RE: Iraqi PM to Pompeo: GTFO
⁜→ RodISHI, et al,
Periodically, this question of who has "Nuclear" Weapons arises; especially with countries like Iran. But you have to keep in mind that in the opening of the 21st Century, the issue are retaining Critical Nuclear Weapons Design Information (CNWDI) is no longer relevant. That cat has escaped the bag decades ago. What is important today is the knowledge and expertise in Material Processing • Component Manufacturing and Fabrication (MP•CMF). Today's weaponry design, or the advanced symmetry for certain components; but more along the lines of cost-effective techniques to synthesize, process and fabricate advanced components → and then maintenance and structural integrity. And these issues are again, much different from the considerations that are given to the functional delivery systems.
This is all a very expensive proposition and a long-term commitment.
Beyond the CNWDI and MP•CMF concerns, there is politics.
For a threat to be of any value, it must be credible. Not only does it have to be credible from the standpoint that we've mentioned thus far, but it must be politically feasible. For Iran to become entangled in a nuclear exchange, it could very well spell the end of Iran. Each American "Boomer" [submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs)] carries 20 Ballistic Missiles. One such SLBM could destroy every major city in Iran from over ten thousand miles away. More than likely, if it were to become necessary to destroy Iran, America would give effective advance warning of attacks to minimize casualties in the civilian population.
Right now, Iran is playing its cards on non-proliferation issues. They will try to extract as much as they can from the US. They want Americans to fear the nuclear acquisition calculated to intimidate the American population and to compel the American government to act in Iran's best interest.
Most Respectfully,
R
⁜→ RodISHI, et al,
Periodically, this question of who has "Nuclear" Weapons arises; especially with countries like Iran. But you have to keep in mind that in the opening of the 21st Century, the issue are retaining Critical Nuclear Weapons Design Information (CNWDI) is no longer relevant. That cat has escaped the bag decades ago. What is important today is the knowledge and expertise in Material Processing • Component Manufacturing and Fabrication (MP•CMF). Today's weaponry design, or the advanced symmetry for certain components; but more along the lines of cost-effective techniques to synthesize, process and fabricate advanced components → and then maintenance and structural integrity. And these issues are again, much different from the considerations that are given to the functional delivery systems.
This is all a very expensive proposition and a long-term commitment.
(COMMENT)
Beyond the CNWDI and MP•CMF concerns, there is politics.
For a threat to be of any value, it must be credible. Not only does it have to be credible from the standpoint that we've mentioned thus far, but it must be politically feasible. For Iran to become entangled in a nuclear exchange, it could very well spell the end of Iran. Each American "Boomer" [submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs)] carries 20 Ballistic Missiles. One such SLBM could destroy every major city in Iran from over ten thousand miles away. More than likely, if it were to become necessary to destroy Iran, America would give effective advance warning of attacks to minimize casualties in the civilian population.
Right now, Iran is playing its cards on non-proliferation issues. They will try to extract as much as they can from the US. They want Americans to fear the nuclear acquisition calculated to intimidate the American population and to compel the American government to act in Iran's best interest.
Most Respectfully,
R
