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

[BowdonUK]

I think western society is suffering from moral cowardice in the face of reality.

When we changed direction and moved away from the empire era it allowed the problems that was there to re-appear. These days instead of direct control of a country we've now gone the indirect way i.e. supporting people that leaned our way, helping them financially, taking out their opposition. But time and time again there are situations were these 'puppets' break free and start causing trouble.

Saudi Arabia could potentially be a big problem if they start going their own way. They have been allowed to become a rich oil country and the family as been supported. But they have been in some very murky events themselves. The last country the west backed against Iran was Iraq and Saddam Hussein. That worked out well

 

[Sankari]

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

No. If it was that easy, we'd see a lot more countries with nuclear weapons.

You can't just put some plutonium on the cooker, add a few herbs, and boil it until you get a nuke. There's a lot of complex technology involved, which is why Iraq never managed it and Iran still can't.

 

[englishpremier]

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.

I don't know how true it is but I remember a statement saying that Japan and Germany could have Nuclear weapons in as short a time as 1 year if they really wanted to. Presumably that would be the same for any well developed country.

 

[muon]

No. If it was that easy, we'd see a lot more countries with nuclear weapons.

You can't just put some plutonium on the cooker, add a few herbs, and boil it until you get a nuke. There's a lot of complex technology involved, which is why Iraq never managed it and Iran still can't.

They haven't bothered. The developed countries would easily have nuclear weapons, unless you believe their engineering is behind the likes of North Korea, Pakistan etc.

The other less developed countries would also have them if they are left unimpeded to pump resources into such a project (as well as the motivation to do so). The science of it is well known now and it's just a case of engineering some of the tech do it.

 

[Sankari]

They haven't bothered. The developed countries would easily have nuclear weapons, unless you believe their engineering is behind the likes of North Korea, Pakistan etc.

The other less developed countries would also have them if they are left unimpeded to pump resources into such a project (as well as the motivation to do so). The science of it is well known now and it's just a case of engineering some of the tech do it.

I am specifically contesting the claim that 'any of these countries could probably make nuclear weapons.'

The list includes:

* Iran
* South Africa
* Belarus (doesn't even have any nuclear power plants)
* Bangladesh (doesn't even have any nuclear power plants)
* Turkey (doesn't even have any nuclear power plants)

I don't believe any of these countries could develop nuclear weapons 'if pushed.' They lack the capacity.

 

[sideways14a]

Given the raw materials, ie enriched uranium / plutonium / tritium ect.. then yes several on that list could well be expected to squirt out a basic gun type or even implosion device.
Iran, yes and SA ... if you believe the story about the Vela incident already have.
Turkey.. hmm probably as well.

There is an awful lot of info now in the public domain, with advanced computers now available for pennies it wouldnt take a half decent nation state long to build something basic that makes a big bang.

 

[muon]

I am specifically contesting the claim that 'any of these countries could probably make nuclear weapons.'

The list includes:

* Iran
* South Africa
* Belarus (doesn't even have any nuclear power plants)
* Bangladesh (doesn't even have any nuclear power plants)
* Turkey (doesn't even have any nuclear power plants)

I don't believe any of these countries could develop nuclear weapons 'if pushed.' They lack the capacity.

Well my post was clearing referring to the countries with nuclear power plants. I told you to order by generating capacity.

So not sure why you listed the bottom three.

 

[Akagi]

Nobody should be allowed nuclear arms. Or other kinds of bombs. Or guns. But such is the world we live in.

 

[Energize]

Given the raw materials, ie enriched uranium / plutonium / tritium ect.. then yes several on that list could well be expected to squirt out a basic gun type or even implosion device.
Iran, yes and SA ... if you believe the story about the Vela incident already have.
Turkey.. hmm probably as well.

There is an awful lot of info now in the public domain, with advanced computers now available for pennies it wouldnt take a half decent nation state long to build something basic that makes a big bang.

"Given the raw materials, ie enriched uranium / plutonium / tritium ect.."

That's a pretty huge caveat... The entire difficulty in making nuclear weapons is the challenge of enriching nuclear materials, not making a bomb from those materials.

Iran already tried enriching Uranium and failed, so that flies in the face of your assertion that "it wouldnt take a half decent nation state long to build something basic".

 

[sideways14a]

Well yes the point was that actually building a functioning nuclear device is not "that" hard, given the materials.
Hence why so much effort goes into keeping proliferation down.

Now building a decent hydrogen bomb is another story, a boosted fission device is prob within most countries abilities but fusion brings a whole different ball game out.
Then again most countries would be happy with ~50kt fission device anyway, its a nuke, makes a big noise and lots of wind.

 

[NickK]

Religion and war - bad.

However one can only hope it bring a stability though maturity.

 

[Tefal]

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.



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

What rule of law?

Rule of law said the Iraq invasion was illegal, the annexation of Crimea is a war crime but nothing happened.


"Rule of law" simply means "the bigger boys rule"

 

[NVP]

It's like we need some type of global law enforcement...

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

What rule of law?

Rule of law said the Iraq invasion was illegal, the annexation of Crimea is a war crime but nothing happened.


"Rule of law" simply means "the bigger boys rule"

Well I'll give you the Iraq one but there was a political cost. Russia was hit hard with sanctions for annexing Crimea and thrown out of the G8