Nuclear facilities in Iran "no easy target to go after"

[indian bull]

Amazing thought process going on here. nfloorl:

The question of dirty bombs that spills nuclear material comes to mind, once the nuclear facilities have been attacked and completely neutralized and the hostilities have been declared, in the event of Iran lacking a nuclear warhead what are the chances of diverting the attention towards a more closer (geographically) neighbor like Israel and using a radioactive dirty bomb, will they be willing to do this or will the threat of further military action control this possibility?

Hey funtz i didnt understand completly what u are saying man,who will attack israel with a dirty bomb?

 

[swerve]

Not always - watching a facility being constructed tells you a lot about its internal layout.

Given enough satellite images, a 3-D computer model can be built, allowing the viewer to rotate the model to any angle, and to explore the above and below-ground layout.

I know several people who have been shown such a model of what I had better describe as "a facility of great interest in south-west Asia".

Of course, this technique does not tell you what is in the individual rooms, but the layout and access arrangements may give clues.

Mercurius Cantabrigiensis

Depends on how much concealment there is during construction. Let us assume, for example, that a temporary roof is constructed to shelter the poor workers from the elements while they toil. All you know then is what goes in & comes out, & the exterior.

Certainly, you can infer much about the function of a building from its appearance, but don't forget that a large part of Iraqs pre-1991 nuclear programme was not discovered before the war, despite considerable surveillance.

Firstly, you have to decide what to look at. You may never look at the right thing. Then you have to get good pictures (satellite orbits are known . . . ), & then you have to interpret them. Both of Iraqs calutron facilities was identified as part of the nuclear programme & attacked in 1991, but neither was identified as an enrichment facility. The one which had calutrons installed wasn't thought to have sufficient power, because the high-capacity underground cable leading to it was not spotted. The calutron manufacturing plant was not identified at all.

What is possible given the best imagery & best interpretation is not what one can assume will happen. That is not realistic.

 

[Grand Danois]

What is possible given the best imagery & best interpretation is not what one can assume will happen. That is not realistic.

Just to expand on the masint side. Off-site aerial isotope-sniffing of is a way of gaining a picture of processes and materials in a particular geographical area. It's good enough to get a fingerprint of most events, nuclear reactors and tests and rough location.

IR imaging gives an indication of activity levels and energy expenditure.

Spaceborne ground penetrating radar gives indications of tunnel systems.

Collate and correlate.

It does also give the nation spied upon possibilities for deception.

 

[funtz]

Hey funtz i didnt understand completly what u are saying man,who will attack israel with a dirty bomb?

.

My understanding is that every nuclear program provides the user with radioactive material, now Iran is pursuing a nuclear program.

In case of massive air strikes on the nuclear facilities and possibly on some of Iran's leadership(as the US military will like to do no doubt), Iran under threat might just decide to use supply radioactive material to nearby terrorist groups with in some sort of a dirty bomb, and how dangerous can this(dirty bomb be?
Or will the possibility of further military action be a threat that will make sure that no such thing happens?

 

[indian bull]

.

My understanding is that every nuclear program provides the user with radioactive material, now Iran is pursuing a nuclear program.

In case of massive air strikes on the nuclear facilities and possibly on some of Iran's leadership(as the US military will like to do no doubt), Iran under threat might just decide to use supply radioactive material to nearby terrorist groups with in some sort of a dirty bomb, and how dangerous can this(dirty bomb be?
Or will the possibility of further military action be a threat that will make sure that no such thing happens?

Well funtz nobody can predict precisely what is going to happen when iran will be attacked. It will be a very dangerous operation as there will be many possibilities about iranian nukes. They may have made a primitive kind of nuke or are in the process of making it, ofcourse they have nuclear material of unknown amount and they will certianly try very hard to prevent it from destruction by US forces. And in this scenario they may hand over this enriched uranium in the form of a bomb to terrorist or millitants or islamic radicals. I think there must be no mistake in calculations from US army, a small mistake will be a great hazard.

 

[metro]

.

