Peace in our time
Yup, that's the way to earn that Peace Prize; set up the pins for a new and bloody war by creating a world safe for tyrants.
Labels: Nuclear, Obama, Russia, United States
I think I think, therefore, I think I think I am, I think.
Labels: Nuclear, Obama, Russia, United States
The United States has a dreadful nuclear waste problem, but it's largely one of its own making. No, not because it has nuclear power plants, but because politicians and "activists" who don't know toffee about nuclear physics won't allow fuel reprocessing because they think the plutonium could be used to make bombs.Labels: Nuclear, United States
A comment on the BBC website from someone who needs looking after:Why shouldn’t Iran have nuclear capability? Israel, India, and many other countries which are no more stable than Iran have the capability. Another case of the USA trying to impose it’s homophobic prejudices on the rest of the world and, to my shame, with this country’s backing!Um... Right.
Think The One is just having trouble on the domestic front? It turns out that he can't get his CND dreams through Congress either.Labels: Nuclear, Obama, United States, Weapons

Labels: Iran, Nuclear, Obama, United States
The Dirty Bomb Emergency Kit.Labels: Britain, Nuclear, Obama, United Nations, United States
Saudi Arabia is considering building its first nuclear reactor.Labels: Nuclear, Saudi Arabia
Labels: Nuclear
Guardian headline:North Korea declares all-out push for nuclear weaponsMaybe it's time for The One to make another uplifting speech.
Labels: North Korea, Nuclear
Meanwhile, the White House leaps into immediate action and draughts an apology.Labels: North Korea, Nuclear
Labels: Nuclear, United States, Weapons
Are you safe from nuclear attack? Check out how you'd do with this handy Ground Zero map generator.
From The Los Angeles Times:Little more than a year after U.S. spy agencies concluded that Iran had halted work on a nuclear weapon, the Obama administration has made it clear that it believes there is no question that Tehran is seeking the bomb.But... But... I thought now that The One was president, it was supposed to be all hearts and flowers and coy glances across the conference table!
Labels: Iran, Nuclear, United States
The New York Times has uncovered a secret United States programme designed to sabotage Iran's efforts to build nuclear weapons.Labels: Iran, Nuclear, United States
Just how long will the world's uranium supply last? 50 years? 500?Labels: Nuclear, Technology
Radiation Shielding Technologies has come up with a material that protects as well as lead for one-seventh the thickness.Labels: Nuclear, Technology
Taiwan asked the United States for helicopter batteries and got nuclear warhead triggers instead.Labels: Nuclear, Taiwan, United States, Weapons

A bit of post-Cold War retroactive nervousness from the BBC.
Damn Interesting has a rather nifty article on the Ford Nucleon: Atomic runabout for the atomic age.Labels: Future Past, Motor Car, Nuclear
The world should "prepare for war" with Iran, the French foreign minister has said, significantly escalating tensions over the country's nuclear programme.At last we know where David Cameron shipped all those Conservative party spines.
Bernard Kouchner said that while "we must negotiate right to the end" with Iran, if Teheran possessed an atomic weapon it would represent "a real danger for the whole world".
The world should "prepare for the worst... which is war", he said.
Labels: North Korea, Nuclear, Weapons
A rundown of the last few days:Labels: Cold War, IAEA, Iran, Nuclear, United States, Weapons
Labels: Libya, Nuclear, United Nations, Weapons
"Nuclear power is the energy of the future," he said. "If we don't give the energy of the future to the countries of the southern Mediterranean, how will they develop themselves? And if they don't develop, how will we fight terrorism and fanaticism?"The president added that if the West considered that Arab countries were "not sensible enough to use civilian nuclear power", this would risk a "war of civilizations".
Aside from the fact that Libya already has plenty of oil to produce power, that Colonel Gaddafi is as flaky as a box of corn flakes, and that he has a track record of trying to get his hands on WMDs, if there is even the remotest chance of a "war or civilisations" wouldn't be prudent to forget appeasing our enemies in favour of making certain that they be kept as far from getting nuclear weapons as possible?
If the choice is them continuing [towards a nuclear bomb] or the use of force, I think you're at a Hitler marching into the Rhineland point. If you don't stop it then, the future is in his hands, not in your hands, just as the future decisions on their nuclear programme would be in Iran's hands, not ours.

On April 9, 2007 there was a United Nations believe-it-or-not moment extraordinaire. At the same time that Iran’s President Ahmadinejad declared his country was now capable of industrial-scale uranium enrichment, the U.N. reelected Iran as a vice chairman of the U.N. Disarmament Commission.Next up, Tony Soprano is put in charge of stamping out the Mafia.
Labels: Iran, Nuclear, United Nations

Meanwhile, Iran demonstrates that it can focus on more than just humiliating the Royal Navy as it announces that it has brought 3,000 uranium gas enrichment centrifuges on line at the Natanz plant and can now enrich nuclear fuel on a weapons "industrial" scale.
Something tells me that if we don't do something soon, we're going to be getting a lot more from Tehran than goody bags.

Labels: Britain, Nuclear, Royal Navy, Trident

Labels: Britain, Mod, Nuclear, Royal Navy


The US has examined the possibility of military strikes on other countries' nuclear facilities in the past.One would think so. Not surprisingly, the BBC asserts that the strike against Iraq produced a bizarre, yet unproven, boost to the Saddam's nuclear programme, which was suddenly dismantled for some reason in 1991 that the BBC seems reluctant to explore (*cough* Gulf War *cough*). Neither do they seem very interested in the outcome of the three episodes:
It came closest in 1994, when a White House meeting discussing whether to strike North Korea was interrupted by news of a possible deal over the country's nuclear programme.
The option of military strikes against Pakistan's Kahuta plant were also examined in the late 1970s but ruled out because the chances of success were rated too low when compared to the consequences of going ahead.
But there is one important precedent for an attack on nuclear facilities.
In June 1981, eight Israeli fighter jets took only 90 seconds to destroy Iraq's Osirak reactor in an audacious bombing raid. It is sometimes cited as a precedent for a US or Israeli (or joint) attack on Iran, but is it really a useful parallel?

Labels: North Korea, Nuclear
I would say that what is dangerous about this situation is not the fact of having a nuclear bomb - having one, maybe a second one a little later, well, that's not very dangerous.Of course, he realised what a clanger he'd made and retracted his remarks within 24 hours-- but only the bit about Tehran being razed. Apparently the imams can sleep safely with Chirac at the helm of the Force de Frappe, though no one else will.Where will it drop it, this bomb? On Israel? It would not have gone 200 metres into the atmosphere before Tehran would be razed.

Labels: Iran, North Korea, Nuclear