Justus For All

I’m just curious, Dave: why is Iran the first and foremost reason the Saudi shahids would want nukes???

What is scary in the thought of Saudi Arabia having nuke technology is the fact that relationships between Saudi Arabia and AlQaeda are far more direct than between Iran and AlQaeda or Iraq and AlQaeda.

How so?

In Polyland (polynesia/nz) they are known as “cuzzie-bros”.

They are the direct, extended family relationships. Neither Iran nor Iraq have or had that…

Greg,

Iran is the foremost reason because given nuclear weapons to use as a sheild Iran would have the ability to expand into the Shiite dominated areas of Southern Iraq, Kuwait and Northern Saudi Arabia. Oil rich regions.

Probligo,

While the Government of Saudi Arabia is a very feudal one with members of the house of Saud controlling the string, and some members of the house of Saud have contributed to Jihadist movements in different ways, the Government of Saudi Arabia is basically at war with Al-Qaida. Saddam had, at minimum, a truce with Al-Qaida and it appears was cooperating with them to some extent.

It would be extremely unlikely that the Saudi Government would provide Al-Qaida with nuclear weapons. There would be the very real possibility that if they did, those weapons would be used in Riyadh.

Dave, that might be so in terms of political control.

However, when one gets to “the control of the product on the ground” (i.e. the production facilities, the testing facilities, the weapons themselves) that control can be diminished to the extent that the worst could happen… and to make matters worse it could happen under the patronage of opponents of the House of Saud within Saudi Arabia.

I do not believe that Iran is the ONLY Arab state that the US should be paranoid about… with the way that the WOI (not WOT!) is going, new and powerful enemies are being made every day.

I doubt that the Saudis would have trouble keeping security on those elements. The number of people isn’t all that large and security screening would be a major focus. That sort of problem is probably more likely to happen in Pakistan than Saudi Arabia.

All that being said, let me be clear that I am not in favor of Saudi nukes. I do think though that we should be realistic of what the dangers of Saudi nukes would be and why they are desirable from the Saudi point of view.

Of course Iran isn’t the only Arab state (Iran is actually Persian, not Arab anyway) that the U.S. is concerned about. We are pretty much concerned with all of them. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and all the rest have deep problems, all of which require complex solutions that are difficult to handle.

Iraq on the other hand is making signifigant progess, and we are gaining new and powerful allies there.

“I doubt that the Saudis would have trouble keeping security on those elements. The number of people isn’t all that large and security screening would be a major focus. That sort of problem is probably more likely to happen in Pakistan than Saudi Arabia”

Yeah, like the Brits thought that they control of theirs during the 1950’s when they “ïnadvertently” sold heavy water to the Israelis. This is an interesting, nay gripping, summary of the events of the time.

If you want a parallel, it reads like the US selling material and technology to Iraq… under the bed-clothes.

The British dealings with Israel you describe would be a good parallel if you think that Britian is like Saudi Arabia, Al Qaida is like Israel, and transfering heavy water is like giving someone else a nuclear weapon.

As for the US selling material and technology to Iraq, that is so vastly over-exagerated it isn’t even funny.

So I take it that you believe Saudi nuclear security in the 200ns would be better regulated than was the British in the 1950s?

Did it pass you by that in 1950 British political intent was to prevent Israel from getting nuclear technology, but that British institutions were instrumental in the initial establishment of that technology?

Did you note that it was not until after the HW reactor was operational that British scientists realised what had happened?

There is a direct parallel in that respect between Britain and Pakistan - where one “rogue” scientist took it in his head to share his knowledge of the technology around.

Do I equate Israel with AlQaeda? No. That is your canard, not mine.

I am looking at the political intent which you believe would stop Saudi Arabia agencies from leaking nuclear technology to terrorist organisations.

I have pointed out that even in Britain, that intent was worth nothing when it came to having effect.

First off, ‘nuclear technology’ to a terrorist organization is a non-issue. No terrorist organization has 1/100th of the resources necessary to persue enrichment technologies. It simply isn’t going to happen.

The only way a terrorist group could make a nuclear bomb is if they acquired already enriched materials and assembled one. The other way that they could gain a nuclear weapon, of course, is to be given one fully assembled.

I am absolutely confident that Saudi Arabia would not lose either a nuclear weapon or enriched nuclear material. No nation has ever lost a nuclear weapon, and the total known amount of enriched material known to be missing from all nuclear programs, yes, even from the post-Soviet collapse, is a small fraction of what is needed to make a nuclear weapon.

So, the sort of proliferation to Al-Qaida that you are talking about simply is not a realistic scenario.

Saudi Arabia is FAR more motivated to preventing Al-Qaida getting nuclear weapons than Britain was toward Israel getting nuclear weapons, even if we pretend that the sort of technology transfers that happened to Israel are applicable to Al-Qaida.

Now, if you want to argue that Saudi technology could proliferate to other Arab regimes, certainly that is quite possible. The Saudi bomb could end up helping the advancement of the Egyptian Bomb and the Jordanian Bomb. That is one of the problems if this proliferation continues.

As I said above, we need to be realistic about what the dangers are, not indulge in fantasy scenarios that are obviously facile.

Good luck tracking the 2kg of plutonium that ends up spraying all over San Diego then.

Not a nuclear weapon, just the dirt…

A Dirty bomb is a completely different thing, and far more likely.

And that is why my example was the HW Britain “accidentally” sold to Israel….

But the Britain-Israel thing was about proliferation and the ability to enrich uranium, not about Israel building a nuclear bomb.

A Saudi nuclear program may be a danger as far as making it easier for terrorist to gain material for a dirty bomb. However, I still think such a development is quite unlikely. The world has changed a lot since the events of the Britain-Israel exchange you speak of, and dangers that were not even considered are foremost in people’s minds now.