My understanding is that every nuclear program provides the user with radioactive material, now Iran is pursuing a nuclear program.

In case of massive air strikes on the nuclear facilities and possibly on some of Iran's leadership(as the US military will like to do no doubt), Iran under threat might just decide to use supply radioactive material to nearby terrorist groups with in some sort of a dirty bomb, and how dangerous can this(dirty bomb be?
Or will the possibility of further military action be a threat that will make sure that no such thing happens?

In your first post, I think you ask if Israel is threatened by this possibility. The obvious answer is, most definitely. In general, almost every country is very worried about Iran passing off some nuclear material to one "terrorist organization" or another. Since your not just dealing with some "everyday, gather your own materials, do it yourself" crude dirty bomb, but the potential for high grade material--I believe IAEA and/or Iran said they have reached enrichment levels of U-235 somewhere between 4.0% and 4.8%-- being used in a "professional" device that can be smuggled by whatever means into almost any country, the concern is definitely justifiable.
As for its danger... any "not so crude" dirty bomb could cause a severe problem if it's detonated in a city like Tel-Aviv. Under that scenario, I'm confident that Israel would launch whatever they have at Iran and ask questions later.

Would that threat of a "second strike" deter Iran from even thinking about letting nuclear material out of their possession? I guess it depends on whether you believe what people like Ahmadinjad, and those who he has surrounded himself with, have been saying. IMO, the quick answer is no, I don't think deterrence is something that comes into play here. When Ali Larijani was replaced by Saeed Jalili as the person heading/representing Iran's nuclear program, I highly doubt this comforted anyone-- I'm guessing it's done quite the opposite. I don't really want to get into politics/religion, but both men (among others in their circle) believe that nuclear weapons are the key to are bringing about armageddon, and all the messianic stuff that follows (hey, to each their own). As someone in our intel has said, "Jalili isn't someone who is just paid to repeat the thought's of the Iranian leadership, he believes it all himself." Other important high ranking officials, such as: Mojtaba Hashemi Samare who heads the foreign ministry, Mostafa Pour Mohammadi who's the Interior Minister and Gholam Hossein Ejehi who's the "Intelligence Minister," all subscribe to the same line of thinking. I'll leave it there but I do encourage you (collective) to look up their names and read about them... that way you can draw your own conclusion.

In march, Iran is holding elections and in 2009 presidential elections. We're (US gov't/World) hoping either ex-president Rafsanjani (I believe, Interpol still has an international warrant out for his arrest) considered a moderate in today's climate or ex-president Khatami (probably the number 1 choice of the west) who has been unusually openly critical of Ahmadinejad (basically questioning his sanity) is put back in power. IMO, Khatami is the best chance at defusing any nuclear crisis or war with Iran.

Last thing; the problem Iran might have with handing off nuclear material is that they'll most likely put it under the control of the IRGC "foreign affairs department" [I sort of couched that one, but I'm trying to be PC], but the IRGC is split between loyalists and basically opportunists. That is, people who joined after the revolution in order to get a good salary and everything else. Many in the IRGC have already "defected" and given us very good intel. It hasn't been difficult to turn members of the IRGC into "assets" within Iran. So, I would imagine that if orders were given to use some nuclear device, one intel agency or another would find out quickly. IMO, Germany and Israel have the best assets, but countries like Turkey, the UAE, and other GCCs get a good number of defections.

Anyway, that's it for now. BTW, I just want to make it clear that I have absolutely nothing against the people of Iran, quite the opposite. My opinion of the gov't, isn't very high... however, the same goes for my gov't, for different reasons.

Peace

 

[metro]

Just to expand on the masint side. Off-site aerial isotope-sniffing is a way of gaining a picture of processes and materials in a particular geographical area.

I knew those analysts were high on something. Does one need to go to rehab after engaging in this activity?

Spaceborne ground penetrating radar gives indications of tunnel systems.

