Saudi Arabia: Will they ever be "allowed" Nuclear arms?

[Rroff]

"Stored legally" is a contradiction, you can't store weapons grade uranium legally, and you can't create any kind of bomb from reactor grade uranium, uranium is so weakly radioactive you can't even create a dirty bomb using it.

Yeah there are various cubes of Uranium floating about from Nazi era reactor experimentation.

 

[ianh]

"Stored legally" is a contradiction, you can't store weapons grade uranium legally, and you can't create any kind of bomb from reactor grade uranium, uranium is so weakly radioactive you can't even create a dirty bomb using it.

He meant that if they had Uranium stored legally (from a power plant etc) then it it would be quite "easy" to create a crude weapon in secrecy, using for example a "Gun" style device once you've extracted enough weapons grade material from your legal "power plant" material - only it's not that easy at all as it takes a long time, requires lots of very noticeable tech which you have to buy, and gives you a huge secrecy problem.

 

[Tefal]

Earlier in the week I read an article regarding Saudi Arabia progressing with its intent to create their own arms industry as they begin accepting license applications in the military sector.




Today I read another article which publicised the announcement by the SA energy minister which said they wish to enrich uranium for atomic fuel.



Considering the Crown Prince statement above, it seems a likely pursuit and one which could be quietly and relatively quickly achievable with their "resources".


Is there anything the rest of the world could actually do to prevent them? Can they be hit hard with sanctions? Would it even go to covert sabotage levels?

Or do we sit back and just wait hoping the likely scenario is it's just another country with nukes that won't ever use them, or doesn't intend to rather as we cannot really talk in absolutes.

Same as all the other middle east nuclear programs, have Israel bomb it while we all tut tut over how naughty Israel is while we restock their bomb shed.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Not that I advocate it but I'm surprised the likes of the US hasn't just taken over the countries - maybe there is some deterrent there in potential conflict with the likes of Russia but it isn't like SA's army is really upto much without US backing - structurally they are largely inefficient, lack motivation for fighting and mostly equipped with export hardware which is reasonably high end but often not running the full spec of the top western stuff.

And then spend the next 50 years fighting an insurgency and terrorist attacks as the whole Islamic world fights back. SA has the 2 most holy places in Islam. The US still hasn't "won" in Iraq or Afghanistan, 2 counties no one really cares about. US flags flying over Mecca and Medina and watch it all kick off and rightly so as well. Using arms to take what you want should never be encouraged or tolerated.

 

[Rroff]

And then spend the next 50 years fighting an insurgency and terrorist attacks as the whole Islamic world fights back. SA has the 2 most holy places in Islam. The US still hasn't "won" in Iraq or Afghanistan, 2 counties no one really cares about. US flags flying over Mecca and Medina and watch it all kick off and rightly so as well. Using arms to take what you want should never be encouraged or tolerated.

Depends how it was approached - though if it was the US going in they aren't exactly known for finesse. The UK and France administered huge parts of the ME at various times in history - this made me LOL a bit on reading it:

Following the invasion, Sir Reader Bullard and Andrey Andreyevich Smirnov, the British and Soviet ambassadors to Iran, were summoned. The Shah demanded to know why they were invading his country and why they had not declared war. Both answered that it was because of "German residents" in Iran. When the Shah asked if the Allies would stop their attack if he expelled the Germans, the ambassadors did not answer. The Shah sent a telegram to the US President Franklin D. Roosevelt, pleading with him to stop the invasion. As the neutral United States had nothing to do with the attack, Roosevelt was not able to grant the Shah's plea but stated that he believed that the "territorial integrity" of Iran should be respected.[2][4]

 

[Tefal]

Using arms to take what you want should never be encouraged or tolerated.

Devils advocate here but why not?

Surely by planning and mounting the technological and logistical challenge of an invasion/successful war you're really proving you would make better use of those resources in the long run.

 

[Efour]

Yeah the US and Russia is bad enough.

exactly.

 

[Rroff]

Devils advocate here but why not?

Surely by planning and mounting the technological and logistical challenge of an invasion/successful war you're really proving you would make better use of those resources in the long run.

On a tangent I've always found it interesting that often intellectuals view is that a civilisation at its pinnacle of advancement would be one that had divested itself of all weapons - but IMO it would be one that could wield the most deadly weapons with absolute responsibility and would have no need to get rid of them.

 

[Sankari]

Saudi Arabia: Will they ever be "allowed" Nuclear arms?

No. It's in the best interests of the West to keep Saudi Arabia weak, and reliant on our military power for their defence.

They're also stark raving mad, so it's not a great idea to give them the nuclear button.

