Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nuclear scientist killed in Tehran was Iran's top Stuxnet expert

debka.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 57 posts

Re: Nuclear scientist killed in Tehran was Iran's top Stuxnet expert

#21

Post by cma »

natrius wrote: post #8
Leptosiphon wrote: post #5

I don't know how reliable a source "DEBKAfile" is, but just in general, it makes me very uncomfortable that civilian scientists may possibly now be considered legitimate targets for assassination or kidnapping by the US, Israel or others.

If you're a scientist working on weapons systems (which is a debatable claim in this instance), you're not a civilian.

I don't disagree with you, but you can take it further: what if someone is growing potatoes, some of which go to feed weapons systems (troops)?

Re: Nuclear scientist killed in Tehran was Iran's top Stuxnet expert

#22

Post by alanh »

sliverstorm wrote: post #12

Considering this happened after the leak, and such a short time after as well, I can't help but wonder if someone read the leak and thought "that's a great idea!"

Seven hours is precious little time, I would imagine, to plan for and put into motion attacks like these.

Re: Nuclear scientist killed in Tehran was Iran's top Stuxnet expert

#23

Post by natrius »

Leptosiphon wrote: post #18
natrius wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a scientist working on weapons systems (which is a debatable claim in this instance), you're not a civilian.

According to Iran, scientists aren't working on a weapons system, they are part of a civilian program to produce nuclear power plants. Following your logic, the people who competed in the DARPA grand challenge are not civilians and are legitimate targets for assassination by another world power.

DARPA funds the Grand Challenge so the technology can eventually be used to defend the country. I would not consider killing scientists involved in the competition to be a war crime; it would just be a garden variety act of war. I know little about the international law involved in such distinctions, but it makes logical sense to me.

In my estimation, attacking DARPA-funded scientists is more likely to be "okay" than attacking the Iranian scientists, because the latter may not actually have any involvement in weapons development if Iran is telling the truth.

Re: Nuclear scientist killed in Tehran was Iran's top Stuxnet expert

#24

Post by radicaldreamer »

Debka is thought to be an Israeli counterintelligence operation, so take its writing with a grain of salt.

Of course, it's possible that the Israelis want everyone to know about their capabilities (the line about the attacks coming 12 hours after the Wikileaks cables release was interesting), but Debka's writing might not be extremely accurate.

Re: Nuclear scientist killed in Tehran was Iran's top Stuxnet expert

#25

Post by yuvadam »

All sings hint at the fact that this is a classic Mossad operation. The MO of a drive-by, close range, shooting or small explosive, is classic Mossad - and has been used in the past.

That said, DEBKAfile is a dubious source of educated speculation - at best. It is not considered a news source, and it does not operate by any standard. They publish mere theories which are loosely backed by hard facts.

It does make a good read, though - I'll give them that.

Re: Nuclear scientist killed in Tehran was Iran's top Stuxnet expert

#26

Post by pyre »

mnemonicsloth wrote: post #20
Leptosiphon wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to Iran, scientists aren't working on a weapons system, they are part of a civilian program to produce nuclear power plants. Following your logic, the people who competed in the DARPA grand challenge are not civilians and are legitimate targets for assassination by another world power.

> civilian program to produce nuclear power plants Desperately needed in a country with the world's third-largest oil reserves.

They should know better than anyone what the state of their reserves are. It would be a pity for them to squander the wealth that comes from selling their oil without having created any lasting infrastructure.

Re: Nuclear scientist killed in Tehran was Iran's top Stuxnet expert

#27

Post by jaekwon »

cma wrote: post #21
natrius wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a scientist working on weapons systems (which is a debatable claim in this instance), you're not a civilian.

I don't disagree with you, but you can take it further: what if someone is growing potatoes, some of which go to feed weapons systems (troops)?

that would make you a potato farmer.

Re: Nuclear scientist killed in Tehran was Iran's top Stuxnet expert

#28

Post by radicaldreamer »

mnemonicsloth wrote: post #20
Leptosiphon wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to Iran, scientists aren't working on a weapons system, they are part of a civilian program to produce nuclear power plants. Following your logic, the people who competed in the DARPA grand challenge are not civilians and are legitimate targets for assassination by another world power.

> civilian program to produce nuclear power plants Desperately needed in a country with the world's third-largest oil reserves.

They have hardly any refining capacity to actually use those reserves.

There's no doubt though that they feel having nuclear weapons will be a deterrent after how close they came to having their government wiped out by Cheney et. al.

Re: Nuclear scientist killed in Tehran was Iran's top Stuxnet expert

#30

Post by sliverstorm »

Leptosiphon wrote: post #18
natrius wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a scientist working on weapons systems (which is a debatable claim in this instance), you're not a civilian.

According to Iran, scientists aren't working on a weapons system, they are part of a civilian program to produce nuclear power plants. Following your logic, the people who competed in the DARPA grand challenge are not civilians and are legitimate targets for assassination by another world power.

What are you talking about, 'legitimate targets'? There are no rules who they are allowed to attack and not allowed to attack. 'They' are capable of targeting any man in this country they like. This is why you either make friends with other countries or carry the biggest stick. We're already talking acts of war, it's not like you can increase the backlash any further than a declaration of war.

I think you're forgetting that war is not a board game with a friendly set of rules everyone has implicitly agreed to follow.

Post reply on HN