I know the system exists, but in practice is it very useful? E.G. even if you know of a relatively small area where multiple tunnels almost definitely exist, will the tunnels be easily exposed (deception aside). How deep can it penetrate the earth (assuming desert conditions)?
I ask because I know that it's a pain in the ass to find well dug tunnels even when "you're" positive they exist in a certain area... take the wall separating Gaza and Israel as an example. It's a relatively small area to cover but very difficult to find the numerous tunnels dug beneath it. Does the spaceborne GPR pick these up easily? Regular "ground based" GPR often misses them...

Thanks in advance!
Cheers

 

[kato]

In general, almost every country is very worried about Iran passing off some nuclear material to one "terrorist organization" or another.

Actually, most countries seem to assess that Iran definitely isn't insane enough to do that (or rather, would want to keep absolute control over the usage of said materials - and that's not really possible via 3rd partners).

 

[metro]

Actually, most countries seem to assess that Iran definitely isn't insane enough to do that (or rather, would want to keep absolute control over the usage of said materials - and that's not really possible via 3rd partners).

-I'm speaking strictly of the current gov't/decision makers (not the Iranian people), I believe you are talking about the same thing... I just don't want to create the impression that it goes any deeper/further than those in control.

-"Isn't Insane enough," is an acknowledgment that some degree of insanity is definitely present. I wouldn't put my country in jeopardy or hand everything on trying to judge if some artificial level of "insanity" has been surpassed or if it's in check. I just see that as not only dangerous but completely reckless on the part of policy makers of any country, especially those countries which has been openly threatened.
I lived in the ME for a while and learned that threats should be taken at face value, especially when you know the background of those making the threats; especially when those threats are consistently made.
Are they credible? Again, one has to assess the totality of information available and not error on the conservative side.
Using an arbitrary scale or something like "the theory of relativity," to decide if someone's "insanity" is relatively acceptable, just doesn't make much sense to me.

-Just as an example, when UBL declared war against us (US) in 1996, it went unnoticed. A few years later, we definitely noticed not only what happened on 9/11, but the complete lack of seriousness our gov't put into a declaration of war on our country! That was insane...

-Iran hasn't started a war in the last century. But Iran's proxies have been active all over the world and fought several wars. To believe that Iran would pass on some of their best arms to Syria, Hizbollah, Hamas, but draw the line at any type of wmd, is, IMO, irresponsible and naive. Factor in the threats, who they are being made by (their complete background), the purpose, etc... and make a decision. If you're warned, repeatedly, and don't act, when something happens you can't tell your people, "who would have ever guessed that they would have done something so insane"?

Germany and Israel basically have the same Intelligence assessment of the Iran, their nuclear program, their leadership, their doctrine, their "long arms." Unfortunately, we always seem to "misunderestimate" or not interpret correctly the capabilities/progress of other countries-- for example Iraq 1991, Somalia, 1,2, skip a few, Iraq 2003, China, etc... Why do we strike out so often? That's a complicated answer.

However, even the CIA appears to have done some homework on this one and that's why we're taking things pretty seriously. That's why all the Arab countries in the ME and Israel are going to Annapolis, everyone understands there needs to be a united front that faces Iran. Ahmadinejad and those he has moved into all high ranking positions, are only rational actors in their own minds. They believe what they believe and are pursuing their end by any means possible.

We saw what happened in Syria in July when Iran was trying to modify some Scud warheads with unconventional weapons. We know because one exploded and VX killed a bunch of people and contaminated the area. We saw in september an air-strike in Syria (that did or didn't happen ), and does one wonder if Iran might have been involved in whatever was going one in that ummm... plant?

IMHO, Iran's leadership has absolutely no qualms with using the IRGC outside of Iran to do as they wish (not to mention other groups). The whole concept of MAD may still be in place, but under a completely different context. MAD not as deterrence but as an expected and welcomed outcome. More like a suicide pact.

Yes its been possible to penetrate several segments of the IRGC and a lot of information confirming Iranian intentions has come from them. When/If nuclear material is passed along to loyalists, if they aren't quickly exposed, they will act upon the orders of Ahmadinejad. When Iran threatens to "unleash hell upon 'western civilization,'" (any country that attempts to stand in their way) perhaps it's a joke to some, I just don't see it that way.