 

[StriderX]

He meant that if they had Uranium stored legally (from a power plant etc) then it it would be quite "easy" to create a crude weapon in secrecy, using for example a "Gun" style device once you've extracted enough weapons grade material from your legal "power plant" material - only it's not that easy at all as it takes a long time, requires lots of very noticeable tech which you have to buy, and gives you a huge secrecy problem.

A huge secrecy problem for Saudi Arabia? Hahah... farce.

The US will hide it for them while they murder journos and coerce politicians, whatever black book Riyadh has on establishment figures in the West will be overflowing at this point.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Devils advocate here but why not?

Surely by planning and mounting the technological and logistical challenge of an invasion/successful war you're really proving you would make better use of those resources in the long run.

Rule of law? It’s agreed you can’t just go and take something because you’re the bigger boy. We are meant to have moved past such things. If that is tolerated it can just become a free for all.

On a tangent I've always found it interesting that often intellectuals view is that a civilisation at its pinnacle of advancement would be one that had divested itself of all weapons - but IMO it would be one that could wield the most deadly weapons with absolute responsibility and would have no need to get rid of them.

^^ This. Although we are a long way from being that civilised imo.

 

[ianh]

A huge secrecy problem for Saudi Arabia? Hahah... farce.

The US will hide it for them while they murder journos and coerce politicians, whatever black book Riyadh has on establishment figures in the West will be overflowing at this point.

I'm not sure places like Russia or China would be happy allowing SA membership of the Nuke club, there's more to secrecy than purely Western interests.

 

[StriderX]

I'm not sure places like Russia or China would be happy allowing SA membership of the Nuke club, there's more to secrecy than purely Western interests.

Maybe, but that's assuming you know what Russia and China think, they don't seem to mind North Korea or Iran doing it.

Russia is currently on the war path for defending sovereign nations right to exist and China doesn't seem to care.

 

[ianh]

Maybe, but that's assuming you know what Russia and China think, they don't seem to mind North Korea or Iran doing it.

Russia is currently on the war path for defending sovereign nations right to exist and China doesn't seem to care.

I can only guess but I'd suggest that as NK/Iran are proxies of Russia/China they (Ru/CN) probably feel passively with NK owning and Iran attempting to own as they may feel they have an element of control over the proxies. However, SA is a western backed state so it'd be good for Ru/CN if they could cause a ruckus between the West and SA by leaking any Nuke deals for everyone to see and then condemn. That'd be my take on the real politik of the situation, whether it's right/wrong is just a guess.

 

[Thecaferacer]

"Stored legally" is a contradiction, you can't store weapons grade uranium legally, and you can't create any kind of bomb from reactor grade uranium, uranium is so weakly radioactive you can't even create a dirty bomb using it.

Isn't Plutonium P-239 made from reactor grade uranium U-238 in the reactor?

I'm no physicist but I was always to believe it was U-235 and P-239 that was used in warheads.

 

[ianh]

Isn't Plutonium P-239 made from reactor grade uranium U-238 in the reactor?

I'm no physicist but I was always to believe it was U-235 and P-239 that was used in warheads.

It's from wiki but here you go - "The fissioning of an atom of uranium-235 in the reactor of a nuclear power plant produces two to three neutrons, and these neutrons can be absorbed by uranium-238 to produce plutonium-239 and other isotopes. In any operating nuclear reactor containing U-238, some plutonium-239 will accumulate in the nuclear fuel but the amounts are small, only around 0.8% of the total waste"

 

[Energize]

Isn't Plutonium P-239 made from reactor grade uranium U-238 in the reactor?

I'm no physicist but I was always to believe it was U-235 and P-239 that was used in warheads.

Yes, but obtaining uranium and plutonium is not particularly difficult. The problem is that it is impossible to separate out different isotopes of an element (enrichment) chemically, it has to be done based on weight i.e. using centrifuges, which require massive facilities and expertise to do. Even Iran as a nation state was unable to enrich uranium despite the USA managing to accomplish it in practically the stone age.

 

[Thecaferacer]

Yes, but obtaining uranium and plutonium is not particularly difficult. The problem is that it is impossible to separate out different isotopes of an element (enrichment) chemically, it has to be done based on weight i.e. using centrifuges, which require massive facilities and expertise to do. Even Iran as a nation state was unable to enrich uranium despite the USA managing to accomplish it in practically the stone age.

Thanks, I didn't know the enrichment process was that difficult if you already had the reactor infrastructure. I thought a reprocessing plant came as part of course.

My dad was an engineer at Sizewell so I spent my youth visiting the open days watching the classic info vids on the process. All looks easy on an animation.

 

[CaptainRAVE]

As the technology becomes more and more accessible, it is a scary thought any of these countries having them.

 

[muon]

Don't loads of countries already have nuclear power.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country

Order the table by generated electricity.

If pushed any of these countries could probably make nuclear weapons.