These serious failings have caused the IAEA to express “grave concern”. Do they justify the current military actions? The IAEA has not determined that Iran has a nuclear weapon, or is capable of developing one, or even wishes to do so (although the evidence plainly points in that direction, it must be said). Nor is there evidence that Iran’s proxies are engaged in its nuclear programme. The board has noted the role of the Security Council, which has met to debate the issue but not acted.
Israel was not subjected to an armed attack from Iran, and on the basis of evidence publicly available it cannot be said that an attack backed by the possession of a possible nuclear weapon was “imminent”. It’s hard to see how attacks by proxies – however real – could be said to justify the nature, scale and direction of the targets in Iran. Regime change is not an objective that is permitted by international law. On the basis of the facts that are publicly available, it is difficult to see a legal basis for Israel’s far-reaching actions, or for the US or others to support Israel, or for Britain to authorise the use of the US military base at Diego Garcia to allow a B2 bomber based there to launch an attack on Iran’s Fordow nuclear site.
So you can only bomb the Mad Mullahs when they’re actually waving a completed atom bomb. Merely trying to build one, working to build one, isn’t enough.
This is to say that the right of self defence only starts when the bloke has already cut your arm off.
Bugger international law.
BTW, yes, they are. There is no reason – none at all – to be enriching up to 60% let alone beyond unless you want a bomb.
“On the basis of the facts that are publicly available, it is difficult to see a legal basis for Israel’s far-reaching actions, or for the US or others to support Israel, or for Britain to authorise the use of the US military base at Diego Garcia to allow a B2 bomber based there to launch an attack on Iran’s Fordow nuclear site.”
More popcorn needed.
(Only one bomber? I rather doubt it).
It looks as if DT has just gone and made that quoted argument somewhat academic.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/06/18/britain-military-support-us-donald-trump-israel-iran/
Hermer: UK joining war on Iran may be illegal
Attorney General warns PM that Britain must limit role to protecting allies
From a thread on here just 3 days ago.
LMFAO.
And the allies he means are: Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Islamic State and the Provisional IRA.
What is the downside for the UK to say bollox to international law? Yes, the US can because they are the big fish in the pond. But Israel are also putting self interest before the tears of the globalist lawyers.
First step could be to just not comply with the 1951 refugee convention. Then fuck off the ECHR and the ECJ.
If the camel f”$”^s haven’t built a bomb after all the help Obama gave them, they’re more stupid than they look. Mind you, they do look bloody stupid.
But as John says, Donald isn’t one to let you kick him in the balls before he starts to think how to defend himself, so Har,Har,Har Harmer…
“Merely trying to build one, working to build one, isn’t enough.”
Trying to build one could well be enough. What he’s saying here is that merely saying they’re trying to build a bomb without presenting any indisputable evidence that they are isn’t enough to prove they’re building a bomb.
What he’s fudging over is that they don’t actually have to actually build a bomb for it to be illegal, and to merit action. He’s moved the goalposts.
“There is no reason – none at all – to be enriching up to 60% let alone beyond unless you want a bomb.”
Or to make people think you might have a bomb.
Much of the strategy around nuclear weapons is about deterrence. Sensible nations don’t want the bomb in order to blow people up. They want the bomb so that other nations won’t attack them. Sensible aggressive nations want the bomb so that they can throw their weight around in their neighbourhood with conventional arms and get away with it, because the other side will limit their responses. Having the bomb means nobody can wage war against you all the way to defeat. That’s why Russia can get away with invading Ukraine – NATO can’t invade Russia without potentially triggering a nuclear war.
But for this strategy to work, all you need is for everybody to believe you have the bomb. You don’t actually have to have it, or have it in any usable form. Strategic ambiguity is much cheaper.
And if you’re subject to enforcement and inspections, it’s a lot safer, too. Nobody can catch you and prove you’re building a bomb if you’re actually not. All you have to do is act suspiciously enough that everyone thinks you are, and are successfully hiding it.
That’s not to say that even pretending to have the bomb isn’t sufficient cause to take action. The UN Charter talks about any “situation likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security.” Having a bomb, or strategic ambiguity about whether you have a bomb, is not a threat to international peace and security if you only want it to deter attacks against yourself. That actually makes international peace and security safer. But if you’re trying to build a bomb, or pretend to, in order to be able to attack your neighbours with impunity, that most certainly is a threat to international peace and security. But it’s a lot harder to prove intentions. And yes, I know Iran declares their intentions to wipe out Israel and America all the time, but they might be lying about that.
“Bugger international law.”
It’s not the written law that is the problem. It’s the UN Security Council.
The UN Charter says that it is the UN Security Council that makes the decision whether to take action.
Article 42: “Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations.”
The process is that in the case of such a dispute, Israel takes it to the Security Council, who first try negotiation (Article 40), or if that doesn’t work economic sanctions and blockades (Article 41), or if that doesn’t work, war (Article 42). Once the UNSC decides a situation is a threat to international peace and security, they are required by the Charter to intervene, and other members are required to help them.
Iran have been a thorn in everyone’s side for decades. They have attacked other nations both directly and by proxy. They’re working hard and spending a lot of money to make it look as if they’re building a bomb, whether or not they actually are. They’re a clear threat to international peace and security. Negotiations haven’t worked. Sanctions haven’t worked. It’s clearly the duty of the UNSC to take enforcement action. That’s the way international law is intended to work.
The problem is that Russia and China are permanent members of the UNSC, and along with Iran they’re members of NAM, and NAM membership comes with an agreement not to help the superpowers attack another member. So Russia vetoes any action to be taken against Iran, like the USA vetoes any action to be taken against Israel. This along with the fact that the UN is stuffed to the gills with Jew-hating Arabists renders the UN ineffective at policing the peace in the Middle East.
The only other recourse one has, besides the UNSC, is Article 51.
Article 51: “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.”
Iran have been launching ballistic missiles against Israel, so Israel are definitely allowed to shoot back at those. Iran’s proxies the Houthis have been shooting at our shipping in the red sea, so we’re arguably allowed to shoot back too. Collective self-defence is permitted. Us helping to shoot down ballistic missiles aimed at Israel was certainly allowable, as it is an “armed attack”. The problem is that dealing with the nuclear weapons isn’t an “armed attack” until – yes – they actually start launching them at you. That part of the problem is clearly the UNSC’s responsibility to deal with.
The paralysis of the UNSC goes both ways, of course. If we help Israel eliminate the Iranian threat, it’s technically illegal, and technically it’s the job of the UNSC to tell us to stop, but since we’re permanent members on the UNSC too, we can veto any such suggestions. The problem is that the international lawyers Hermer and Starmer think we should be bound by the law, but don’t seem the slightest bit bothered when the other side fails to play by the rules. It’s not international law that’s the problem, it’s the fact that the people responsible for enforcing it are only doing so one-sidedly.
It’s the Iraq war problem all over again.
Israel was not subjected to an armed attack from Iran
The useless cnut is ignoring the previous missile/drone attacks which are most definitely acts of war.
