So this shit is all you need for a nuclear weapon? Would a modified merry-go-round from an amusement park work

You need it to get high purity uranium

>>508566703
...in gaseous form. so no. OP is a retard.

The equipment isn't the problem when it comes to nukes, it's the material, good luck sourcing enough uranium while staying under the radar

you need yellow cake i think walmart has a box of yellow cake premix

>>508566809
do you need like way way more than u do for nuclear power? iran already has a bunch of nuclear power plants

>>508566858
A nuke uses far less uranium than a reactor.
Power plants use low-enriched uranium (LEU) at ~3–5% U-235.
Bombs require highly enriched uranium (HEU) at 90%+ U-235. The issue isn’t quantity, it’s the level of enrichment.

>>508566611 (OP)

You need tens of thousands those if your want get enough enriched uranium single bomb before you die to old age. Process is slow and cost a lot of energy.

>>508566858
For nuclear reactors 3% enrichment is enough. For weapons, you need 90%.
Iran has reached 60%.
>we don't want nucular weapons, is purely peaceful and civilian program, plz don't bomb

>>508566611 (OP)
That cand do gas phase u fluoride u fucking nigger memeflaggot whore

>>508567056
Why don't they make fusion bombs from hydrogen isotopes instead of uranium? Fusion releases more energy than nuclear fission.

you may as well post a washing machine, it also spins things around

>>508567056
>>508567160
yeah but the way you enrich it is just spinning it a lot of tiems right

>>508567212
They do u fucking faggot. Its old tech from us and russia

>>508567160
The jew aggression justifies it now

They have complied with every western inspection and you repaid them with a surprise attack and killing their American negotiator

>>508567212
And jumpstart it with what? Spoiler: A regular nuclear bomb

>>508566611 (OP)
That's like posting a firework and saying "So is this all I need to go to space?"

>>508566611 (OP)
Nukes aren’t real, jungle nigger.

>>508566611 (OP)
>So this shit is all you need for a nuclear weapon?
Yes.
And large amounts of uranium of course.

>>508567355
>expecting anyone who posts here to understand how a conventional fission only nukes work let alone boosted fission or fusion designs
I appreciate the benefit of the doubt but come on anon.

>>508567309
If you only need 3% why would anyone go through the hassle of going to 60% unless you want to go further.
Saying 60% is still civilian is cope.

>>508567160
That doesn't make any sense. You can make weapons starting at 20%, though it'd be impractical. 60% would already plenty for physically viable weapons.

That and there is no reason a country that can already reach 60% wouldn't be able to go higher, especially one that's been "2 years away from having nuclear weapons" for 30 years now.

>>508567594
The point of enrichment is to reduce the overall needed material. With 20% you could make a nuclear explosion but not really a weapon you could deliver. Like back when North Korea tested their first bomb people were joking the only way to deliver the bomb was on the back of a truck.

>>508566611 (OP)
>what is uranium hexafluoride
God I wish I could give you a deep hit of that gas. It would definitely smarten you up