World's deadliest profession? Iranian nuclear scientist

[Sheilbh]

Point number six is downright absurd. Witnessing the contrast between the fates of our Dear Leader and Saddam Hussein was more than enough encouragement for an Iranian nuclear program.

No doubt.  But there's no chance of an invasion.  Sponsoring bombs against a nuclear armed power is more dangerous - India-Pakistan's an example.

[Viking]

Goldberg seems to be heading for the conclusion that someone within Iran is performing these assassinations for internal consumption.

Somebody in Iran might be assassinating them for one of two good reasons

1) Stopping the program is the best way to avoid being bombed.

2) If they kill their own scientists they can plausibly achieve the dual goals of aggitating against the west for internal political reasons while not having to explain why they are unable to do what the jews and the gays did 66 years ago.

[Sheilbh]

Somebody in Iran might be assassinating them for one of two good reasons

1) Stopping the program is the best way to avoid being bombed.

2) If they kill their own scientists they can plausibly achieve the dual goals of aggitating against the west for internal political reasons while not having to explain why they are unable to do what the jews and the gays did 66 years ago.

Or No. 3 the regime looks like it's collapsing or suffering from a sort of internal civil war.  This is part of that.

[DGuller]

Or it could be no. 4:  they have already served their purpose. 

[Maximus]

Goldberg seems to be heading for the conclusion that someone within Iran is performing these assassinations for internal consumption.

I think there's the suggestion that it's not the Israelis but possibly the Americans?

Replacing Israeli with American doesn't really address any of his points though. It comes down to question #2.

Although internal dissent is another possibility, it seems unlikely to me that such a movement would be so adept at assassination.

[Tonitrus]

Makes me wonder why Iran isn't doing more to protect these guys.

The director guy I can see, but it's harder to protect a University professor.  They are supposed to be accessible.  It's also clear from the assassinations and sabotage that the project is severely compromised.  There is at least one agent on the inside, probably more.

If they're on the inside of the Iranian nuclear agency, thems gotta be some evil bastards to sell out their colleagues for assassination.

[The Brain]

Goldberg #2 is retarded. Kill scientists involved in ANY project and it slows the project down. Even if you happen to have lots of other guys with the relevant background they can't just pick up the bloody notes and start producing 100% from day one. And Iran doesn't have large numbers of guys with the relevant background. Also it seems likely that the Iranians would pick their best nuclear guys for the bomb program. Second best (the replacement) is just that.

[The Brain]

And talking about nuclear security. Iran seems a bit meh.



Details Iran: http://www.ntiindex.org/countries/iran/

Sweden seems to have 1-5 kg of material. Tremble plz.

[PDH]

It's just nuclear physics.  How hard can it be, don't they have vo-tech schools for that?

[Sheilbh]

He mentions crippling.  I think there's a very real cost-benefit analysis as to how much you slow it down by a limited number of assasinations and bombs in Iran v their response to that.  If you could cripple it then that's a different question.  If you could cripple them through this then there'd be no need to consider bombing Iran.

[CountDeMoney]

Goldberg #2 is retarded. Kill scientists involved in ANY project and it slows the project down. Even if you happen to have lots of other guys with the relevant background they can't just pick up the bloody notes and start producing 100% from day one.

Yeah, no kidding;  hell, just from a project management perspective, obliterating a single cog totally fucks up Tehran's Project 2007 layout.

[CountDeMoney]

He mentions crippling.  I think there's a very real cost-benefit analysis as to how much you slow it down by a limited number of assasinations and bombs in Iran v their response to that.  If you could cripple it then that's a different question.  If you could cripple them through this then there'd be no need to consider bombing Iran.

The problem seems to be that critics somehow think it's one-stop shopping regarding the retardation of their program; "but bombing Natanz only sets them back 2 years"...fine, then hit them again in 2 years.

What has to be done is that there needs to be consistency combined with progressive ratcheting; you want the Iranians to learn that punitive measures will cost more than the program itself.

[Razgovory]

Makes me wonder why Iran isn't doing more to protect these guys.

The director guy I can see, but it's harder to protect a University professor.  They are supposed to be accessible.  It's also clear from the assassinations and sabotage that the project is severely compromised.  There is at least one agent on the inside, probably more.

If they're on the inside of the Iranian nuclear agency, thems gotta be some evil bastards to sell out their colleagues for assassination.

Perhaps.  The Stuxnet virus could only be done with a man on the inside.  Someone had to carry it in, and load it on to the computers onsite.

[CountDeMoney]

The Stuxnet virus could only be done with a man on the inside.  Someone had to carry it in, and load it on to the computers onsite.

Doesn't mean it has to be intentional "on the inside".  All you need is an introductory agent. 

"Hey, here's a free USB drive.  Enjoy." 
"Thanks!"

[Berkut]

I am thinking that there are lots of other potential actors here than the US and Israel. Plenty of other states are not interested in seeing a nuclear Iran.

Like Saudi Arabia. Means, motive, opportunity.