Source: McKenzie Intelligence Services. The New York Times
New York Times: Plutonium Is Unsung Concession in Iran Nuclear Deal
At first glance, the metals that give atom bombs their destructive fury might seem interchangeable: Uranium and plutonium are both more valuable than gold. Both captivate would-be atomic powers. And both fueled bombs that leveled Japanese cities — uranium at Hiroshima and plutonium at Nagasaki.
But to see them as equal is to ignore a crucial difference: Of the 15,000 or so nuclear warheads on the planet, atomic experts say, more than 95 percent rely on plutonium to ignite their firestorms.
As a fuel for weapons, plutonium packs a far greater punch than uranium, and in bulk can be easier and cheaper to produce. Which is why some nuclear experts voice incomprehension at what they see as a lopsided focus on uranium in evaluations of the deal reached with Iran — under which Tehran would forsake the production of plutonium.
WNU Editor: It was definitely a concession .... but I suspect that if the nuclear deal does fall apart .... it would not take long for Iran to ramp up production of nuclear materials .... plutonium included.
1 comment:
Even if the deal does not "all apart" there seems no way for the US to actually enforce anything. Iran agrees not to plutonium so what? They just violate the deal and do it anyway. With no way for the Americans or anyone friendly to America to engage in inspections there is no way to be sure. As such, they can "agree" to anything. It means absolutely nothing.
Post a Comment