“or for Britain to authorise the use of the US military base at Diego Garcia to allow a B2 bomber based there to launch an attack on Iran’s Fordow nuclear site.”
It looks like the B2s have gone non-stop from Missouri. A 37-hour round trip. Initially four B2s plus tankers were reported to have left for Guam, but it’s since been reported than more bombs have been dropped than can be carried by four aircraft. So that first flight of four drew eyes and set expectations, whilst others stealthily joined in. B2s have done this non-stop stuff to the Middle East before, let’s not forget. Who the fuck needs Diego Garcia?
I reckon DT and the military planners have played a blinder, especially with the timing and expectations management. I’m particularly interested in what Israel surgically does next, because it’s not stopping with this, is it?
Actually, both the US and UK use HEU at around 65% to fuel their nuclear submarine reactors. But I rather doubt Iran needs to on the basis it doesn’t have any 🙂
Bear in mind that Little Boy was 80% enriched U235, and Orange Herald was almost a pure A bomb using 117kg of 90% enriched U235, with a yield of 0.72MT
Two really rather good articles on background here. Natasha Hausdorff (certainly Hermer’s intellectual equal) in the DT, and John Jenkins in the Speccie:
https://archive.ph/AFztX
https://archive.ph/WaWjV
Meanwhile, I’m off to fill up the car.
“Israel was not subjected to an armed attack from Iran”.
Being attacked for the last thirty years by blokes recruited, trained, paid and armed by Iran doesn’t count.
If there is any regime change in Iran, one issue will be that the mad mullahs and their moslem footsoldiers will ramp up in some other third world shithole* and carry on their jihad against the civilised world.
* I unfortunately include the UK in that description…..
I know Iran declares their intentions to wipe out Israel and America all the time, but they might be lying about that.
If so they’re more foolish than I thought.
“Sensible nations don’t want the bomb in order to blow people up.”
You might want to consider whether Iran is a ‘sensible nation’, or not.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/06/19/the-deadly-risks-involved-in-bombing-irans-nuclear-mountain/
The risks of bombing Iran’s nuclear mountain
An attack on the underground Fordow plant could release toxic chemicals into the atmosphere
Yet another “Let’s all laugh at the telegraph” from just three days ago.
We’re all doomed!
If regime change is not ‘legal’ international law (which doesn’t actually exist) then what has Europe been doing with the US for the last 20 years?
What has Britain done *multiple* times across the world over the last three centuries?
“You might want to consider whether Iran is a ‘sensible nation’, or not.”
Again, strategic ambiguity about that question is just as effective!
“If regime change is not ‘legal’ international law (which doesn’t actually exist) then what has Europe been doing with the US for the last 20 years?”
Article 2 part 4: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”
Article 2 part 7: “Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.”
Encouraging regime change is not illegal so long as you don’t use force or threat of force to do it. Effecting regime change by force is allowed if it is done to restore international peace and security, as a means or a side-effect.
Again, Iran uses force and the threat of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of Israel all the time, but these people are only interested in enforcing international laws against the West.
Can international lawyers out-argue a bullet?
Norman – I’m particularly interested in what Israel surgically does next, because it’s not stopping with this, is it?
Maybe not, but this would be a good time to stop the war and declare victory. Iran has just had its teeth lovingly kicked in, they’re not going to be troubling their neighbours for a while.
But a protracted war wouldn’t be as one sided and it would favour Iran, with its much larger population. Right now the regime is completely discredited, humiliated and if we leave them alone there’s a good chance the Iranians will do the needful. If it turns into a war against the Iranian people that opportunity may be lost.
BTW, Iran has responded to the US air strike by… threatening to sue the US.
Fucking LOL
What does “international law” say about “Death to America”?
Anyone know if regular citizens in Iran permitted to own proper arms like in USA, SWI, ISR and a handful of other countries.
Bongo – legally, only Islamist thugs may carry weapons in Iran.
However, markets still do their magic even when they’re forbidden, and Iran is a corrupt shithole, so a lot of Persians are packing.
‘Bugger international law.’
Yes Tim. When I think of that Chagos Island nonsense, I whole-heartedly agree with you!!
BREAKING NEWS – A US federal judge from Hawaii has ruled that President Trump must rebuild Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities.
Steve,
I’m stealing that one. It’s going straight to my US friends.
I’m a sceptic on “International Law”: it seems to be believed in by all the wrong people.
I am also as ignorant of most of the facts as everyone else here. But I do think:
(i) It’s unlikely that Iran already has a nuclear bomb because the Israelis wouldn’t have dared to attack her if they’d thought she had.
(ii) I can’t understand Iran’s policy of enriching uranium short of bomb requirements but beyond requirements for almost anything else. It’s equivalent to hanging a sign on your arse saying “please kick me”.
(iii) Mr Naziyahoo has argued for decades that Iran is on the brink of building a bomb so the fact that he’s been saying it again means nowt.
(iv) Trump’s claim that he’d Put America First and avoid foreign wars has proved false. Put not thy trust in princes.
(v) Even though some may prove to be sensible; Elizabeth I – “I do not like war. It is costly and the outcome uncertain”.
“Maybe not, but this would be a good time to stop the war and declare victory. Iran has just had its teeth lovingly kicked in, they’re not going to be troubling their neighbours for a while.”
That’s what they always do, and is why the conflict has gone on so long. They can never sustain the will to finish the job.
Yes, things will go quiet for a while. But then they’ll be back, and next time round you might have another Biden or Kamala running the USA. Best to take the opportunity now while Trump is there.
Agree we don’t want to make it a war against the Iranian people. But the Persians are fairly secular by Middle Eastern standards (I think only about 12% attend mosque regularly) and hate the Mullahs more than we do. The problem is the Mullahs have all the guns and prisons and security forces and religious policemen.
“What does “international law” say about “Death to America”?”
Political rhetoric. Free speech.
NiV,
What nuclear deterrence does Iran need?
Iran without a bomb – largely left alone and ignored despite massive financing and logistical support to terrorists worldwide, but especially in and around Israel.
Iran making it pretty obvious they’re trying to build a bomb – gets fuck blown out of it before bomb is built.
The nuke had the opposite to the desired deterrent effect.
Iran’s mere repeated statement that they will wipe Israel off the map as soon as they have one is quite sufficient. Israel can not tolerate Iran ever having nuclear weapons, they have to be stopped before they get there.
Bomb the prison walls, bomb the police sttions and anyone else in internal security. Leave the people and the army alone and see what happens.
The MSM talking heads all worry about the effect on the UK. So bubble-headed. Nobody has mentioned the people, their degree of secularity or Resa Pahlavi. They are worried about ‘regime change’ in case someone worse takes over, as in Syria. But who’s worse? There’s not much danger of that, there is no islamic force operating inside Iran except the mullahs.
John – thanks 🙂
Dearieme – (ii) I can’t understand Iran’s policy of enriching uranium short of bomb requirements but beyond requirements for almost anything else. It’s equivalent to hanging a sign on your arse saying “please kick me”.
Yarp x 100.
Maybe I’m cynical, but I can’t think of a non-sinister reason to bury a uranium enrichment facility 300 feet underneath a mountainside, surrounded by AA missiles. No other country that has peacefully built civilian atomic power infrastructure has ever done anything remotely like that. That’s Bond supervillain shit. As my kids say, sus.
Think of how poor a country Iran is, and the enormous expense they went to in order to carve laboratories into the bones of the Earth, and how completely unnecessary all of that was if the goal is electricity for civilians. If low-carbon electricity for the folks in Tehran was the goal, they could have built a dozen Thorium reactors by now for less money, no enrichment (with all the suspicions that provokes) necessary.
The Mullahs in Iran whose mottos are “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” will tell you a great story about how atomic weapons are against their peaceful religion (lol). What they won’t tell you is that their religion says it’s a good thing to lie to infidels.
(iii) Mr Naziyahoo has argued for decades that Iran is on the brink of building a bomb so the fact that he’s been saying it again means nowt.
I’m always suspicious of the alleged timing, but not the intent. Clearly Iran is trying to develop the Bomb. You don’t enrich uranium to nearly 90% for a school science project. Foreign threat assessments are supposed to be based on the other guy’s capabilities, not his professed motives, and Iran has deliberately invested in the capability to make nukes.
(iv) Trump’s claim that he’d Put America First and avoid foreign wars has proved false. Put not thy trust in princes.
I disagree. This isn’t a war from the United States pov. It’s more like that time Tony Soprano smashed that guy’s teeth in. If President Trump is daft enough to put the fabled “boots on the ground”, that would be a major betrayal of his base. This isn’t that.
This is more like the assassination of Solemani or the airstrikes on Syria from his first term. It may prove to be an escalate-to-deescalate tactic, because at this point, with Iran defanged and humiliated, its proxies infiltrated and destroyed, there’s probably no better time to declare victory and move on. What’s Bibi going to tell voters if he insists on further military escalation? He can no longer justify it by reference to the nuclear threat.
Tony Soprano wasn’t starting a mob war, he was reminded everyone that the boss is not to be fucked with. Iran seems to understand the situation they’re in, or they’d be firing missiles directly at US bases, instead of threatening a lawsuit.
I like as an idea arming the Iranian peasants, perhaps drone drops of rifles and ammo to women working the fields. It’s said that every revolution starts in the countryside.
NiV – That’s what they always do, and is why the conflict has gone on so long. They can never sustain the will to finish the job.
Yes, things will go quiet for a while. But then they’ll be back, and next time round you might have another Biden or Kamala running the USA. Best to take the opportunity now while Trump is there.
That’s just life tho. There’s no “finishing the job”, unless you’re prepared for Total War (ht Goebbels) or, candidly, genocide. Even changing the regime may not “finish the job” (did 20 years in Iraq and Afghanistan finish the job?) because regimes can always change again. While President Trump has legitimate grievances against the terror supporters in Iran, they have a legitimate grievance against the US for regime changing them in 1953.
Consider the possibility that the Middle East is a savage jungle that can’t be “fixed”, short of violently converting the locals to Christianity and returning the Holy Land to its rightful owners, the Knights Hospitaller. And while violence does solve disputes, for a while, it may also make the defeated party’s sons and grandsons hate you enough to fight again in future.
. But the Persians are fairly secular by Middle Eastern standards (I think only about 12% attend mosque regularly)
They’re singular, but not unique, tho. There’s a quiet wave of secularism rising in the ME. Even Hajj numbers are declining (incredible, given Muslim birth rates). Islam has waxed and waned before, it may do so again.
“What does “international law” say about “Death to America”?”
Political rhetoric. Free speech
But freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences, in this case, B-2 stealth bombers.
Mr Naziyahoo
Naziyahoo? You seem to be confused between the democratically-elected prime minister of Israel and the never-elected genocidal religious fascists who rule Iran.
If you are unsure how to identify a Nazi, a tell-tale sign is the constant demands for the worldwide slaughter of Jews.
“Iran without a bomb – largely left alone and ignored despite massive financing and logistical support to terrorists worldwide, but especially in and around Israel. Iran making it pretty obvious they’re trying to build a bomb – gets fuck blown out of it before bomb is built.”
Financing a bit of terrorism is a pain, but not enough for the world to let Israel deal with them. But October 7th, shooting at the shipping in the red sea, and firing ballistic missiles at Israel is what they really wanted to do all along, and what got the fuck blown out of them. (And even then, only because Trump is giving Israel top cover.) If Iran had nuclear weapons, we wouldn’t be able to do that. It would be a stand-off, like Russia in Ukraine.
Iran have been working on a bomb since the 1990s. It’s never been sufficient before. It’s not why Israel/Trump have taken action against them now. The situation over Gaza has just given them the opportunity to deal with a long-standing problem.
“If low-carbon electricity for the folks in Tehran was the goal, they could have built a dozen Thorium reactors by now for less money, no enrichment (with all the suspicions that provokes) necessary.”
While generally agreeing with Steve, I must dissent on this. Thorium is fertile but not fissile: to make a reactor from it you must “light” the reactor with HEU or Plutonium, and breed the thorium to U233. Once going, its self sustaining and no further U235 or Pu239 is needed, but the need to light it with a bombstoff is a serious objection to widespread thorium power plants. Yes, in principle, you can have inspectors count it all in and count it all out and subtract that used, but its a snag.
And contrary to our esteemed host’s statement: this is a good and non-bomb related reason for enriching beyond 60%: to start a thorium power cycle. (You need a high neutron gain to breed the thorium, so cannot afford loads of dead weight U238 soaking up the neutrons).
Not a reason that has occurred to, or is relevant to, the Islamic nutters in charge of Iran though.
NB You don’t have to make your own bomb-stoff to start a thorium power cycle: you can always borrow it.
Imagine the fun that would cause: “Putin delivers high grade plutonium to Iranium ‘civil’ power reactor”
President Eleven would wet himself laughing.
“That’s just life tho. There’s no “finishing the job”, unless you’re prepared for Total War (ht Goebbels) or, candidly, genocide.”
The only way to end it is cultural conversion – we have to Westernize them (in the essentials, at least).
They’re well aware of that, which is why they fight so hard to keep Western influences out. That’s what all the religious police enforcing hijab laws is about. The regime is about enforcing cultural isolation. The way to counter them is to force them open and give the people the choice. But cultures take generations to change – 30-50 years minimum – and this is why all the recent attempts haven’t been very successful. It’s not enough to overthrow the current regime. You have to keep it overthrown until a new more liberal culture can grow up and take over.
It’s the same way Christianity spread – evangelism and cultural change. And it’s why the Romans threw them to the lions until they succumbed to the new culture themselves – they recognised the danger. Viral cultures take over from the inside.
The Abraham Accords are the evidence of progress in that direction, and it’s probably what triggered October the 7th as a last desperate attempt by the Islamists to stave off defeat.
IAEA has publicly declared its irrelevance. Close the shop; furlough the employees.
‘even wishes to do so (although the evidence plainly points in that direction, it must be said)’
Wut? Did Kamala write this?
TtC – Thorium is fertile but not fissile: to make a reactor from it you must “light” the reactor with HEU or Plutonium, and breed the thorium to U233. Once going, its self sustaining and no further U235 or Pu239 is needed, but the need to light it with a bombstoff is a serious objection to widespread thorium power plants. Yes, in principle, you can have inspectors count it all in and count it all out and subtract that used, but its a snag.
Ah, thanks. My understanding (which is obvs limited, I’m not a rocket scientist or nothing) was that light water reactors using thorium aren’t much good for weapons development?
But what I was getting at is Iran has consistently went about its nuclear business in the most provocative technical directions, instead of the lower cost (politically and probably monetarily, excavation isn’t cheap) and more plausibly civilian options. They’ve had a nuclear programme for 30 years, and still only have one nuclear power plant:
Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP)-Unit 1, which started commercial operation in 2013 and accounted for nearly 1.7% of total national electricity generation in 2023.
Two possibilities occured to me:
1) The Iranian government is as competent as our “world class” civil service that gave us HS2
2) If, after 30 years of insisting they’re only interested in peacefully generating leccy, they still only generate 1.7% of their leccy from fission – but somehow found the time and money to build Persian Khazad-dum to house their fuel enrichment processes – maybe the Jews are right to be suspicious of the “Death to Israel” crowd. 🙂
Both could be true.
Not a reason that has occurred to, or is relevant to, the Islamic nutters in charge of Iran though.
Oh, yuss. I feel sorry for Iranians just like I do my own people. Both are great nations, brought low by the fuckwits and clowns who have acquired control of the government. Iran should be a lot richer and more successful than it is. It takes a special kind of genius to make Persia or England a shithole. Darius wept.
NiV – It’s not enough to overthrow the current regime. You have to keep it overthrown until a new more liberal culture can grow up and take over.
How do you do that? It only “worked” in Germany by physically destroying Germany and militarily occupying the place for 80 years (and counting). Japan had to be nuked twice and they’re still fucking weirdos.
It’s the same way Christianity spread – evangelism and cultural change.
And the sword, natch. One of the saddest and gayest things about modern life is the complete absence of Holy Crusades. And given Pope Leo has the smooth, unhappy face of an androgyne, I’m not expecting good news soon.
But Christianity is not a religion for weaklings. Judas was weak, and look what happened to him. Weakness invites sin, and, among other evils it brings us, it causes us to be despised.
The Abraham Accords are the evidence of progress in that direction, and it’s probably what triggered October the 7th as a last desperate attempt by the Islamists to stave off defeat.
I think so, yeah. I hope that President Trump has just escalated to de-escalate, because peace, capitalism and normalising relations is the way to go. Iran has lots of lovely oil and gas we could be buying, it’s a beautiful country with many good people in it. We may see Trump Tower Gaza yet.
I like as an idea arming the Iranian peasants, perhaps drone drops of rifles and ammo to women working the fields.
I’m not sure thats the great idea that you think it is. The peasants in the countryside are the most conservative of the population and more likely to support the mullahs.
It’s hard to think what the mullahs thought they were doing. They FA and FO when once when Trump lost his patience and took out Soleimani.
They have no air defence, they’ve effectively lost their ring of fire around Israel and all their top strategic planners and leaders have been taken out. So when and Trump told them negotiate or else and they didn’t and then told them surrender or else and they didn’t what did they expect to happen?
Did they really think he wouldn’t take this opportunity to give them a good kicking?
. . . Iran has responded to the US air strike by… threatening to sue the US.
They also launched more missiles at israel, which indicates some short term strategic sense (perhaps with the Mullahs in hiding, wiser heads prevail). If they decline Trump’s invitation to further FAFO, and limit their response to Israel, it makes it difficult for Trump to do more against them.
Last night there were reports from all across Iran of very intense airstrikes. Perhaps the Israelis were engaged in supplementary actions while they still have a window before Trump puts his grumpy dealmaker hat back on. Or perhaps the reports were bollocks.
Unfortunately, the Fordo site is not visually “totally obliterated” (a crater instead of a hill); just some holes and some subsidence. For damage assessment the Yanks and Israelis are dependent on their intelligence of the internal layout being correct and comprehensive. Maybe they left the outside alone so the Israelis can go take a look, but that seems a big ask.
Israel will have detailed knowledge of the damage inflicted via its immense network of spies in Iran. The US will have it a few minutes later.
Probably both will have it before any messenger is prepared to admit how bad it is to Ayatollah, or even the Lowatollah.
And now it seems the Iranian government has voted to close the Strait of Hormuz. A decision which we will probably come to see as one with as much consequence as Lambeth declaring itself nuclear-free. We’re now entering Black Knight territory: “It’s just a flesh wound.”
For those that think the US had no legal right to bomb Iran, think back to the US embassy being overrun in 1979. That was an act of war. The fact that it has taken more than 45 years for the response is immaterial. I don’t recall a peace treaty or even a ceasefire being signed. So now the US has gotten its sh..act together and ended the long sitzkreig.
“Ah, thanks. My understanding (which is obvs limited, I’m not a rocket scientist or nothing) was that light water reactors using thorium aren’t much good for weapons development? “
Not sure really. They work by breeding U233, which you burn in-situ, so once going, there’s no plutonium production or U enrichment for weapons. But you can make a bomb from U233, and that can be chemically separated from the thorium, a much easier process than isotope enrichment, though how it compares in difficulty to Purex I couldn’t say.
The US made and demonstrated a U233 bomb, presumably to understand the risk of thorium power cycle and bomb proliferation.
The big factor would be how the material influences the bomb design.
I don’t know what the self-fission properties of U233 are, and whether a simple gun-type assembly is sufficient (as per U235, no need to test) or whether implosion is required, as per Pu, and hence a need to test it.
South Africa built U235 gun weapons, and never tested them. The US never tested their first U235 weapon before use..
So if U233 is feasible for gun-type, then a serious proliferation risk.
NB Not sure if any moderator is used in a thorium/U233 breeder reactor, anyone know?
None of this suggests that the Iranian object is power stations 🙂
NB Both India and China are investing in thorium power, so time will tell.
Whose next?
Damn lack of edit.
…Whose next? Egypt wants one too, just to use on you-know-who,…
Y’all stop reading Popular Science. Thorium is a joke. It was given a proper burial 40 years ago.
@Steve: “This isn’t a war from the United States pov.” Ah – oh I see what you mean. It’s a Special Military Operation. That certainly clears things up.
Steve,
“How do you do that? It only “worked” in Germany by physically destroying Germany and militarily occupying the place for 80 years (and counting). Japan had to be nuked twice and they’re still fucking weirdos.”
Probably the biggest thing that changed Germany was the split into East and West. This wasn’t even deliberate, but Nazism was mostly a peasant agricultural Germany thing. Where the mindset is that you increase prosperity by driving the Poles off the nice land and farm it. States like Bavaria, Saxony and Brandenburg. There wasn’t a lot of support in the more industrial areas like North Rhine-Westphalia, Hamburg. They had industrialised, so you make money by making things and trading them. Losing Saxony and Brandenburg quickly changed the average view of “make stuff” vs “invade others”.
Then you also have post-war agricultural improvements, full bellies, so no-one cares about a new Ostplan that much.
BiND,
“I’m not sure thats the great idea that you think it is. The peasants in the countryside are the most conservative of the population and more likely to support the mullahs.”
This whole “regime change” thing is a misreading of how Germany changed after WW2, and is to some extent reinforced by movies that were inspired by it. Darth Vader throws the emperor over the railings and it’s all sitting around a BBQ singing yub nub. If there are incentives to be a galactic empire, they remain after the emperor is killed. You get a new emperor.
The change to democracy and peace in Western Europe, South America and some of Asia all follows growing industrialisation and in particular, the industrial vs the agricultural. Why did Switzerland democratise much earlier than Italy? Because land in Switzerland is garbage. Owning land for cattle isn’t worth much. So the power of landowners was easily overridden by industrial power.
And it’s why the Middle East is overwhelmingly not democratic. All the money in Iran, Iraq, Saudi, Kuwait is in the land. No-one is producing cars or Nike trainers there. It has a similar mindset to 14th century Western Europe. Tribalism, religious feuds, killing each other.
PJF – Unfortunately, the Fordo site is not visually “totally obliterated” (a crater instead of a hill); just some holes and some subsidence. For damage assessment the Yanks and Israelis are dependent on their intelligence of the internal layout being correct and comprehensive. Maybe they left the outside alone so the Israelis can go take a look, but that seems a big ask.
Yarp, Mohammed might be able to move the mountain, but for everyone else it would take a direct nuclear strike or five. Have you read up on the bomb they used? The GBU-57 is 30,000 terrifying pounds of burrow-through-solid-rock high explosiveness, with sophisticated fusing that’s supposed to be able to “count” how far it has penetrated before setting off the big firework. Barnes Wallis would be proud.
As BiG said, Israel seems to have riddled Iran with spies who probably can confirm. Assuming they picked the right spot to bomb, the accuracy of these things is like Robin Hood splitting an arrow. But also there’s literally nothing that could stop the B-2’s coming back anytime they want, unless Iran agrees to some kind of peace arrangement.
Gamecock – Thorium is a joke.
Shame on you.
The feasibility of using thorium was demonstrated at a large scale, at the scale of a commercial power plant, through the design, construction and successful operation of the thorium-based Light Water Breeder Reactor (LWBR) core installed at the Shippingport Atomic Power Station.[1] The reactor of this power plant was designed to accommodate different cores. The thorium core was rated at 60 MW(e), produced power from 1977 through 1982 (producing over 2.1 billion kilowatt hours of electricity) and converted enough thorium-232 into uranium-233 to achieve a 1.014 breeding ratio.
If this is a joke, it’s a lot funnier than the ones Ed Miliband tells. Thorium works.
TtC – South Africa built U235 gun weapons, and never tested them. The US never tested their first U235 weapon before use
Didn’t they do a secret test on the Prince Edward Islands in 1979? I’m not sure it’s feasible to develop an atomic weapon without testing, unless you had access to classified data from an existing nuclear power and simply copied the design exactly. You’d never be sure of the yield even if it did work.
Little Boy was a proof of concept device, not a proper weapon. It was very large and extremely wasteful of expensive uranium for a poor 15kt yield. Hence all the testing they subsequently did to make better nukes. And us too, natch. Blue Danube had similar problems to Little Boy and Fat Man and it required a lot of expensive testing to come up with the smaller, more powerful and reliable nukes we know and love today.
Norman – And now it seems the Iranian government has voted to close the Strait of Hormuz. A decision which we will probably come to see as one with as much consequence as Lambeth declaring itself nuclear-free. We’re now entering Black Knight territory: “It’s just a flesh wound.”
Iran is only 45 minutes away from deploying a very sternly worded letter.
Sure, the infidels may have bombed the shite out of Iran with impunity, killed or maimed most of its top tough guys, set their nuclear ambitions back to the Stone Age, and shagged their girlfriends. But are they ready for the “DOUBLE Death to America” chant?
DM – @Steve: “This isn’t a war from the United States pov.” Ah – oh I see what you mean. It’s a Special Military Operation. That certainly clears things up.
My Pictish pal, you jest, but declaring war is like wearing a trilby. Hasn’t been in style for yonks. Iran certainly didn’t formally declare war when it weaponised its proxies to attack Israel and the United States.
The USA hasn’t declared war on anyone since 1941.
To be fair, the Japs had the right idea in 1905 and 1941. If you’re going to hit somebody in the face with a golf club, you probably shouldn’t warn him first. He’ll try to stop you.
WB – but Nazism was mostly a peasant agricultural Germany thing. Where the mindset is that you increase prosperity by driving the Poles off the nice land and farm it. States like Bavaria, Saxony and Brandenburg. There wasn’t a lot of support in the more industrial areas like North Rhine-Westphalia, Hamburg. They had industrialised, so you make money by making things and trading them. Losing Saxony and Brandenburg quickly changed the average view of “make stuff” vs “invade others”.
I know you like the theory that industrialism reduces the potential for war, but it’s just nawt true. The reason the Nazis were slightly (and let’s not pretend the Germans didn’t embrace Uncle Adolf, most of them were enthusiastic Nazis) less popular in the cities was because the cities contained more Communists.
Not sure that wanting to impose Stalinist tyranny on Europe instead of Hitler’s dictatorship by consent was inherently less murdery. And btw, Communism and the 100,000,000 or so people it killed was only made possible by the industrial revolution.
Then you also have post-war agricultural improvements, full bellies, so no-one cares about a new Ostplan that much.
Not many empty bellies in Israel, Iran, Russia, Ukraine, or even the decent parts of India and Pakistan, but there’s still warfare. The reasons why men kill each other may change, but the desire never goes away.
War. War never changes.
NiV:
Yer what now?
There’s nothing “mere” about Iran openly financing Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis… ( and gods only know who else less openly…)
All three are their proxy armies to fullfill the will of the Mullahs: Destroy Israel and
enforce“promote” their particular poisonous brand of relgious fanaticism in their area of influence.That Iran isn’t *technically* attacking Israel is lawyerese weaselling.
Like the bleating of the “international law” globalist toads that let this situation drag on for decennia.
Its like saying “you can’t hit me cuz’ I’m a Girl” while at the same time kicking the bloke against his shins, with intent. Eventually the bloke will lash out and put out your lights.
Which DT just did. In response to literally decades of goading.. At the request of a sworn military ally under attack.
Iran said “Ner, Ner, You can’t hit meee!!” one time to many. FAFO 101.
But nice of you showing your true colours again…
Ha ha ha ha! Great thorium joke!
Shippingport had thorium targets. They were not involved in the reactor fission AT ALL. PASSIVE TARGETS. The targets were sent to Savannah River Plant Separations H Area, where the U-233 was separated . . . along with a few grams of the ultra nasty, gamma-emitting U-232, a by product. The U-233 was never used for anything.
What problem do you think thorium solves ?!?! It is useless.
Not members; only observers. I know – probably a distinction without a difference, as my lawyer friends would say.
Steve,
“I know you like the theory that industrialism reduces the potential for war, but it’s just nawt true. The reason the Nazis were slightly (and let’s not pretend the Germans didn’t embrace Uncle Adolf, most of them were enthusiastic Nazis) less popular in the cities was because the cities contained more Communists.”
And yet, they didn’t behave like communists did in the following 40 years. The only alternative theory is something institutional but then, we did the whole League of Nations/demilitarising thing after WW1 and it didn’t stop the same thing happening again.
“Not many empty bellies in Israel, Iran, Russia, Ukraine, or even the decent parts of India and Pakistan, but there’s still warfare. The reasons why men kill each other may change, but the desire never goes away”
OK, maybe not the empty bellies thing so much, but how you achieve power. Britain, France, Netherlands, Spain are all clearly doing a lot less killing of each other than we did for millenia. Japan stopped caring about owning Korea and China. The French stopped caring about Algieria. I don’t believe that just happened by luck. Something drove people to not care about killing, so what is it?
The USA hasn’t declared war on anyone since 1941.
But that hasn’t stopped them, especially Obama, bombing and droning the shit out of numerous countries this millennium without prior congressional approval – a fact conveniently memory-holed by all those democrat congress-creatures currently stamping their tiny hooves in frustrated indignation.
“There’s nothing “mere” about Iran openly financing Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis…”
I didn’t say there was. But *the world* (please note who I’m referring to here) didn’t think it sufficient to justify bombing the fuck out of them.
Terrorism is carefully calibrated to fall above ‘annoying enough for governments to make political concessions to stop it’ and below ‘annoying enough for governments to bomb the fuck out of them’. The West has a high tolerance threshold, and the actual military impact of terrorism is small compared to the costs and casualties from a war. (It’s not an existential military threat. A lot of the fuss made about it is security theatre to justify repressive monitoring and control over us, anyway.) On the couple of occasions they have stopped over the latter line (9/11 and 7th October) they did get bombed to fuck, but the public will to fight never lasts long.
“That Iran isn’t *technically* attacking Israel is lawyerese weaselling.”
Iran is *definitely* attacking Israel, but it is doing so with drones and ballistic missiles, not nukes. *Developing* nukes is not an “armed attack”. The action against it is to *prevent* an armed attack occurring. Article 51 doesn’t apply, as it’s only supposed to be a short-term thing until the UNSC gets its act together, but the threat to peace and international security articles certainly do.
My point is that international law *does* cover Iran’s activities, the UNSC simply doesn’t enforce it. Two tier enforcement, as usual.
“But nice of you showing your true colours again…”
Tribal thinking. You see whatever you expect to see.
I don’t play the ‘colours’ game. I’m only interested in what’s true.
“Not members; only observers. I know – probably a distinction without a difference, as my lawyer friends would say.”
You’re right. I missed that. Thank you.
“Something drove people to not care about killing, so what is it?”
Wealth-creating productivity which is then traded, which equates with sophisticated (not mass-labour heavy-industrial) industrialisation.
It’s easy to nick people’s stuff, whether it’s land, factories or trinkets. This is what the Spaniards did in South America. Then they brought it home and spent it poncing about. And after that? Back to being peasantry because they hadn’t used it to increase their own productivity. The thing about geese that lay golden eggs is that you don’t want to kill and eat the goose.
[And that, BTW, is the argument against “decolonisation” and reparations. When we nicked people’s stuff we used it to become productive, enriched ourselves, traded our products back to them, and even set up infrastructure, taught them how to do it themselves, and encouraged them.]
At the end of WW2 MacArthur jailed all the Japanese zaibatsu owners and managers. Six months later they were mostly out again because they were the only people who knew how to run these organisations and make them productive, and postwar Japan needed all the productivity it could get. Something similar happened in Germany.
So, productivity. It’s all very well Stalin gulagging millions of labourers and Mao killing peasants because manual labourers are not very valuable: they don’t generate much wealth. Traditional owners are little better. The real wealth creators are networks of skilled people using kit and infrastructure. Therefore, if you want the wealth, and want it to continue, you want to preserve the networks, creators and kit, rather than bomb them to bits. How then do you get their wealth? You trade with them, because they probably want some of your stuff in return for some of theirs.
And in all of this the kit and infrastructure becomes increasingly valuable. This is why China is unlikely to go to military war. WAY too much value tied up in Shenzen and all of their other infrastructure of the past 30 years.
Of course this argument holds little water with religious fundamentalists who are all about the next world rather than this one, who believe in martyrdom, and therefore deprecate human material wealth and wellbeing. That’s why the mullahs still act like medievalists, and why they need bombing back to the Stone Age if they don’t behave.
A further almost unique problem is Russia’s geography. Huge, resource-laden territory frozen solid half the year; navigable rivers draining into the Arctic Ocean and therefore useless for most of the year; only two warm-water ports, one of which is trapped in the Black Sea. To escape to blue water you have to get through the Bosporus and the Straits of Gibraltar. Or St. Petersburg: you have to get through the Skagerrak. All a bit shit. They actually have a reason to invade Europe: to get access to and control of the rivers, coastline and ports. They’re still far better off trading with us, mind.
WB,
This wasn’t even deliberate, but Nazism was mostly a peasant agricultural Germany thing.
Are you sure about that?
The most enthusiastic book burners were students and in many cases egged on by their tutors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_book_burnings
When the Weimar Republic was collapsing the middle class were horrified at the prospect of a communist revolution and turned to the Nazis if somewhat reluctantly. The same for big business who also feared the communists.
That’s not to say he didn’t have support in rural areas but I don’t think you can say it was mostly peasants.
WB – And yet, they didn’t behave like communists did in the following 40 years.
What, like the GDR?
The only alternative theory is something institutional but then, we did the whole League of Nations/demilitarising thing after WW1 and it didn’t stop the same thing happening again
We killed millions of Germans, razed their cities to ash, the Red Army raped about half the survivors, then the victorious allies occupied and partitioned their country, and brainwashed them into hating the colour of their own skin.
That’s how grampa pacified Germany.
OK, maybe not the empty bellies thing so much, but how you achieve power. Britain, France, Netherlands, Spain are all clearly doing a lot less killing of each other than we did for millenia. Japan stopped caring about owning Korea and China. The French stopped caring about Algieria. I don’t believe that just happened by luck. Something drove people to not care about killing, so what is it?
I think you’re taking an unusual historical blip – the Long Peace of 1945-2022 – and assuming it’s the New Normal.
It was, until the old normal came back. Merry Warmas! Don’t get me wrong, it’s not a bad theory you have and I like it, but I don’t think the evidence bears it out. The bloodiest wars man has ever fought, in all of recorded history, all happened in the 20th century. Twasn’t ignorant, superstitious country bumpkins looking for extra fields to graze cows who are to blame for this.
BiND – The most enthusiastic book burners were students and in many cases egged on by their tutors.
Jawohl. And the Fuhrer wasn’t imposed on Germany by some kind of countryside alliance. The Germans loved Hitler, he was like the David Hasselhoff of the 30’s and no contemporary politician comes close to the genuine popularity the Austrian corporal enjoyed. Every section of German society bought into Naziism, it was eminently respectable in 1933. If the German elites didn’t want Hitler, he would’ve been gone like a fart in a hurricane. But they did want Hitler.
Look at how much trouble von Stauffenberg and co. had trying to kill the little guy. And that was when Germany was getting the shit kicked out of it by the allies.
Norman – So, productivity. It’s all very well Stalin gulagging millions of labourers and Mao killing peasants because manual labourers are not very valuable
But Stalin didn’t just kill off a bunch of illiterate kulaks, he killed most of the officer corps of his own armed forces and terrorised the Inner Party and much of the Russian intelligentsia with beatings, murders, show trials and gulags (not necessarily in that order). Power cares about power. Power doesn’t give a fuck about productivity, wealth, human lives or any of that stuff, unless it’s related to the acquisition and retention of power.
This is why China is unlikely to go to military war.
Countries don’t usually build a massive bluewater navy so they can not go to war. The Chinese would prefer not to do a war because they’re not stupid, but it’s only a matter of time before they start to flex those big military muscles they’ve been building. They are preparing for the old ultraviolence, that’s what the aircraft carriers and stealth bombers are about.
Rearmament is the irl version of Chekhov’s gun.
Gamecock – What problem do you think thorium solves ?!?! It is useless.
Uranium is 0.00027% of the Earth’s crust. Thorium is a whopping 0.00096%.
John – But that hasn’t stopped them, especially Obama, bombing and droning the shit out of numerous countries this millennium without prior congressional approval – a fact conveniently memory-holed by all those democrat congress-creatures currently stamping their tiny hooves in frustrated indignation.
It is pathetic of them to kvetch about the “legality” of bombing other countries. As if the important thing is to get some lawyer ponce to agree. These are people who have never been punched in the face, and yet desperately need to be punched in the face.
However, I would also support President Trump if, next time, he decides the B-2’s should drop lawyers on Iran, from 50,000 feet. Just make sure it’s not over a populated area, we wouldn’t want any real people to get hurt.
@ Norman,
Which of St Petersburg and Vladivostok is in theBlack Sea?
“Uranium is 0.00027% of the Earth’s crust. Thorium is a whopping 0.00096%.”
So fucking what? Popular Science non sequitur.
Again, what problem does thorium – allegedly – solve? Uranium being 0.00027% matters how?
– I think you’re taking an unusual historical blip – the Long Peace of 1945-2022 – and assuming it’s the New Normal. It was, until the old normal came back.
It didn’t just come back, it was enthusiastically resurrected by western-hating people such as yourself who sadly carried too much influence on an embittered Trump. You are the reason the Long Peace alliances are crumbling. Can they be restored? If having the deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council (and ex Russian president) say that Iran will now be directly supplied with nukes by its allies isn’t enough to make Trump wake up and shake off his FuckWitcoffs, then the answer is no.
Gamecock – Le sigh. Thorium is of interest because it’s significantly more abundant than uranium, and a lot more countries have significant thorium deposits than have commercially viable uranium ore. Currently nearly half of global uranium production takes place in Kazakhstan. The USA and Canada are among Kazakhstan’s customers…
It’s possible – just possible, mind you – that Kazakhstan might not be a reliable long term energy supplier.
It’s also potentially a means of reducing the amount of long lived nuclear waste we need to deal with and generally reckoned to be inherently less proliferatey than traditional nukes. There’s a reason why the US, UK, China, India, Germany, Russia, Japan, Canada etc. are researching or building thorium reactors, eh? Not sure why you hate Thunar. He invented Thursdays you ingrate!
Btw, a stray thought: it’s a good thing Two Tier isn’t President of the United States, or he’d have tried to solve the Iran crisis by giving them £30Bn and a free island.
J77, that’ll be Sebastopol, which the Russians clearly regard as theirs.
PJF – It didn’t just come back, it was enthusiastically resurrected by western-hating people such as yourself who sadly carried too much influence on an embittered Trump. You are the reason the Long Peace alliances are crumbling.
Wow, I am more powerful than I could have possibly imagined. Are you sure you aren’t just ticked off with me because we disagreed over Ukraine and you took that personally? And to add insult to injury, I was right. Nobody ever forgives you for being right.
Also consider the irony that I (and President Trump, so good company) am being accused of starting wars (!) due to *not* morally supporting a massive war in Europe.
Makes sense.
As for “alliances”, lol. It wasn’t Trump who deprecated them, the freeloading, but strangely warhungry parasites running other NATO countries (into the ground) did that. Trump is just the first US president to not take their shit anymore. Vice President Vance was right, the US seeks *civilisational* allies. Not a bunch of deluded and disarmed homos who are rapidly turning their own countries into Pakistan West but with Chinese style political repression. Such “allies” are worthless.
Can they be restored?
No.
If having the deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council (and ex Russian president) say that Iran will now be directly supplied with nukes by its allies isn’t enough to make Trump wake up and shake off his FuckWitcoffs, then the answer is no.
Calm down. Nobody’s going to give Iran free nukes. Medvedev is a shittalker who is always grandstanding and making empty threats on Twitter. Somebody’s got to do it, because Zhirinovsky is dead.
I have no idea what a FuckWitcoff is, sorry.
But if you’re worried about Iran getting nukes, or Russia (grr!) doing something to harm us, my advice is don’t. There’s no need to torture yourself worrying over this stuff, it’s going to be fine.
Proofs: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T72TopWbXJg
Iran has been weeks away from an atomic bomb for years. That they never get to it is most probably because that’s never been their aim. What they have been doing is showing they are capable. There are rumours that they haven’t built a bomb for religious reasons but this has never been confirmed so it’s more likely they are uncomfortable making them but would if the situation changed and it became important to do. This could now become a case of self fulfilling prophesy.
Going from a large amount of 60% enriched uranium to a large amount of 90% is a slow process. However going from a large amount of 60% to enough to make a few bombs is very quick and doesn’t preclude later slow processing of what’s left. Israel’s spy network in Iran seems to be really good. Let’s hope they haven’t missed a topping off cascade hidden away somewhere that’s had a delivery or 60% enriched uranium, If they have the 90% enriched material really could be cast and assembled into an otherwise ready warhead in a couple of weeks. The now deceased scientists were more than capable of designing an implosion physics package rather than a simple gun device, so can get more warheads from what they have got. They may or may not have tritium available to boost the yield as their reactor that would best produce that was decommissioned in 2016, but that’s less than one tritium half life so will certainly have enough for the neutron initiator.
Tel Aviv and/or Haifa is the obvious target for a ballistic missile. Should the US be a target an Intermodal container would have the range. They don’t even need to detonate it: just reveal where one is in a secondary city and claim there are more.
Are they crazy enough to do it? Probably not but who knows. That question could be answered with a very bright flash and a very loud bang.
‘Thorium is of interest because it’s significantly more abundant than uranium, and a lot more countries have significant thorium deposits than have commercially viable uranium ore. ‘
If it’s so wonderful, why is no one using it? BECAUSE IT’S NOT COMPETITIVE WITH URANIUM.
‘It’s also potentially a means of reducing the amount of long lived nuclear waste we need to deal with and generally reckoned to be inherently less proliferatey than traditional nukes.’
You make the standard thorium fan boy mistake of confusing molten salt reactors with thorium. MSRs don’t need thorium.
‘There’s a reason why the US, UK, China, India, Germany, Russia, Japan, Canada etc. are researching or building thorium reactors, eh? ‘
For 70 years now. Will fusion be first? BTW, there is no such thing as a ‘thorium reactor.’ It’s a hoax. There is intermittent research into MSRs, which have FA to do with thorium. The US actually had a working MSR at Oak Ridge 20 years before Shippingport. And the ran it on U-233 that they bred at Savannah River 15-30 years before Shippingport. Shippingport didn’t tell us anything we didn’t know already.
Oak Ridge hilariously called it LFTR. Liquid fluorine thorium reactor. It never saw a molecule of thorium. Beware anyone who says Oak Ridge LFTR. It’s a trick.
The simple story of thorium breeding is that it was a great idea in the 50s. Savannah River produced 630 kg of U-233 from it from 1956 to 1971. It was a great idea because in the early days, uranium was rare and expensive. That problem was solved nearly 50 years ago. Thorium serves no purpose. It cannot come close to competing with uranium. Hasn’t for generations.
All the books and pop science articles that tout it are an ignorant joke. Clownish distraction.
Thorium is a waste product of processing rare earth ores. One of the reasons that the West doesn’t produce rare earth elements is that the price of getting rid of the thorium byproduct is too difficult and expensive, by government regulation.
I have heard that, MG, that Man’s thorium needs are so small that supply is met with byproduct from processing rare earths.
I.e., there is NO thorium industry. No mines, no mining, no transport, no processing, etc.
“What does a ton of thorium cost?”
“You can’t get a ton of thorium.”
Umm, well, sorta.
Tho’ there was once a year when I did the only thorium transaction in the entire US of A. 13 lbs of it. It’s there in the trade stats that that was the only transaction.
Bought it off the US Navy. They’ve got hundreds of tonnes in storage. Summat to do with reactors for submarines….
‘They’ve got hundreds of tonnes in storage. Summat to do with reactors for submarines….’
I don’t believe it. I play golf Thursday with a nuclear submarine reactor designer. I’ll ask him. I expect a strange look.
This time series is fun:
https://www.usgs.gov/media/files/thorium-historical-statistics-data-series-140
You can see old use (gas lamps) dying out, then vast blips of USN demand then near nothing as the years go by.
Andyf – Iran has been weeks away from an atomic bomb for years. That they never get to it is most probably because that’s never been their aim. What they have been doing is showing they are capable.
If that’s true, their government is literally too stupid to live. Inviting all the downsides of appearing to be developing nukes, without the benefit of actually getting a nuke. It’s like pretending you might have a gun in your pocket when going through airport security, nothing good is going to come next.
Gamecock – did Thorium shag your bird or something? Are you saying this is kayfabe:
In August 2024, China became the first in the world to use the latest generation of nuclear power technology, as a power plant with two new thorium (molten salt) reactors started commercial operations in the eastern province of Shandong.- Wall Steet Journal-Atomic Power Is In Again—and China Has the Edge
Re: fusion. Totally agree it’s a massive disappointment, but if we don’t do engineering experiments, how do we expect to be wearing silver jumpsuits on the Moon? The SS Great Britain was an engineering experiment too, it bankrupted the company that ordered it, but we’re all better off for it having been built.
It’s another lie you fell for. Thorium is fertile for bullshit.
I have enough knowledge of the nuclear world to know the thorium story. Both my parents retired from the Savannah River Plant. I delivered newspapers to nuclear physicists. Steve, you aren’t the first to regurgitate all the thorium BS. This isn’t my first rodeo. I’ve been fighting the lies for decades.
Gamecock – Somebody ought to tell the nuclear engineering industry they’re being scammed:
https://www.neimagazine.com/news/china-refuels-thorium-reactor-without-shutdown/
Btw this sounds like the Chinese think their nerds are smarter than your nerds*:
Xu and his team at the Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics (SINAP – part of CAS) developed the technology based on declassified research from the USA. He explained that researchers in the US had been building and testing early molten salt reactor technology since the 1960s, but did not develop it further, choosing to focus on uranium fuelled pressurised water reactor technology.
“The US left its research publicly available, waiting for the right successor. We were that successor,” he told the CAS meeting. “We mastered every technique in the literature – then pushed further.”
*Doubtful imo, given their lack of Jews. That’s probably also why Iran was dicking around with uranium enrichment for 30 years without apparent success. You need Maths Jews for this kind of work.
Steve, the article was written by thorium fan boys at Nuclear Engineering International. It repeats goofball cliches.
It seems the only thing we know for sure is China duplicated a 60 year old experiment. Whoopee.
The article points out that the researchers have two major problems yet. Corrosion from the salt and the need for online separations. Gamecock smiles. These two problems have blocked molten salt reactor development since the Oak Ridge test. NOTING HAS CHANGED.
Periodicals still write vaporware articles. And chumps believe them.
Thorium is just fine for nuclear power. Bombard it with neutrons in a reactor and you get uranium 233 which is a great fuel and makes a good bomb too with a low critical mass. The problem is that you get uranium 232 too which has a half live that makes it hazardous to health. Separating U-233 and U-232 isotopes is hard as you need things like centrifuges. This makes uranium bred to plutonium and chemical separation a lot better fuel cycle if you want plutonium warheads and power.
Mr Worstall, I discussed thorium and the navy with my friend today.
He revealed that he can neither confirm nor deny that the navy has thorium stockpiles.
Not a security thing; he just never heard of it. He just doesn’t know.
As far as nuclear propulsion, he said it was not a security breach to say no, thorium use was non-existent. In his several decades experience, they never touched the stuff.
“Thorium is just fine for nuclear power. Bombard it with neutrons in a reactor and you get uranium 233 which is a great fuel”
Not in solid fuel reactors, like Shippingport. Some thorium will be transmuted to U-233, but it is NOT FUEL. And that is a huge problem. The uranium created will not participate in the fission reaction. It can be separated from the thorium targets, but it has to happen offline. Outside the reactor.
The MSR dream is to get the created uranium to react. Theoretically, that should work. So you don’t have to do offline separations. But, alas, because of all the fission products in the slurry, you have to do online separations, which is a huge problem (along with corrosion, mentioned earlier).
So, the problem for utilities operating solid fuel reactors, do you want to replace some fuel rods with thorium targets?
HELL NO