If they build nuclear weapons, that is only part of the problem. They still need to develop a way of delivering it to long range targets. If Iran get nuclear weapons, that does not mean that they will use them.
China, Russia, Israel, Pakistan, France, India, and Britain all have nuclear weapons. Who is to say one of these nations will not use nuclear weapons?
As far as I know, the United States was the only country vicious enough to use nuclear weapons. There is still radiation from the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
2007-09-04 13:01:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
Once you have the right materials, there is plenty of knowledge and information available to fairly quickly (twelve to eighteen months) build a weapon. Getting the right materials, particularly weapons grade uranium or plutonium, is the difficult and time consuming part. Any nation with a reasonable amount of resources and the willingness to obtain such technology could develop such a weapon in five years.
It took the United States about four years to develop the first A-Bomb. The Soviet Union did it in three (using information obtained through spies in the Manhattan Project). It isn't a matter of if Iran will develop a nuclear weapon, it is a matter of when. The only way to stop them is war and I do not believe that the United States or Europe is willing to fight such a war. Basically, we will end up with another nuclear armed nation and a greater probability of such weapons ending up in the wrong hands and using it (if more people have them, they are easier to get a hold of).
2007-09-04 12:57:20
·
answer #2
·
answered by msi_cord 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
cost to build one? depends if you know how or not to. Uranium (commonly used in nukes) is hard to come by, but poor parts of Africa are pretty abundant in them. So they are willing to sell uranium pretty easily.
And it takes only a few days to build one if someone knows how, and has the right equiptment
EDIT: however, if you want, i could tell you how a nuke works. Basically, they take a neutron, and shoot it at a uranimum molecule, which then explodes into two different elements and creates 3 more neutrons that hit other uraninum molecules. Sort of like dominoes except a lot more energy for it. In nuclear reactors, they control this reaction but stopping it before it become too powerful. Nuclear bombs however, have no end until there are no more molecules to hit
2007-09-04 12:55:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Well even if them have a nuke they don't have the capability to launch it across the world and hit any targets in the US. So unless they wanna blow up their own country the only thing they can do with a bomb is drop it from a plane that we can easily shoot down. Unless they pull something like a 9/11 again
2007-09-04 12:56:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Its not just cost, but expertise. The triggering mechanism for anything but the Fatman design (with two sub-critical masses forced together along a rail) is complicated. Developing the electronics expertise to do that can be very costly.
2007-09-04 12:55:29
·
answer #5
·
answered by Lavrenti Beria 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Believe me war with Iran is just around the corner. The US cannot allow a challenge to their supremacy in the middle east and that is exactly what Iran pose. Early next year is my prediction.
2007-09-04 12:58:15
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