If you haven't done so already and are interested, I'd read about those in charge and see what you think.

Hey Kato, I'm tired man... gotta get some sleep. Hope you know nothing personal at all! I just disagree on this one.

Cheers

 

[Mercurius]

Depends on how much concealment there is during construction. Let us assume, for example, that a temporary roof is constructed to shelter the poor workers from the elements while they toil. All you know then is what goes in & comes out, & the exterior.

That is indeed true – but in my original posting I used the qualification “Not always”. You may not be able to see what you want to see.

A temporary roof would screen the nature of the work, but in the case of a large building that is going to extend deep into the ground and/or to a good height, I’m not sure how practical erecting such a structure would be.

Let’s assume that I’ve dug a huge rectangular excavation and am planning to pour the foundations then the lowest floor surface. The engineering problem of spanning this hole with a temporary roof would not be simple. How do you support the roof in mid-span? Once you have reached ground level, and the walls are rising, how do you create a new temporary roof?

These are essentially civil-engineering problems. Is anyone reading this thread an experienced civil engineer? This is an area where only direct experience can provide a useful answer, I suspect.

In the case of the "facility of great interest in south-west Asia", I’ve seen some of the overhead images that were used to create the 3D model. The site was open and fully visible. Concealing the work had either been considered unnecessary or impractical.

Don't forget that a large part of Iraqs pre-1991 nuclear programme was not discovered before the war, despite considerable surveillance.

Also true – the reconnaissance programme needs to be able to find the targets of interest. That’s are area outside my expertise – I had an extensive briefing on satellite reconnaissance more than a decade ago, but that was focussed purely on the techniques of image gathering and exploitation.

Mercurius Cantabrigiensis

 

[Grand Danois]

I knew those analysts were high on something. Does one need to go to rehab after engaging in this activity?

I know the system exists, but in practice is it very useful? E.G. even if you know of a relatively small area where multiple tunnels almost definitely exist, will the tunnels be easily exposed (deception aside). How deep can it penetrate the earth (assuming desert conditions)?
I ask because I know that it's a pain in the ass to find well dug tunnels even when "you're" positive they exist in a certain area... take the wall separating Gaza and Israel as an example. It's a relatively small area to cover but very difficult to find the numerous tunnels dug beneath it. Does the spaceborne GPR pick these up easily? Regular "ground based" GPR often misses them...

Thanks in advance!
Cheers

Space based GPR can penetrate miles into the ground. Of course it wont be able to find indications of Gaza style tunnels, but I'm thinking industrial sized cavities.

My own experience with "ground based" GPR, is that you can extremely good resolution and detect very small variations. I have also read articles on how it has been tested for detection of people buried by avalanches.

I have heard of the difficulty of detecting the Gaza tunnels, and truly I am puzzled.

 

[metro]

Space based GPR can penetrate miles into the ground. Of course it wont be able to find indications of Gaza style tunnels, but I'm thinking industrial sized cavities.

My own experience with "ground based" GPR, is that you can extremely good resolution and detect very small variations. I have also read articles on how it has been tested for detection of people buried by avalanches.

I have heard of the difficulty of detecting the Gaza tunnels, and truly I am puzzled.

That's interesting. I had no idea what Space GPR could do, but I understand what it's used for now. It's all the more strange because Ground GPR, in the conditions mentioned, only penetrates the earth about 20ft, at most. They usually dig the tunnels on a 45 degree angle down, anywhere from 45ft to 100ft depending on the "construction crew," or what it's going to be used for. Then they go horizontal to wherever their destination is. Yeah, for whatever reason, it's incredibly difficult for them to locate the tunnels... and they are literally all over the place. I think they should dig holes straight down and put a good size explosive charges in the holes. I'd think that might have a chance of collapsing the tunnels... however, I'm not sure they can do it in all areas due to infrastructure.

