ERRORS in rebuttal to "Pandora's Promise"

[PamW]

10. Do you doubt it?

A few years ago; nuclear inspectors found samples of uranium that qualified as "highly enriched" in Iran.

Highly enriched uranium, that is uranium with a high percentage of U-235 relative to U-238 does NOT occur in Nature.

It has to be the result of enrichment.

Normal power reactors and research reactors don't need highly enriched uranium.

There are really only two applications that require uranium that is highly enriched; naval reactors and nuclear weapons.

I don't see Iran with any nuclear-propelled naval vessels; so the HEU that was found was in all probability produced for a nuclear weapons program.

Besides; I'm not the one that made the original claim; Mark Hertzgaard in "The Nation" made that original claim:

http://www.thenation.com/article/174733/pandoras-terrifying-promise-can-nuclear-power-save-planet

In fact, it was by exploiting the dual nature of nuclear fission that India acquired nuclear weapons in 1974—much as Iran is believed to be trying to do in 2013.

Mark Hertzgaard is the one that brought up Iran as a potential nuclear weapons proliferant. However, Hertzgaard ERRONEOUSLY states that Iran is pursuing the same path as India did in 1974. That is wrong. IF Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons; which is why the USA and others put sanctions on them; then they are doing so by using their centrifuges to enrich uranium to high enrichment. They are seeking a "Little Boy" bomb; not the "Fat Man" bomb, as did India.

You may believe that Iran is not working on nuclear weapons, but evidently Hertzgaard, Secretary Kerry, the US Government, and all those countries promoting the sanction; evidently DO believe Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. Not without reason.

PamW