Saudi Arab Threatens To Abandon Its Non-Nuclear Status

warrior monk

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
650
Likes
1,114
Saudis cannot go nuclear without Pakistani help or Chinese. Pakistanis are going to provide technology for a rudimentary Bomb probably through Uranium route . Saudis have finance the Pakistani Nuclear weapons program over the last 30 years in hope that Pakistanis will provide them with either warheads or technology for a simple gun type fission weapon.
 

sgarg

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
3,480
Likes
986
Well the Saudis can put a nuclear plant which I undertand will take at least a few years to put. Further that place then becomes one of the target for Iran in case there is a war.. But on other hand, Saudi has a lot of space and it can use it for solar energy. This is safe and it can be implemented like satellites at fraction of the cost of nuclear powerplant. Further in case iran bombs it in future, there is no nuclear fallout in case of Solar energy plants.
Enriched Uranium can be sold just like any other commodity. Even an entire nuke can be sold. The problem with Americans is that they sign treaties only for show. Anything goes in private. I would not be surprised if Saudi have bombs made in USA. USA will do anything to keep its influence in the middle-east.

The military trade is primarily geopolitics. This should be remembered always. It is only Indians (and you have read India's recent history which is full of military blunders) that believe arms can be obtained by "OPEN" tenders.
 

sgarg

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
3,480
Likes
986
Saudis cannot go nuclear without Pakistani help or Chinese. Pakistanis are going to provide technology for a rudimentary Bomb probably through Uranium route . Saudis have finance the Pakistani Nuclear weapons program over the last 30 years in hope that Pakistanis will provide them with either warheads or technology for a simple gun type fission weapon.
Why? I bet it is most likely Americans who have provided Saudis with nuclear material. I don't know why and how people trust Americans??
 

rock127

Maulana Rockullah
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
10,569
Likes
25,230
Country flag
Give Nukes to all Middle East countries with short range missiles so they all blow up each other asap.

It would eradicate "roots" of most of the troubles we have today specially Terrorism. :thumb: :thumb:
 

sesha_maruthi27

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
3,963
Likes
1,803
Country flag
Why? I bet it is most likely Americans who have provided Saudis with nuclear material. I don't know why and how people trust Americans??
Sir, I would like to know whether the Saudi's got the nuclear missiles from the Chinese with support of the US.......
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,797
Likes
48,276
Country flag
This means a lot of countries can make money . It is a commercial and costly venture
Not just a strategic one.
 

Sambha ka Boss

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
701
Likes
375
Why if Iran can be nuclear? With Saudis USA can make a lot of money if they go nuclear.
If Saudi ever try it, they would be inviting wrath of Western countries. Moreover, the Shell Oil boom has also dented the power of petrodollars. ;)
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,797
Likes
48,276
Country flag
If Saudi ever try it, they would be inviting wrath of Western countries. Moreover, the Shell Oil boom has also dented the power of petrodollars. ;)
You are mistaken western nations will welcome it as a great money making opportunity. This is not
For energy but seems to be a military program?

There is a lot of hypocrisy but when it comes to making money it does not matter.
 

warrior monk

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
650
Likes
1,114
First of all having nuclear plant and fabricating nuclear weapons are two different things . Many country have nuclear plant but don't have nuclear weapons . For getting nuclear weapons they need their own uranium source to generate fissile material and around 9 to 10 more technologies.
Weapons-grade uranium, or U-235, is a highly unstable form that makes up less than 1 percent (.7 percent) of the concentration of uranium ore that is dug up and then to make it weapons usable the uranium needs to be refined to a concentration of at least 80 percent U-235 to be weapons grade, though upwards of 90 percent is preferable then comes building a successful detonation device.
If they use plutonium route it is even tougher they have to build a hugely expensive chemical processing facility that also happens to be verytough to extract, purify and compress the plutonium so it would fit into a nuclear warhead.
Thats why they need the help of Pakistan . There are enough literature that have evidence that Saudis have financed the Paki " Islamic " bomb . It was Saudis that helped Pakistan with the sanctions when they tested in 1998 with 50000 barrels of oil per day till the sanctions are removed.
Gaddafi of Libya also gave 100 million dollars to Pakistan for the Islamic nuclear weapon.
 

warrior monk

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
650
Likes
1,114
Pakistan will help Saudis with a bomb but secretly without informing the International community and Iran as Iran will be livid. Pakis spent 2 billion dollars on their nuclear weapons program every year mostly it comes from Saudis because I don't think so Pakis have money for their program.
 

Rashna

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
2,259
Likes
704
Country flag
The pakistanis murmur about being under Saudi obligation because Saudi is believed to have funded Pakistan's nuclear program. There is a tacit understanding btw KSA and Pakistan that nuclear weapons if and when required would be provided by Pakistan. Therefore the Saudi's have already gone nuclear just that their nukes are kept in another country.
 

prohumanity

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
1,290
Likes
1,362
Country flag
The AXIS: West+ Saudi +Israel+ Pakistan is still alive and well. I wonder what the implications will be if a war breaks out between Saudi Arabia and Iran....what will happen to oil price ? Especially if they target and destroy each others oil wells and refineries. Oil prices might skyrocket causing severe economic depression in World.
The biggest oil consumers are (1) USA (2) European Union (3) China (4) Japan and (5) India.
Skyrocketing oil prices will cause high inflation and thus, further erosion in consumer confidence leading to negative economic growth....high unemployment and food riots and violence in many countries. Fortunately, India only consumes approx. 3 % of worlds oil due to a great Railway system and smaller cars and scooters etc. Still, India is dependent on Saudi and Iranian oil and Gas. Any thoughts about consequences of Saudi-Iran war ?
 

rohit.gr77

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2015
Messages
135
Likes
119
The AXIS: West+ Saudi +Israel+ Pakistan is still alive and well. I wonder what the implications will be if a war breaks out between Saudi Arabia and Iran....what will happen to oil price ? Especially if they target and destroy each others oil wells and refineries. Oil prices might skyrocket causing severe economic depression in World.
The biggest oil consumers are (1) USA (2) European Union (3) China (4) Japan and (5) India.
Skyrocketing oil prices will cause high inflation and thus, further erosion in consumer confidence leading to negative economic growth....high unemployment and food riots and violence in many countries. Fortunately, India only consumes approx. 3 % of worlds oil due to a great Railway system and smaller cars and scooters etc. Still, India is dependent on Saudi and Iranian oil and Gas. Any thoughts about consequences of Saudi-Iran war ?
Why did u include Israel in the axis?
Asked just out of curiosity.
 

prohumanity

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
1,290
Likes
1,362
Country flag
I am not current on the policy of Israel. Historically, Israel has been anti -India and in collaboration with Pakistan, Saudi and America's Jewish rulers such as Henry Kissinger, Madelenine Albright, Barbara Boxer and the mafia . Its possible that after 9/11 Israel might have changed its policy but its important to be vigilant and cautious. Old Axes do not evaporate quickly. Most news you get is from western propaganda machine which is almost totally controlled by jews as they are the financial lifeline for BBC, CNN etc. I just want you to watch carefully and do not get misinformed and mislead.
Don't forget..Kissinger called Indira Gandhi "that Indian bitch" and Indians as "bastards" (declassified Kissinger papers from 1970s-80s.)
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
WASHINGTON — When President Obama began making the case for a deal with Iran that would delay its ability to assemble an atomic weapon, his first argument was that a nuclear-armed Iran would set off a “free-for-all” of proliferation in the Arab world. “It is almost certain that other players in the region would feel it necessary to get their own nuclear weapons,” he said in 2012.

Now, as he gathered Arab leaders over dinner at the White House on Wednesday and prepared to meet with them at Camp David on Thursday, he faced a perverse consequence: Saudi Arabia and many of the smaller Arab states are now vowing to match whatever nuclear enrichment capability Iran is permitted to retain.

“We can’t sit back and be nowhere as Iran is allowed to retain much of its capability and amass its research,” one of the Arab leaders preparing to meet Mr. Obama said on Monday, declining to be named until he made his case directly to the president. Prince Turki bin Faisal, the 70-year-old former Saudi intelligence chief, has been touring the world with the same message.

“Whatever the Iranians have, we will have, too,” he said at a recent conference in Seoul, South Korea.


Graphic | The Iran Nuclear Deal’s Definition Depends on Who’s Talking American and Iranian officials are using different words to describe elements of the preliminary agreement to limit Iran’s nuclear program.
For a president who came to office vowing to move toward the elimination of nuclear weapons, the Iran deal has presented a new dilemma. If the agreement is sealed successfully next month — still far from guaranteed — Mr. Obama will be able to claim to have bought another decade, maybe longer, before Iran can credibly threaten to have a nuclear weapon.


But by leaving 5,000 centrifuges and a growing research and development program in place — the features of the proposed deal that Israel and the Arab states oppose virulently — Mr. Obama is essentially recognizing Iran’s right to continue enrichment of uranium, one of the two pathways to a nuclear weapon. Leaders of the Sunni Arab states are arguing that if Iran goes down that road, Washington cannot credibly argue they should not follow down the same one, even if their technological abilities are years behind Iran’s.

“With or without a deal, there will be pressure for nuclear proliferation in the Middle East,” said Gary Samore, Mr. Obama’s top nuclear adviser during the first term and now the executive director of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard. “The question is one of capabilities. How would the Saudis do this without help from the outside?”

In fact, the Arab states may find it is not as easy as it sounds. The members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, a loose affiliation of nations that make the crucial components for nuclear energy and, by extension, weapons projects, have a long list of components they will not ship to the Middle East. For the Saudis, and other Arab states, that leaves only North Korea and Pakistan, two countries that appear to have mastered nuclear enrichment, as possible sources.

It is doubtful that any of the American allies being hosted by Mr. Obama this week would turn to North Korea, although it supplied Syria with the components of a nuclear reactor that Israel destroyed in 2007.

Pakistan is another story. The Saudis have a natural if unacknowledged claim on the technology: They financed much of the work done by A.Q. Khan, a Pakistani nuclear scientist who ended up peddling his nuclear wares abroad. It is widely presumed that Pakistan would provide Saudi Arabia with the technology, if not a weapon itself.

The Arab leader interviewed on Monday said that countries in the Gulf Cooperation Council, all to be represented at the Camp David meeting, had discussed a collective program of their own — couched, as Iran’s is, as a peaceful effort to develop nuclear energy. The United Arab Emirates signed a deal with the United States several years ago to build nuclear power plants, but it is prohibited under that plan from enriching its own uranium.

Over the last decade, the Saudi government has financed nuclear research projects but there is no evidence that it has ever tried to build or buy facilities of the kind Iran has assembled to master the fuel cycle, the independent production of the makings of a weapon.

Still, the Saudis have given the subject of nuclear armament more than passing thought. In the 1980s they bought a type of Chinese missile, called a DF-3, that could be used effectively only to deliver a nuclear weapon because the missiles were too large and inaccurate for any other purpose. American officials, led by Robert M. Gates, then the director of the C.I.A., protested. There is no evidence the Saudis ever obtained warheads to fit atop the missiles.

Mr. Obama met with Saudi princes in the Oval Office on Wednesday — Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef and Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman — who will most likely moderate their criticisms of his administration while talking directly to the president. Mr. Obama is expected to offer them and the other Arab states some security assurances, although not as explicit or legally binding as the kind that protect American treaty allies, from NATO to Japan to South Korea.

But Mr. Obama will have a difficult time overcoming the deep suspicions that the Saudis, and other Arab leaders, harbor about the Iran deal. Several of them have said that the critical problem with the tentative agreements, as described by the White House and Secretary of State John Kerry, is that they assure nothing on a permanent basis.

Prince Turki, while in Seoul, went further. “He did go behind the backs of the traditional allies of the U.S. to strike the deal,” he said of Mr. Obama during a presentation to the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, a South Korean research organization.

Although “the small print of the deal is still unknown,” he added, it “opens the door to nuclear proliferation, not closes it, as was the initial intention.”

Prince Turki argued that the United States was making a “pivot to Iran” that was ill advised, and that the United States failed to learn from North Korea’s violations of its nuclear deals. “We were America’s best friend in the Arab world for 50 years,” he said, using the past tense.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/05/1...tch-iran-in-nuclear-capability.html?referrer=
 

Sakal Gharelu Ustad

Detests Jholawalas
Ambassador
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
7,114
Likes
7,761
Doesn't Saudis already have the know-how through their proxy Pakistan?

What is the current status of overt/covert nuclear dealings between SA and Pak?
 

warrior monk

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
650
Likes
1,114
Sand ******s don't know the difference between U238 and U235 and they are dreaming of a fuel cycle this must be joke of the century.
Pakistan will definitely help with whatever little they know about fuel cycle . They might use buy few cheap low yield bombs from Pakistan . Pakis might have actually shipped the bombs just in case.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top