What's new

See now, Iranians should've developed the nuke when they could

Paul2

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
3,193
Reaction score
7
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Arab Emirates
See, there are no way they can make them now under 1.5-2 years.

If Iran was to go to war now, they can't do anything about US resorting to nuke.

My advice, start work while you still can. You can't run industry while American bomber will be zipping in your skies.
 
. . .
See, there are no way they can make them now under 1.5-2 years.

If Iran was to go to war now, they can't do anything about US resorting to nuke.

My advice, start work while you still can. You can't run industry while American bomber will be zipping in your skies.
yes definitly, the Iranian leadership was under the illusion that having just conventional missiles is enough, but what will they do if tomorow we wake up, turn on the TV, and there is breaking news saying "the Pentagon has just declared that 100 nuclear bombs have been dropped on Iran"?, those who think the US would never go that far are sleeping in La La land, Iran has only three options now:-
1-become a province of either China or Russia to gain nuclear protection.
2-aquire nukes & remain an independent state.
3-capitulate to the US & prepare yourself mentaly for your inevitable demise.
 
. . . .
Should have learnt from Gaddafi. NK certainly did. You cant negotiate with demons. Only deterrence will work. The much heralded deal is in the gutter and sanctions are in full effect. You have nothing to lose.




Iran has everything needed to develop nukes but are hesitant as they do not want the americans/israelis/NATO attacking them pre-emptively. That's all it is.
 
. .
Iran has everything needed to develop nukes but are hesitant as they do not want the americans/israelis/NATO attacking them pre-emptively. That's all it is.

If we could get away with preemptive attacks we would have done it already. Libya, Iraq, Syria all preemptively attacked. We can attack weak countries but not Iran at least not without consequences.
 
.
If we could get away with preemptive attacks we would have done it already. Libya, Iraq, Syria all preemptively attacked. We can attack weak countries but not Iran at least not without consequences.
If they attack, just dig deeper bunkers, and continue...

To take down USA in one go, you need 200t plutonium and delivery means. It is out of realm of physically feasible. What you can do?

Superpowers at the peak had around 110t plutonium each and ~400 missiles on watch. First strike would've only consumed 15t, and then they will take days to weeks to reload what was not taken down in retaliatory attack.

15t plutonium is what you can get from 450t natural uranium in 8-9 months.

It's doable. If even 1 in 10 weapons will reach and cause damage, it means 40 population centres.

Losses will be enough for US to think: I can focus on rebuilding, and live, or continue to fight, and waste the chance to recover quickly.
 
Last edited:
.
Iranians are brain dead. They can't build nuclear weapons.

Iranians have jelly spines and jelly legs. They would rather surrender their nuclear program to every tom, dick and harry for some economic biscuits instead of making nuclear weapons.
 
.
When a chinese give you advice, china is the one who left Iran alone after that obama deal was canceled.....

You can flush it in the toilet...
 
.
No thanks :blah::blah:

We already have one child across the border taking all nuke nuke. Don’t want anymore especially since they have been meddling with our internal matters and people...
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom