Does Iran Actually Have a Nuclear Weapon? || Peter Zeihan
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 вер 2024
- Everyone is talking about Iran's potential development of an active nuclear weapon. Before anyone gets too frightened at the prospect of this announcement, let me give you some food for thought.
Full Newsletter: mailchi.mp/zei...
Please join us for the Webinar - Peter Zeihan's Risk List: What Keeps a Geopolitical Strategist Up at Night on June 5th at 12:00 PM EST. Click here to register: us02web.zoom.u...
Where to find more?
Subscribe to the Newsletter: bit.ly/3NyQu4l
Subscribe to the UA-cam Channel: bit.ly/3Ny9UXb
Listen to the Podcast: spoti.fi/3iJyNEe
Zeihan on Geopolitics website: zeihan.com/
Purchase the Global Outlook Webinar Here: bit.ly/3xBvRxd
Where to find me on Social Media?
Twitter: bit.ly/3E1E95D
LinkedIn: bit.ly/3zJAW8b
Instagram: bit.ly/3IW2mgp
Facebook: bit.ly/3ZIAjHk
#iran #nukes #war
Not the Iran video I expected.
I’m certain he’s waiting for confirmation and probably an announcement.
@@brittanislarp3850 Confirmation was 5 h back, he is death
@@xavierlaraserra me chek phon
reciveve masage:
ebruhim raisin is died
me joy
@@brittanislarp3850 Waiting to get the OK from his handlers
LOL
Despite all the financial struggles i and my family faced, everything is finally falling into place! $47,000 weekly profit and riches I'll always praise the Lord
Wow! Kind of in shock you mentioned expert, Elizabeth regina nelsen. What a coincidence!!
Life is easier when the cash keeps popping
in, thanks to Elizabeth Regina Nelsen services. Glad she's getting the recognition she deserves!
Such a genuine personality!!, Sincerely speaking. I will continue to trade and stick to Elizabeth Regina daily signals and guides as long as it works well for me💜💜
Any specific guide. I'm from Georgia how do I go about this? I think I'm interested how can I get in touch with mrs Elizabeth Regina Nelsen
Thank you for your kind words! l'm glad to
have been able to connect with you in a
positively. It sounds like Elizabeth Regina Nelsen is a trusted resource for you when it comes to trading and financial guidance.That's great! Having a reliable source of information and support can make a big difference in one's financial journey
A better question would be: does Iran have good helicopters?
Eh.
We all no that answer. They are hoping to replace their air force with Russia aircraft and even once they do that we are looking at essentially decrepit planes from a slightly more modern era.
Some years ago an RAF Chinook flew into a mountain on the 'Mull of Kintyre', in Fog.
The helicopters are probably fine. The decision to fly them in heavy fog, not so much.
😂😂😂😂
On the other hand, Libya and Ukraine are lessons to never trust the bureaucrats in Washington in regards to assurances if you give up your nuclear weapons.
An implosion is not necessary for the manufacture of a simple type of atomic bomb. The bomb that levelled Hiroshima was a gun type device called little boy. where two quite large subcritical masses of uranium 235 were slammed together at one end of a cut off large gun barrel. This device was so simple it wasn’t even tested prior to being used.
Interesting that Trinity test was implosion, and yet Hiroshima bomb was gun. I thought gun hadn’t worked, which is why they went implosion.
True but still tricky to get right
Zeihan is one of these guys who fancies himself an expert on everything, but actually knows very little about a lot.
@@Pod6168 the gun worked perfectly for large amounts of Uranium 235 63 kilos I think but it didn’t work for plutonium 238 because they couldn’t illuminate the 240 isotope contaminating the 238 This would have led to pre ignition and a fizzle even with a much longer faster gun barrel. Hence the work on the tall boy weapon was ceased.
Gun type devices are probably too large and heavy to launch on a long range missile, though history shows us that delivery by plane will work.
@3:25 - India did not develop nukes because of Pakistan, but because India fears it otherwise can't deter nuclear-armed China. Pakistan did not have nukes when India got them, so there was no Indian fear of Pakistan in this regard.
Yeah caught that. It was Pakistan that got them after, but they both knew they were in development, and at that time they HATED each other more than today (maybe?).
Nobody knows when Pakistan got them, only USA was suppose to have them, then only the original 5 (USA, China, Russia, Uk, France) after nobody was suppose to have them.
@@Tethloach1 Pakistan got for sure by '98, India was like '72.
@@Tethloach1 What about South Africa?
@@chechnya if they got one, then it's a leftover from a hush-hush-nuclear-test-during-a-hurricane deal with Izrael.
Didn’t expect to open a Peter Zeihan video and randomly see my city. I hope you’ll enjoy Poznań!
My son, if given the choice, would live in Poland. Loves the country.
I studied at AMU in Poznan back in 2017, it’s a nice city
Hopefully that strange new policy of banning the Crucifix and other religious items in any government office in Warsaw will be repelled. God have mercy on us.
@@holdingsteadfast Hail Satan.
@@Aconitum_napellus Christus vincit! Christus regnat! Christus imperat! ✝️
And yesterday, their president pulled a Kobe…interested in the geopolitical fallout from this.
please let's not make this a thing 😅
Oh shit, he really is dead. I knew there was a crash, but you literally just had me find out he was actually dead.
I knew someone would eventually end up getting hurt from that dumb meme...
Okay but let’s not conflate the tragedy of Kobe, his daughter, and 3 other innocent people’s horrific deaths that were captured on video versus the net world benefit of an Iranian authoritarian dying the same way but under way stranger circumstances bro.
@@3ZN357how is it stranger circumstances? They’re actually really similar. Poor weather crash into the side of a large hill/mountain.
Getting this all right for a basic nuclear weapon was extremely difficult - in 1945.
This is nearly 80 year old technology. The things they had to work very hard for are off-the-shelf tech now - everything from timing the implosion to machining the plutonium/uranium.
The only hard part is getting suitable amounts of quality fissionables, and they've been working on that for decades.
The science part? Iran has had plenty of time to hire former Soviet physicists to oversee the construction of such a device.
Iran also has their own Universities. And probably a High School Graduation rate that would embarrass some US States.
Doesn't matter how old the technology is unless your knowledge spills over they won't get it. China has enough knowledge to catch up to the west and even pass it.
@@tsubadaikhan6332 Right, I’m sure it’s a broad and rigorous curriculum too. Fool.
those scientists would be 65-ish in a country where the average male life span is 55-
@@watchthe1369 Or they'd be 65-ish, sitting on millions of dollars in some other country.
The Iranians getting lots of help from North Korea.
Israel will know when Iran gets them. Then Iran won't have them anymore.
Saudi Arabia has a deal with Pakistan regarding nukes. They just have not called it in yet.
I love when Peter calls Iranians Uranians.
Because he talks out his inus most of the time
"I'm not afraid of the man who wants ten nuclear weapons, Colonel. I'm terrified of the man who only wants one"
(Julia Kelly, Movie, The Peace Maker 1997)!
India got nukes because China got nukes, not because of Pakistan.
Don't know about that.
@@jeffk464we do know, becuase India had them first…because China has them. Pakistan got them after India.
@@robbycook4298 Wasnt the pakistan guy the one that sold nuclear secrets to China?
North Korea got nuclear tech from Pakistan.
On his recent trip to Pakistan, Iran's Raisi may have been negotiating for Pakistani tactical nuclear weapons designs (which are themselves of Chinese origin)
In exchange for some untold billions of dollars for the cash-strapped Pakistanis, the Iranians may have gotten the lower-yield nuke designs they wanted (this lets them make more of them with their available fissile material). One further clue in relation to that was the Pakistani PM's quick trip to Beijing while Raisi's visit was going on (Chinese are the ones who gave the final nod for proliferating their bomb tech)
They have it.
AQ Khan network sold nuke designs
Could be. Then the Mossad nudged the choppers on the trip.
Didn't Pakistan get their nuclear weapon knowhow from North Korea?
@manofsan, thoughts on the implications if this theory proves correct or even partially correct? The U.S. has had a mostly warm strategic relationship with Pakistan, but if Pakistan were to have engaged in this conduct with Iran, that has major implications likely from both the U.S. and India (and Modi doesn’t strike me as one to suffer this kind of bullshit).
Sweden was very close to its own nuclear bomb in the 60's, but closed the program in part due to influence from the U.S.
Yeah, there are a lot of countries who could get a nuke in a week if they wanted to
I dont think the Somalis of New Sweden can make a nuclear bomb.
@@globalist6574 As a Somali from Denmark, thats was funny. We are here to stay buddy, cry more 😂
I was waiting for Peter to make a video after the Iranian president unsubscribed from life.
It could be "ISIS" (keep the quotes on that)
We'll know for sure that it's "ISIS" when media mouthpieces all begin insisting so in unison, even before an investigation has been done
Dislike, unsub is the true fuk this I'm out
Remember way back when we were quite certain Pakistan & North Korea lacked the capacity to secretly develop nuclear weapons?
Good times, baby.
That’s what I was wondering too. If detection and “prevention” (attacking before capable) is so easy against Iran, why didn’t we do this against N. Korea?
I sure remember how proud Clinton was that he got North Korea to sign a treaty saying they wouldn't develop nukes. Ah the western world loves paper documents.
America knew Pakistan was developing nuclear weapons but let them develop anyway because they needed their support against the USSR in Afghanistan
Iran has 10 Warheads
Prove it.
If Pakistan and N Korea have nukes. Iran has nukes. Iran also has hypersonic missiles from Russia.
I was saying that they probably have because they seemed very confident standing up to israel in the "light of day". I am betting they have Russian expertise now they are allies, if not technological help. Them getting a working one is basically a certainty now imo.
Peter, I love your work. But you say at 2:29 that if Iran demonstrates that they have "capture the power of the atom", Iran's opponents will hit them immediately to prevent them from creating a way to deliver the bomb. If this is true, why did this not happen w North Korea? Did N. Korea effectively conceal its nuclear capability and ability to deliver a bomb from us until it was too late? Or did the fact that they are seen as China's ally deter us from stopping them?
Well Israel have said multiple times it will strike so it is probably on the table
There may be more than one way to skin a cat in this regard. I think the US could and still can mess with the guidance devices on the N Korean rockets, so delivery will not work. But I agree that the US should have been rock solid in its opposition to N Korea getting any type of atomic or nuclear device. Fear of a new war on the Korean peninsula was the likely reason but it is better to be firm from the get go or you set a precedent for weak resolve, which all the irresponsible evil doers in the world will try to exploit.
It's clear Peter also doesn't know that you can test and refine your implosion design without having to fuel it with precious U-235, U-233 or Pu-239, risking losing the material or setting it off, letting the world know you did it. How does he think the guys working on Project Manhattan perfected it? As a matter of fact, I remember a presentation from Netanyahu, back during the first Trump presidency, where he shows several classified materials on a big screen, documents, pictures, exposés, etc, obtained by the Israeli that showed Iran was playing with that and documenting their efforts. Bibi was pointing out during that presentation that focusing on Iran's capacity to enrich Uranium to weapons-grade level shouldn't be the only concern a new Nuclear Deal should have focused itself. They were playing with advanced implosion technology in a sandbox, and were getting results, and that should also be taken into consideration. North Korea chose to go ASAP with crude implosion designs, fueled by reactor produced Pu-239, that was probably not completely free of impurities, and improve their designs and processes on the fly, because they were being intentionally reckless and loud with their intentions. They wanted everybody to know what they were doing, and that was by design. There was no point in hiding their hand. You can see that pretty much the same went on with their ICBM program.
Speaking of Poznań, try to visit Armored Forces museum there, they have some unique tanks. Oh , and should ever US quit NATO, Poland is the first in queue of new nuke powers. Because you know how deterrence by French and UK worked last time...
Nah. Fission bombs are 1940's tech, made super easy in the era of µm accurate CNC machines and high power semiconductors, and Persians are really smart. The only impediment was access to highly enriched Uranium which the Iranians for sure have in more than ample quantities now. They'll be gradually building up a stock of warheads to mate to their delivery systems with the intent of announcing once they have enough to prevent anyone wanting to risk a knock-out strike against them.
Agree. Precision CNC machining is available anywhere in the world - just takes $.
I reckon this is more likely. A triggering circuit for a nuclear bomb is pretty to easy to construct with 1980s semiconductors. There's enough seismic activity in Iran to hide an underground weapon test as well.
I believe the recent missile strikes on Israel were a test of delivery systems.
Like when we told Ukraine we’d defend them when they gave up the old Soviet nukes?
Ya, the same treaty that Russia said they wouldn't invade if Ukraine gave up nukes?
So I can think of about 50,000 people in Hiroshima who would disagree that a nuke needs to be complex. Apartheid South Africa had a half dozen of the gun type bomb that they gave up when it was clear the ANC was coming to power.
I do agree how comical that “Iran is 6 months from the bomb” for 25 years. It’s like how every election is “the most important election of our lifetime.”
