing, its not much use sitting there in a warehouse. As for becoming a nuclear power, just look around the world and start counting all the countries that have nuclear power plants. Are you saying that all of these countries have just "peace full" nuclear facilities. While this terrible state of affairs exists in the world, Iran will also want a piece of the action

2007-09-08 06:54:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It could take Iran up to 5 or 6 years before they develop a nuclear weapon.

I think Iran should definitely be allowed nuclear energy. Russia offered a plan to build nuclear power plants in Russia that would provide plenty of nuclear energy to Iran, but they turned it down. Proving even more than Iran doesn't want the Nuclear power just for energy, but for weapons capable of killing millions.

If they do have nuclear energy, it constantly needs to be under the watchful eye of the world.

2007-09-03 06:30:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Sadly it is almost impossible to interfere with this process even militarily, which would most likely make it worse.

This is the result again of Bush making nuclear proliferation a standard to achieve in a return to a base policy of Mutually Assured Destruction rather than the exception to the rule for foreign relationships. Our lack of credibility for this subject has mad it nearly impossible to achieve consensus on how to reduce this threat.

Tragic, unnecessary and again the result of this administration's incompetence and the unrealistic goals of a significant portion of the Neo Con element of this country.

2007-09-11 06:22:12 · answer #5 · answered by Lazarus 3 · 0 0

I believe all countries should have to take responsibility for nuclear energy. How can any country, even our own look to another country and say 'I am responsible therefore I can have this and you cannot.'? Why must any other country have to trust us and our power when we don't trust the other country? On the chance of being naive I would say maybe we need a little more naivete in this world.

2007-09-09 17:38:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

i am from iran.why you are not concern about israil nuclear weapon.here israil have nuclear weapon.you dont think if no one prevent it its a right for iran to have.also usa,its the first country witch use nuclear weapon.who can say it will not use it again? however we do not bleive in making nuclear weapon.but we know its our right to use its other works.

2007-09-09 10:39:44 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Iran should have nuclear generated power, but no wepons. The only people who should have nuclear wepons is the UN or NATO.

2007-09-03 06:31:10 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

well for now no sign of making nuck bomb hasbeen found in iran.
we r talking about a thing that does not exist

2007-09-08 02:19:24 · answer #9 · answered by aminhhmt 2 · 1 0

They won't get one. Israel will make certain of that.

2007-09-03 10:16:35 · answer #10 · answered by jdkilp 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers