JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Jim Redelfs" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

Physically building the bomb itself isn't very complicated.
Please issue a "spew warning" before posting such humor.

If not the most ignorant statement I've read in a *LONG* time, it is
certainly
among the funniest.

People who know what they're talking about would disagree with your view on
this issue. If I knew you were going to happen along, I would've jotted down
the names of experts who were interviewed just after the latest intelligence
stinker about Iran's nuclear capabilities. They all said that refining the
fuel was a bitch, but bomb design was the easiest part.
....

I suspect you're not interpreting what they _really_ said quite right
although I don't have a clue as to what or to whom specifically you're
referring (other than the general gist of the report (that is now also
not necessarily looking to be all that intelligent from what I hear more
recently) I've not read much detail.)

Anyway, the basics of rudimentary technology for separation isn't that
difficult, either -- it's the details of the efficiency of how to do it
in large quantities with "only" hundreds or low-thousands of centrifuges
as opposed to 10's of thousands in order to obtain sufficient
weapons-grade material in a relatively short time.

Similar story w/ weapons manufacture -- to utilize limited amounts of
material efficiently is a pretty good trick -- if one had lots of
material, a crude weapon is indeed relatively straightforward.

--