This election is the most important election of the REST of our lifetimes.
So racist. They should have allowed ANC to carry on the nuclear program and delivery mechanism as the upcoming African superpower.
If Iran doesn't have nukes, it's likely because they don't want the trouble of having nukes. And as they themselves say... They don't want to destabilize the Middle-East by bringing nukes to the table.
The second Iran had nukes, you'd get a ton of proliferation across the Arab states... Which increases danger to the planet.
@@bigminh-y3l You haven't been to South Africa lately, have you?
We've also been 10 years away from Fusion Power for all since the 1950's.
The Salesmen for that one have coaxed literally $Billions$ out of Taxpayers for that one for over 60 years.
(And I'm still optimistic we will get there one day...)
Only 2 things Peter is ever right about, this is not one of them. Geography and Oil
Are you referring to a specific claim by Peter regarding oil and geography or just in general?
@asdasdasddgdgdfgdg Peter covers a wide-ranging array of topics, but his home base is geography and energy. Outside of those subjects, the opinions seem stilted
If he’s 75% on all subjects great and small, that’s one hell of a slugging percentage.
@@richardkammerer2814 I feel ya, I only commented because you can easily tell when its not something within his expertise.
@@richardkammerer281475% wrong
Iranian here: you are neglecting an interesting scenario: We know that Iran and NK have had close military ties for decades. Some Iranian missiles (Shahab-3, for instance) can carry nuclear warheads, and these missiles are copies/improvements of NK missiles. NK does have nuclear weapons and, from time to time, tests long-range ballistic missiles and sometimes carries out nuclear warhead detonation underground. Who can say for sure that at least some of these tests are not conducted for Iran, at the presence of Iranian scientists, and even maybe a few of these warheads are actually made in Iran, transported to NK and then tested there? Maybe that goes for the longer-ranged missiles too (so that Iran's claims about limiting the range of their missiles to 2000 km doesn't turn into a lie).
Yes, good point. Although one would think that if they do or did this, and essentially have deliverable nuclear weapons, they'd quickly flex it or make it known, for that deterrent effect on Israel and any other countries that get ideas.
The deterrent would be the biggest gain from having usable nukes, so I'd think they'd want others to know.
You're not Iranian. You're lying through your teeth
Name checks out
@@DK-ev9dg his name is totally iranian lmao.
@@rick323actually no. The deterrence is simply by convincing intelligence services that such nuclear capabilities exist. Israel has neither tested nor claimed to have nuclear capabilities yet since every intelligence service in the world is convinced, they are considered a nuclear power.
Just the man i was looking for given the Iran helicopter incident
That jewel is a joke
Iranian drones couldn’t find their president for 9 hours, they requested 1 drone from Turkey, the Akinci, and they found it in an hour. So yeah, this makes sense.
NO WONDER ISRAEL WERE LAUGHING WHEN IRAN ATTACKED THEM WITH DRONES.
Did Iranian drones actually try? Turkey offered it and a mountain rescue team.
@@MehrLovin I believe Iran requested first.
@@MehrLovin
Did they rescue the mountain. ???
این دروغ است
The pipes in the back made me chuckle. Like, there's this lowkey patriotic-sounding music in the back and he's going on about nukes 😂
Didn't some grad students successfully create an implosion device as part of a government program to see how "easy" it was to create nuclear devices? If it's something that a graduate student could potentially create, wouldn't it stand to reason that Iran might actually have a working device?
Although, that said, they would have most likely demonstrated that they had the bomb by doing a nuclear test, which we would have detected.
It was called the Nth Country Project.
“The Curve of Binding Energy: A Journey into the Awesome and Alarming World of Theodore B. Taylor” by John McPhee
You can test and refine your implosion design without having to fuel it with precious U-235, U-233 or Pu-239, risking losing the material or setting it off, letting the world know you did it. How does Peter think the guys working on Project Manhattan perfected it? As a matter of fact, I remember a presentation from Netanyahu, back during the first Trump presidency, where he shows several classified materials on a big screen, documents, pictures, exposés, etc, obtained by the Israeli that showed Iran was playing with that and documenting their efforts. Bibi was pointing out during that presentation that focusing on Iran's capacity to enrich Uranium to weapons-grade level shouldn't be the only concern a new Nuclear Deal should have focused itself. They were playing with advanced implosion technology in a sandbox, and were getting results, and that should also be taken into consideration. North Korea chose to go ASAP with crude implosion designs, fueled by reactor produced Pu-239, that was probably not completely free of impurities, and improve their designs and processes on the fly, because they were being intentionally reckless and loud with their intentions. They wanted everybody to know what they were doing, and that was by design. There was no point in hiding their hand. You can see that pretty much the same went on with their ICBM program. This is the last thing the Iranians would do because they can't afford it. They would have Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, the US, Israel, and probably Turkey to worry about if they decided to go down the North Korean path. We must remember always that even amongst the muslim nations, Iran has more enemy than friends. It's my personal believe they will go down the path of the Israeli, that may take them a long long time, 25 more years, but I think they will show their hand once they are sure they have a working bomb, it's deliverable by more than one mean, and they have enough of them to give a lot of bloody noses around, shall anybody test their resolve. Then, they can blow one up in an underground shaft just to prove their point. I hope I'm wrong, of course, for the sake of us all, and in the name of regional stability.
Doubt i'm the first to say it, but a Uranium device is a "gun-type weapon, not an implosion type.
Little Boy was a gun-type, despite the trinity test being implosion type; that's how confident they were in the design of a gun-type weapon. Getting one to explode is the easy part; getting one not to go off too early and fizzle as the projectile approaches the rest of the pit is the hard part.
Actually, no. Uranium can be used in both designs and will go BOOM just fine. That was known even before the Trinity test and the attacks against Japan. There were even tests with implosion devices with a Uranium-Plutonium core, those 1950s atomic scientists created several escuses to go and blow a nuke... So they tried that and it worked just fine. Actually the problem is when you try a gun-type design with Plutonium. Wikipedia does a very decent job explaining why that's an issue.
Exactly. Iran has already done the hard part for a uranium bomb, which is enriching the uranium. At this point they have the warheads, and frankly they most likely can deliver them in Scuds - just not to Israel, which can shoot Scuds down. This is not the same situation as North Korea, which used the easier method of a small reactor at Yongbyon to create the plutonium for a plutonium bomb, which has to be engineered just right - North Korea needed several tests to get it right.
The polish-swedish nuclear weapons program
I believe Iran can build a nuclear weapon and it’s scary. Some of the things Peter said is inaccurate simply because countries like India and Pakistan build nuclear weapons with limited budget and expertise and still managed to build one. India build nukes because there was a threat from china. Subsequently Pakistan build nukes because of the threat from India. It was a security chain reaction(Google the timelines you’ll know). So Iran maybe closer to build one so we should not get ahead of ourselves.
Pakistan got the bomb from China. Exactly how limited do you think India’s budget is?
Yup. But I take some solace in their (C-I-P) relative non-waring since getting their nuclear weapons - they work far better as a deterrent than an attacking weapon (not even North Korea have used them offensively yet). But the fewer states have them the smaller the risk of things going off the rails badly.
Interesting call on India building their nukes as a response to China. I had heard off hand it was focused on Pakistan and vice versa but have never dug deep into it. Thanks!
Yeah Peter only described to more advanced method to detonate while it's easy to detonate with the "gun" method.
Threat from Pakistan not China. China doesn't care about india.
Pete ... you need do a special-episode Kobe edition ... 😐 ... Clearly you recorded this before the 🚁 incident.
My-take...
three words.
In ... side ... job.
Your thoughts? ... ☺
What about their president crash landing a helicopter?? Good briefing on the Iranian "nukes".
Did Iran president just die from helicopter crashed a few hours ago?
Guess it was too much to hope for zeihan to post about the helicopter crash instead of a premade video
It is funny it’s about Iran tho
I suspect he's waiting for it to play out a bit rather than telling us what we already know.
He Is a clown.
@@DK-ev9dg Then why are you here? To display your own brilliance, which no one buys into?
@@ToddSauveNice comebacker dude.
I usually agree with Peter. His information is sound and he has a whole team behind him. He's not some Lone Ranger just airing his opinion. That's to say I respect what he says and watch nearly all his videos and have learned a ton from him. I have most of his books. Most of what he says is pretty inevitable because it's hard to argue with math even where humans and human ingenuity are concerned.
