Persia

[Runyan99]

So, what happened on the anniversary? Nothing?

[Dirtweasle]

I don't know, haven't made it to the foreign press web sites yet.   I plan to, but haven't had time yet.   

[MilhachVlhandsandwich]

I'm sure there must be a smarter way for the Merkns to do diplomacy than 'Hulk SMASH'. 

Well, sure.  The current consensus seems to be that we try to use diplomacy to slow them down and hope that maybe the regime will collapse and the next one will be nicer, or that if it doesn't collapse then a nuclear Iran can still be managed.  This differs from the previous consensus (which didn't have the regime collapse part) only due to events that have been out of our control.

We've already made our decision.  If it comes down to it we will allow Iran to go nuclear rather than invade to stop them.  I don't think almost anyone disagrees when it's put in those terms - the main disagreement is on how much we want to deceive ourselves into thinking we have the ability to affect the situation through diplomacy.

I wonder if part of the problem is the short-termist thinking behind the US government's policies.  The Chinese have been planning the takeover of Nepal for, what, 40 years?  They're nearly there, with their Maoist government 'elected' now that everyone's too frightened to vote for anything else.  In terms of US policy it seems that they react in a very short-term way rather than planning for a generation or two's time.  Perhaps it's part of the nature of the democratic system but I don't think it needs to be that way.

[Dirtweasle]

I think the short term is due to the amount of time untill they have a weapon.

[MilhachVlhandsandwich]

I think the short term is due to the amount of time untill they have a weapon.

And what about the last 30 years?  There's been plenty of time to get on good terms with Iran.  Trade is the best way.  Make it impossible for them not to be friends and don't bully them.  We might even have had their help on Afghanistan by now. 

[Dirtweasle]

I don't think so.  Too much baggage to start with, and then you have their decline into milleniallist whacko territory to boot.

[Lars]

So, what happened on the anniversary? Nothing?

They announced that they can now enrich to 20% and can enrich to 80% anytime they feel like it.

In short, they are a de facto nuclear armed state.

[Dirtweasle]

Yup.   Still nothing I am seeing about activity in the streets.   

I think thye need to test a weapon to join the club.   ... or get the club.

[Lars]

Israel never did.

[Dirtweasle]

True.

I would appreciate the calrity sake though if Iran once they say they have a weapon to test one. 

[Runyan99]

Yahoo says there were rallies and protests.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100211/ap_on_bi_ge/ml_iran

[Dirtweasle]

So far just the offical state sponsered celebrations and tiny anti-regime stuff.



Here's a story with some crazy photos, a mention of some minor clashes, and the regime throttling back their IP connectivity.

[Scott_B]

I wonder if part of the problem is the short-termist thinking behind the US government's policies.  The Chinese have been planning the takeover of Nepal for, what, 40 years?  They're nearly there, with their Maoist government 'elected' now that everyone's too frightened to vote for anything else.  In terms of US policy it seems that they react in a very short-term way rather than planning for a generation or two's time.  Perhaps it's part of the nature of the democratic system but I don't think it needs to be that way.

I'm very sympathetic to this view.  There are a bunch of reasons why we are pretty lousy at this but a big part of it is cultural.  Aside from the uniformed services in the Pentagon, I'm not aware of any big U.S. government agency that has detailed plans that extend beyond 20 years or so from the present.  We don't think in these terms, and even those few among our leaders that do are hamstrung by the process in any number of ways.

Israel never did.

It's my understanding that a common view among the "expert community" is that the Israelis conducted a test of a warhead in the Indian Ocean jointly with the South Africans.  The requirements of a Manhattan project-type atomic bomb are well enough known that nobody believes you need to test one to have confidence that it'll work if you have decent engineers, but I'm told there are a few things you want to make sure you got right on your H-bomb design that requires a test.

[Dirtweasle]

I'm very sympathetic to this view.  There are a bunch of reasons why we are pretty lousy at this but a big part of it is cultural. ...

Yea, I get that it's the same thing in the corporate world.

My point is the efficacy of a long term plan that over-runs the short term.

[Lars]

It's my understanding that a common view among the "expert community" is that the Israelis conducted a test of a warhead in the Indian Ocean jointly with the South Africans.  The requirements of a Manhattan project-type atomic bomb are well enough known that nobody believes you need to test one to have confidence that it'll work if you have decent engineers, but I'm told there are a few things you want to make sure you got right on your H-bomb design that requires a test.

That is as I understand it too.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/

Some type of non-nuclear test, perhaps a zero yield or implosion test, occurred on 2 November 1966 [possibly at Al-Naqab in the Negev]. There is no evidence that Israel has ever carried out a nuclear test, although many observers speculated that a suspected nuclear explosion in the southern Indian Ocean in 1979 was a joint South African-Israeli test.

Note that we think they had two bombs way back in '67, and the suspected Indian Ocean test occurs in '79.