NationStates

Uxupox wrote:

The East Marches II wrote:
The Russians and Chinese will just hand them a nuke when convinent as they did with North Korea.

They probably did already lol.

Fartsniffage wrote:

Uxupox wrote:
They probably did already lol.

You do realise that nuclear weapons are very traceable? Even after detonation the fissile material can be traced back to the plant, and often the specific reactor, that produced it?

Fartsniffage wrote:

The East Marches II wrote:
The Russians and Chinese will just hand them a nuke when convinent as they did with North Korea.

They could have done that at anytime.

Uxupox wrote:

Fartsniffage wrote:
You do realise that nuclear weapons are very traceable? Even after detonation the fissile material can be traced back to the plant, and often the specific reactor, that produced it?

I’m no specialist nuke but I do have some very minor understanding of nuclear weaponry and nuclear chemistry. They can be traced back to the plant only if they are actually used during either an attempted detonation or a nation declaring its intent. While I highly doubt that either China or Russia have given nuclear weaponry to Iran it’s within the realm of possibility.

Fartsniffage wrote:

Uxupox wrote:
I’m no specialist nuke but I do have some very minor understanding of nuclear weaponry and nuclear chemistry. They can be traced back to the plant only if they are actually used during either an attempted detonation or a nation declaring its intent. While I highly doubt that either China or Russia have given nuclear weaponry to Iran it’s within the realm of possibility.

No it isn't.

Neither Russia or China want to get wiped off the face of the planet by the US if Iran nuked Israel.

Uxupox wrote:

Fartsniffage wrote:
No it isn't.

Neither Russia or China want to get wiped off the face of the planet by the US if Iran nuked Israel.

Does the Iranians have the capability of striking Israel with a nuclear weapon either via an aerial bomber or the usage of an ICBM? What does the specific treaty between the United States and Israel states as to the defensive measures on first strike, is it counted as a direct strike against the US mainland?

Fartsniffage wrote:

Uxupox wrote:
Does the Iranians have the capability of striking Israel with a nuclear weapon either via an aerial bomber or the usage of an ICBM? What does the specific treaty between the United States and Israel states as to the defensive measures on first strike, is it counted as a direct strike against the US mainland?

Well you're the one imagining that Russia or China has given Iran a nuke. Which nuke have they given them?

And it would be an IRBM. Iran and Israel are pretty close.

Fartsniffage wrote:

Uxupox wrote:
Does the Iranians have the capability of striking Israel with a nuclear weapon either via an aerial bomber or the usage of an ICBM? What does the specific treaty between the United States and Israel states as to the defensive measures on first strike, is it counted as a direct strike against the US mainland?

Well you're the one imagining that Russia or China has given Iran a nuke. Which nuke have they given them?

And it would be an IRBM. Iran and Israel are pretty close.

Uxupox wrote:

Fartsniffage wrote:
Well you're the one imagining that Russia or China has given Iran a nuke. Which nuke have they given them?

And it would be an IRBM. Iran and Israel are pretty close.

The nomenclature between icbms and Iran’s are not very different just it method of transportation.

I don’t belong have top level clearance of nuclear weaponry in the governments of China or Ruskin to tell you.

Fartsniffage wrote:

Uxupox wrote:
The nomenclature between icbms and Iran’s are not very different just it method of transportation.

I don’t belong have top level clearance of nuclear weaponry in the governments of China or Ruskin to tell you.

ICBM is InterContinental Ballistic Missile. IRBM is Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile. This is US nomenclature.

And given that, on what do you base your supposition that Russia or China has given Iran the bomb?

Uxupox wrote:

Fartsniffage wrote:
ICBM is InterContinental Ballistic Missile. IRBM is Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile. This is US nomenclature.

And given that, on what do you base your supposition that Russia or China has given Iran the bomb?

No it’s definitely not. The only thing changing is the method of transport NOT it’s actual payload. A very similar comparison would be a 107 vs a browning. Both are delivering the same payload but one has a better maximum effective range.

Fartsniffage wrote:

Uxupox wrote:
No it’s definitely not. The only thing changing is the method of transport NOT it’s actual payload. A very similar comparison would be a 107 vs a browning. Both are delivering the same payload but one has a better maximum effective range.

I'm done with you. Run along now.

Uxupox wrote:

Fartsniffage wrote:
I'm done with you. Run along now.

That’s what the US Navy and US Air Force states lol but ok.

Fartsniffage wrote:

Uxupox wrote:
That’s what the US Navy and US Air Force states lol but ok.

The US Navy and Air Force state that Russia or China have given nuclear arms to Iran?

Uxupox wrote:

Fartsniffage wrote:
The US Navy and Air Force state that Russia or China have given nuclear arms to Iran?

Nope that’s about the nomenclature.

But with things such as operation merlin, the recent aircraft crash that had Soviet Union era nuclear physicists being transported to Iran and the fact that Israel has the capacity of nuclear weaponry it is a disgression.

Republican senators said on Tuesday that they want the Trump administration to submit any final deal between the United States and North Korea to Congress for a vote.

[...]

Sending any agreement to the Senate in the form of a treaty would require the deal to get bipartisan support and win over two-thirds of the chamber. The Obama-era State Department rankled congressional Republicans when it defined the Iran nuclear deal as a "nonbinding agreement" instead of a treaty.

[...]

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo indicated earlier this month that the administration intended to give a document to Congress for their approval.

Christmas Pudding wrote:The Hill: GOP senators: We want vote on any North Korea deal

Republican senators said on Tuesday that they want the Trump administration to submit any final deal between the United States and North Korea to Congress for a vote.

[...]

Sending any agreement to the Senate in the form of a treaty would require the deal to get bipartisan support and win over two-thirds of the chamber. The Obama-era State Department rankled congressional Republicans when it defined the Iran nuclear deal as a "nonbinding agreement" instead of a treaty.

[...]

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo indicated earlier this month that the administration intended to give a document to Congress for their approval.

Christmas Pudding wrote:The Hill: GOP senators: We want vote on any North Korea deal

Republican senators said on Tuesday that they want the Trump administration to submit any final deal between the United States and North Korea to Congress for a vote.

[...]

Sending any agreement to the Senate in the form of a treaty would require the deal to get bipartisan support and win over two-thirds of the chamber. The Obama-era State Department rankled congressional Republicans when it defined the Iran nuclear deal as a "nonbinding agreement" instead of a treaty.

[...]

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo indicated earlier this month that the administration intended to give a document to Congress for their approval.

Internationalist Bastard wrote:

Christmas Pudding wrote:The Hill: GOP senators: We want vote on any North Korea deal

Now that’s interesting
What the odds they’d pass the deal

Al-Ghaihr wrote:I was happy with Trump meeting Kim Jong Un, very well done. I was up all night in North Carolina watching history be made.

Firm handshakes to both parties.

Geneviev wrote:

Al-Ghaihr wrote:I was happy with Trump meeting Kim Jong Un, very well done. I was up all night in North Carolina watching history be made.

Firm handshakes to both parties.

It was a beautiful moment, absolutely. Hopefully it leads to no nuclear war.

Communist Winnipeg wrote:Please spend 4 minutes of your life to watch this video. It is not satire. It was produced by the White House to convince North Korea's brutal dictator to 'shake the hand of peace'. Watch it...

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultu ... im-jong-un

Internationalist Bastard wrote:

Communist Winnipeg wrote:Please spend 4 minutes of your life to watch this video. It is not satire. It was produced by the White House to convince North Korea's brutal dictator to 'shake the hand of peace'. Watch it...

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultu ... im-jong-un

Da fuck I just see?