But I disagree on Iran. Two words: North Korea. North Korea is one of the most sanctioned countries in the world. Their people live in abject poverty. And yet, they not only have the bomb and have tested it, they've shown the ability to create rockets to deliver them. Nor is China helping them. China and NK are not friends. Their border is closed or mostly closed and China very actively discourages North Koreans from trying to migrate there. Kim is a headache for China, but they'd rather have that headache than the headache of a united Korea where the U.S. is now lounging comfortably at their back door. If NK can do it, you'd better believe that Iran with better resources can do it. Worse, I'm not convinced that Iran needs a rocket delivery system: they could realistically deliver one by _truck_ . Iran has border issues with a number of neighbors and their own special set of problems - but border issues work both ways.
Peter's other point about not having a bomb for 25 years is disingenuous. It ignores and diminishes all the successful effort and diplomacy that went into convincing Iran not to continue enriching the uranium.
Further, he doesn't mention that Russia has been cozying up to Iran, offering help in the nuke area, and IIRC, rocket delivery. It's a pretty natural development, what with Iran supplying drones to Russia.
That said, the one point I thought he'd make about the consequences of Iran setting off a bomb he didn't, or he did obliquely: Israel might very well bomb anything related to nuke production - because they've done it before. Iran developing workable nukes is an existential issue for Israel.
As to Peter's other points about nuke proliferation, regarding the other countries he mentioned - I totally agree on that. A lot of people don't seem to understand that it's in *our* best interests as Americans to support Ukraine in the European side of things and Taiwan on the China side of things. We can deal with it now without sending Americans in harm's way - or we can deal with it later in a much tougher conflict and the loss of American sons and daughters, sisters, brothers, fathers, mothers.
1:11 - Oops. Implosion is for a plutonium bomb. A uranium device just requires a critical mass and a neutron kicker, neither of which are hard to do, its the enrichment thats hard to accomplish. Uranium bombs are also weak.
Not sure I would call them weak but you nailed everything else
Large and Heavy too, so limits the delivery system.
A uranium bomb was once made that fit in a suitcase
I live in Western Australia. My State is 3 times the size of Texas. The Brits exploded a couple of test Nukes here in the 1960's. I can call a Uranium Bomb Weak. I guarantee you that no-one in Israel would call an Iranian Uranium Bomb 'Weak'.
*(Neither would my Indigenous neighbours).
Nope. Implosion is for BOTH types of device.
Implosion is the only possible method for plutonium but it also works for uranium. Gun-type devices are less efficient than implosion devices. They also do not work for boosted fission or fusion devices.
A Gun type nuke like Littleboy doesn't require as much precision as an implosion type like Fatmam though.
I don't think building the bomb is beyond them.
Enriching enough weapons grade fissile material however might be impossible.
Actually, you only *need* an implosion-type bomb if you use plutonium because uranium is capable of supporting a long enough chain reaction to reach critical mass without an implosion-type bomb. That's why little boy was a canon-type design.
The reason why you need the implosion type is due to Plutonium having two different isotopes usually in the mix. Other can initiate fizzle even in sub critical mass. You can reduce this problem with additional purification but it will cost you extra. The cheap workaround is to cock the fuel just long enough to have acceptable ration of them, then remove the rods and chemically extract the plutonium. Implosion device gets around the fizzle problem by bringing most of the mass in to criticality region simultaneously, thus avoiding the fizzle problem it would have in gun type device.
Peter Zeihan casually explaining what was missing in the knowledge of Iranian scientists to make nuclear weapons... Oh boy, how they are happy they finally got it!!
I'm joking
Is he explaning a plotonium bomb?
He’s explaining the Fat Man style bomb. Little Boy was not that complex.
What? They could have a guntype device instead of implosion + they already have an advanced ballistic missiles program capable of delivering it anywhere.
What a dumb video
I'm interested in the common US view of Iran. I work with multiple Iranians in Malaysia. My view has changed. Horses mouth is the best source.
And what does the horses mouth tell you?
Iranians I have met are nearly always nice, well adjusted and educated people. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the fact their Ayatollah is a nutcase.
Common view: They want to nuke Israel, our ally.
We'll meet again
Don't know where
Don't know when
But I know we'll meet again some sunny day
Maybe they do or they don't have nukes, but what they DEFINITELY don't have is an executive branch LMAOOOOO
This is why the world needs America to not be isolationist.
Obama and Biden give tons of money to Iran. We need less of that.
No, this is why the world needs off the American taxpayer tit ..FULL STOP
Bro loves war
Not for black nations. We not yall peoples nor have anything to do with yall
@@munnakhan8961 Tell me you don't know anything about politics without telling me you don't know anything about politics.
I think the most telling benefit of having a deliverable nuke is you don’t get invaded. Russia with its invasion of Ukraine displayed its inability to might in Keystone Cop fashion. Without its nukes it’d be buried by a NATO counter invasion as many responded to Russias invasion of Ukraine a reaction akin to a frustrated AGAIN this pain in our collective ass!
Nice little trumpet music in the background
Peter can you comment on Annie Jacobsen’s book “Nuclear War” - so even 1 warhead launched will set off an unstoppable chain reaction and we’ll be blown into annihilation into the next ice age? It’s not what I thought would happen.
Implosion usually associated with Pu
If Russia is providing the means for North Korea and Iran to launch military satellites I don't see why they can't also provide technical expertise regarding the development of nuclear weapons in exchange for helping fuel their war. This doesn't seem like much of a leap by any stretch.
Oh wow Poznan.
Retuzi pananski to ratusz jak mniemam hehe
Ja dopiero z trzecim razem zrozumiałem 😂@@cecyliajankowska3426
Peter describing plutonium bomb technology … wonder what Fineman and von Neumann would say! Polish nuclear bomb?
How are they supposed to maintain nuclear weapons if they can't even maintain their helicopters?
Biden will help them out ....again
Because the two is in no way connected? Most countries needs a totally domestic nuclear industry to produce a weapon, and will pour resources into that industry if the feel that they need to. Almost no country need to have a domestic helicopter industry to fly helicopters, and will not pour resources into that sector since you can buy helicopters from 20 different countries. Also, a healthy helicopter industry might be considered less of an existential strategic goal than a nuclear weapons program. Just a thought.
Priorities is a thing.
WHITE FOLKS !!!!! 😂😂😂😂
If as I understand it they are enriching uranium to purify out the U235, and they can achieve high enough purity (~97%) they could use a cannon style device (like little boy) and get a crude, but workable device without having to master the spherical explosive lenses.
Peter was recording it at exactly 12:00 and he missed "Poznan Goats" on a top of the town hall's tower. 🐐
Uranium bombs are mechanically easy to make but it is difficult to refine the U235 to a pure enough form. That is where centrifuges come in. Plutonium bombs are mechanically difficult to make and need the implosion, but the plutonium itself is fairly easy to make if you have a fission reactor. Two different reasons, but yeah it still makes both types hard to make. The US did sabotage Iran's centrifuges a while back when they got too close.
An excellent analysis, thanks!
Nuclear proliferation isn’t an issue, the real issue is paranoia proliferation. To understand imagine a next level weapon is developed that makes nukes seem like conventional weapons (or the aliens land), all of a sudden having nukes is a no brainer for defence, it’s not the weapon at question but rather the intent.
At 00:56 I secretly hoped the pigeon would take a dump on Peter’s head 😅🐦
Lol
Don't take what joe biden or any democrat says seriously. Peter, do you really believe what AOC says?
I've read a fair few comments on this video and it seems to me it's just riddled with mistakes, misunderstandings, and misconceptions on Peter's part. Should just take it down and repost at this point.
I remember in the early 2000s, US “lost” 40lbs of plutonium- reportedly-🎯🌸
My understanding is, subtle nuance, Iran hasn't been aiming to build a bomb, because as Peter says, the real risk of getting thumped at the 11th hour just before they cross the threshold. The goal is to achieve "breakout" potential, where they gain, and continually build upon, the materials and the knowhow for building a bomb - getting the IKEA set for building a bomb and studying the plans but not putting it together [yet] - so they can build the thing rapidly if they feel the strategic need. I also wonder if there's some kind of utility for strategic ambiguity. Countries are much less likely to attack a country that has nukes, and that applies to countries that may or may not have nukes. The strategy of 'hit em hard before they get nukes' gets messy if you have to allow for even a low probability that you might be too late and they've got them already.
Several people have mentioned that a little boy gun type weapon is possible with enriched uranium. Is it deliverable though? The W33 nuclear artillery shell weighed 110 Kg and had yield of 40 KT en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W33_(nuclear_warhead) . Certainly a higher yeild device can be made for similar weight using Plutonium the 95 Kg W76 yields 100KT en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W76
there are also neutron bombs which are just as deadly. and also, 1 single aircraft carrier can cause more total damage than 1 single nuclear bomb.
If you do not have enough sense to not fly a helicopter into zero visibility fog, how can you build a NUKE?
Please pronounce correctly “NEW-CLEAR.” Thank you.
