Iranian nuclear scientist awol in Saudi-US blamed

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by HectortheInspector, Jan 12, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I never did it.
  2. And who uses motorbikes for attacks on their enemies in Tehran and the other major Iranian cities?

    Put it another way, Iranian state media would have you believe that the CIA orchestrated 9/11.

  3. awaiting Bugsy to come along and say its an Israeli plot to destabilise an otherwise peaceful country
  4. The CIA did arrange 9/11.

  5. Personally, I think this one was domestic.
    The Prof was apparently linked to the Moussavi opposition party, and I defy anyone to find and identify bomb components that quickly. Unless you know what was in it because you built it.

    Since other opposition opponents have also been hit lately, I think this one was probably the Iranian Government itself, or some faction therein.
  6. He would thus be an asset considering/and beyond his immediate function - making the nuclear project one within the Iranian consensus and not a government folly.
  7. Yes, but he was (apparently) a quantum theorist rather than a weapons expert.
  8. Depends. Some news items seem to suggest he was more of a mathematician dealing with quantum mechanics, which is hard enough to make your ears bleed, but not really concerned with the engineering aspects of making things that go bang.
    The general public consensus in Iran seems to be pro nuclear, but not necessarily pro-Bomb.
    However- If you have someone on the fringes of the Bomb programme who is of dubious political reliability, do you continue to let them run free, and perhaps talk to the wrong people? (Klaus Fuchs) Jail him? (Vananu) OR do you just remove him with extreme prejudice?
  9. Having read the latest, it does look like a government spin - co-opting him posthumously into the program. Point taken.

    Everybody's guess at the moment.
  11. I don't doubt that he would be able to contribute to a weapons programme, but apparently his strong point was a very advanced form of maths.

    It's way way, beyond me, but it's the kind of abstract reasoning where maths wanders over the border into philosophy and religion.

    It is also possible that someone in the hierarchy didn't like the religious implications of some of the theories involved here. I know that some Christians don't. However, the Archbishop of Canterbury hasn't (so far as I know), put out a contract on Stephen Hawking for musing on the unthinkable. The Iranians put a hit out on Salman Rushdie for a rather dull piece of fiction, so they do have previous for suppressing dissent.