Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
"A BIZARRE NOTION." He ended his answer implying that he'd authorize air strikes against an Iranian nuclear warhead if one's built, but prior to the conclusion Joe Biden made two surprising (for a debate) and welcome points on Iran: that the policy of "regime change" itself -- of making demands on a country like Iran while also touting our intentions to topple the government -- is "bizarre" and should be abandoned; and that, according to actual and credible analyses, Iran is many years further away from developing nuclear weapons than is commonly discussed or assumed.
--Sam Rosenfeld
COMMENTS (1)
" Iran is many years further away from developing nuclear weapons than is commonly discussed or assumed"
...by non-physicists.
Frankly, I think what Iran is doing is almost all for show. They're saying far too much, considering how far along they are.
Here's the kicker: having *a* nuke isn't useful for defence. Having a nuclear weapons *program* is (i.e., having more on the way).
My own wild guess is that Iran picked up *a* nuke from the FSU, and now wants to have a semi-plausible program to back it up. Because, frankly, it'll take 10-15 years at the rate they're going, and their efforts seem pretty incoherent (why enrichment + heavy water? If you have one, you don't need the other!).
A country has to test a nuke (successfully) to actually have a deterrent, and without a program to back it up, the response is "thanks for disarming yourself".
Posted by: Grumpy Physicist | June 4, 2007 11:57 AM