I interpreted this as Peter telling us Israel killed the Iranian president
more like fog did
@@Brockliy ICC issued arrest warrant for Bibi so they had Iranian president killed.
Russia has now sent Nuclear Missiles to Iran. Update your pathetic Narrative 😂
for the love of God it's "nuclear", i thought you were supposed to be educated
Gotta love those nukular weapons.
Can Pakistán provide Iran with nuclear bomb?
Dude You come across like a know it all and very unbelievable. bla bla bla
This guy is trying too hard to be smart and talk about something he doesn’t know…
Peter's claim about the explosive plates being an issue is completely wrong and well unnecessary. Rather than the explosive plate, a "shot and tube" method can be used. On one side of a tube inside the device, you place HE with a detinator, a steel plate, and a "bullet" shaped piece of uranium on the other side, a sphere of uranium with a wedge cut out. So long as the total weight of the two pieces of uranium are at "critical mass," the device will trigger a nuclear explosion. There's no way the Iranians dont know about this method.
Good point, I posted a similar comment. The downside of the gun type design is the yield. The Little Boy bomb (gun type) less than 2% of the uranium mass underwent fission.
@banalestorchid5814 for sure, but a nuke is a nuke. And let's be honest, the implosion method isn't that complicated to actually pull off either. I highly doubt that's the reason "Iran doesn't have a nuke"
america is falling apart all the rest is irrelevant, we let america fall...we are all guilty of that..
The only thing I know, it doesn't have a "president". 😏
The bomb described in video is incorrect. A plutonium bomb requires compressing into critical mass as described in video. A Uranium bomb is easy to make by sending large slug into a larger slug of uranium. The US didn’t even test this bomb before using in WWII. Uranium however was hard to make back then, but is now easier with centrifuges.
Yup. Which is exactly what Iran would and can do should it choose to do so.
So russia or china couldn't just hand Iran the technology?
An equally good question is does Israel have the bomb, and just how did they get it if they do................
A uranium explosive p-38 space modulator.
They have nuclear power plants they have all the raw materials. They have modern CNC machines. We made this in World War II with basic milling tools and new science. I’m pretty sure they could make one easily today.
Wait, Koreans, Japanese and Taiwanese have civilian nuclear program and can eeeeasily build-a-bomb in days or weeks but Iran who has a civilian nuclear program cannot do the same. Interesting.
An implosion design is what you have to use for Plutonium not Uranium. Uranium can be used in a gun type design. This is the reason Little boy and Fat Man were different, Little Boy was a Gun Type Uranium bomb, Fat Man was an Implosion type Plutonium bomb. The high hurtle for creating a simple fission device isn't design its materials.
I think you left out the possibility that Iran could buy, or more likely trade items (drones for example as well as other military support items), for technology and designs for nuclear weapon's and delivery systems, from other countries (for example Russia, North Korea, or China). It is a scary world.
FluteSnoot: if the Saudis "have the cash to buy one" how come the Iranians do not? Just asking.
Becoz he believes American sanctions have made them “broke”…I disagree nonetheless
Tangential question: given your rationale for why countries have nukes...why why did South Africa have nukes?
They don't have nukes and they dont have a president 😅
If ya get time should go back to the jre show
hmm, cant they just buy one from russia?
What’s worse, everyone having nukes or us facing another WW1 style conflict but with drones
Implosion devices have the best yield, but you don't need one to build an atomic weapon. Little boy was a "rifle type" design. The Americans scientists were so confident of the design that they didn't even test it.
So if you have enriched uranium and a half decent machine shop then you can produce a functional (if dangerous to yourself) nuclear weapon that you can detonate with confidence if you want to warn off potential aggressors.
And Poland could get the tech from Farnce
It doesn't matter if the do have one they are unable to launch it.
Would it have to launched? There must be potential targets where the thing could be driven in on a vehicle.... It would be hard getting it in to somewhere like the USA but the drug cartels seem to manage smuggling tons of product in via narcosubs, planes etc.
Zeihan was referring to "implosion type" nuclear weapons as used in the WW2 era Fat Man weapons. The Little Boy bomb used a "gun type" which is much easier to make and I would think is well within the expertise of the Iranians.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_design#Implosion-type
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_design#Gun-type_assembly
Pete, they may have developed the technology but not actually tested it yet for that exact reason.
Still difficult to believe that North Korea has managed to pull off this feat and’s Iran hasn’t.
Even Iraq was thought to have one and US invaded Iraq 😂😂😂