Anyway, thanks a lot for the info!

 

[Grand Danois]

That's interesting. I had no idea what Space GPR could do, but I understand what it's used for now. It's all the more strange because Ground GPR, in the conditions mentioned, only penetrates the earth about 20ft, at most. They usually dig the tunnels on a 45 degree angle down, anywhere from 45ft to 100ft depending on the "construction crew," or what it's going to be used for. Then they go horizontal to wherever their destination is. Yeah, for whatever reason, it's incredibly difficult for them to locate the tunnels... and they are literally all over the place. I think they should dig holes straight down and put a good size explosive charges in the holes. I'd think that might have a chance of collapsing the tunnels... however, I'm not sure they can do it in all areas due to infrastructure.

Anyway, thanks a lot for the info!

I may have been a bit hasty with the number on penetration from space borne gpr, thinking of penetration of ice, dry sand is a different medium of course. otoh i was not thinking of locating the structures per se, but of indirect evidence as to what is going on...

The depth of the tunnels in Gaza may explain why they are hard to detect. I seems to be the tunnel diggers fortune that the water table is so low!

 

[alexsa]

I know I am off topic but the hypocracy is getting to me. You come from Russia dn you have a problem with other restriction free speech on thsi web site. Remind me what happend to the Ogliarchs who used to own the 'independent' media in russia again. The mods are trying to hose down spiteful and inflamatory posts to keep this exchange of information civil. The requirements are in the rules, break em and your post gets edited, pretty simple really.

 

[eckherl]

No - they are not sharks but administrators that request you learn the rules and keep your political views off of this site, writing this type of rubbish will get you banned which you deserve.

 

[RubiconNZ]

No but you haven't bothered checking your spelling which is against forum rules how hard is it for you to read your post and think hmm maybe the Iranians didn't invested chest maybe they invented chess

 

[indian bull]

What a revolting posture, this man is surely a hardcore communist. I think we should abide by the rules framed for the forum and also we should be really thankful to the administrators they have given us an excellant platform to discuss about defence matters and expand our knowlege about these matters. They do a lot of hardwork and even have to read rubbish things posted by some mischevious people and inturn they charge nothing.

 

[alexsa]

What a revolting posture, this man is surely a hardcore communist. I think we should abide by the rules framed for the forum and also we should be really thankful to the administrators they have given us an excellant platform to discuss about defence matters and expand our knowlege about these matters. They do a lot of hardwork and even have to read rubbish things posted by some mischevious people and inturn they charge nothing.

I know one liners are off limits but .... here here and well said.

cheers
Alex

 

[gf0012-aust]

Iran made the plant not easy to target, it was for many reasons because what Israel did to Iraq in 1981. Iran knows Israel wants to attrack and destroy the plant so why make the plant open to attrack. Iranians are smart people, they invested chest.

The offtopic portion of your thread was deleted. (You are apparently a very very slow learner)

If you are going to have Oxforduniversit as your nickname at least have the decency to spell properly.

btw;
It's Chess and not Chest
It's Martial and not Marcel

Your pithy commentary is unwelcome and shows a lack of maturity.

If you want to be treated like an adult, then when and if you come back, make the effort to act like one.

 

[kato]

Sidenote:

Chess wasn't invented in Persia, it just got its modern name there.

Presumably when a chinese proto-chess game (a forerunner of Xiangqi) was transferred to a 8x8 field in India, creating Chaturanga, at least that's the current historical view. An older standardized view sees the origins of Chess only in India. Opinions are pretty much split between those two. Old Persian sources give India as the origin.
Chaturanga transformed into Shatrang over time, and then went west from there to Persia, where it was known as Shatranj. Shatrang/Shatranj still had significantly different rules from both Chaturanga and modern Chess. Modern Chess rules as we know them only appeared around the mid/late 15th century, created in Europe.

The name Chess -> Shah itself is actually derived as an abbreviation of Checkmate -> Shah-mat, which is an amalgam of Persian (shah, king) and Arabic (mat, dead).