Right, I got that, but Japan isn't really a useful comparison to Iran because they can basically flip a switch and 'go live' if they wanted, whereas Iran is under significant import restrictions (of varying effectiveness), is under international duress (and fairly intense scrutiny), and has an active interest in being an aggressor or threat (if only as a deterrent, though this can certainly be debated).
What I'm not sure I get is what you wanted to say they had as an alternate option. Garden-variety WMD's? A large conventional barrage?
Oh, well I'd have to disagree with you there. Iran has significant uranium reserves and technical know-how for enrichment processes, so I would consider being able to build a nuke independently a given.
That's what I thought too, but now we're hearing reports of them running out of raw materials and centrifuges going hungry for lack of product. I don't have a handy link, but apparently all the stuff they've been refining recently is left over from a decades-old purchase of yellowcake from South Africa, with their own supposed reserves untapped.
Now I don't know if this means that they actually don't have as much uranium as the world has been led to believe (if it's a lie, it's a lie that would make sense if they're trying to justify a domestic nuclear program for electricity), OR if they lack the know-how to mine their own uranium reserves (which casts further doubt on their ability to do this independently). But either way the answer is good for the west.
But even if Iran had the raw materials, I would say there is a massive difference between the ability of Iran to get a nuke up and going in a big hurry and for Japan to do the same. The speed and efficiency of the one versus the other would be an order of magnitude in difference. Thirty years of sanctions HAVE taught Persians to be self-reliant at the highest levels of manufacture (and for those of us who know, this modern trend is actually older). But understanding self-reliance is still not the same as already having the technical knowledge.
They'll get there, given time, but a comparison to Japan just isn't useful. Anyway, that point still doesn't make any sense. Here's the sentence:
Iran doesn't even need a warhead, really. Japan has the capacity to begin production quite quickly. That would be all they need to increase their strategic power in the region. Also significantly less stupid than a nuclear test.
I'm not trying to be a jerk here, I just honestly can't parse what you're getting at. Based on this and your later replies, I've got:
- Iran doesn't need a nuke.
(Agreed.)
- Japan could significantly increase it's power if it wanted to by making a nuke.
(And this means Iran should... not? To say nothing of the North Korean example which is actually more relevant?).
- Iran has the the technical know-how to produce a nuke.
(Quite probably - but not nearly as quickly as any nuclear-powered western nation. Especially not under such intense scrutiny.)
- Iran has the natural resources to make a nuke.
(To quote: "In the same sense that someone with an iron mine is close to making a car.")
- What's 'significantly less stupid than a nuclear test'? Just making a bomb and not telling anyone? Sticking to conventional weapons? Staying peaceful?