Should we be worried? The International Atomic Energy Agency has reported that the
Iranians' uranium enrichment programme is proceeding, though perhaps at a slower pace. Iran is not answering questions raised by western intelligence. The IAEA cannot exclude the possibility that the Iranian programme has military aspects. So, yes, there should be concern, but there is even more reason to be distressed that this has been going on for years in full view, yet has not been met with effective diplomacy.
The demands that Iran should accept ever more inspection are meaningless. They are not made to help Iran show its lack of weapons intentions but in the hope that convincing incriminating evidence will be found. However, if such evidence is not found it will - rightly - be said that even if there were no intention today to move to bomb-making, Iran could change its mind next year. The key point at issue is not Iran's intentions but its development of an industrial-scale capability to enrich uranium. Once such capability exists - whether in Iran, Egypt, Turkey or Indonesia - the country would be a shorter time away from a bomb if it wanted to make one. The further countries in sensitive regions are from that capability the better.
This is scary. He is making sense.
HOWEVER....
In the 1980s when Saddam Hussein was moving Iraq towards nuclear weapons (and Israel bombed the Osirak research reactor) Iran clearly could have claimed a strong incentive to develop a nuclear programme with a weapons option. However, after the defeat of Iraq in 1991 and 2003 Iran can no longer see the nation as a nuclear threat. Nor can it fear a nuclear attack from any neighbour, or even Israel. In these circumstances it might have been counterproductive for the Bush administration to threaten Iran by talking about all options being on the table and by dispatching aircraft carriers to the Persian Gulf. The Obama team might do better by adopting the line taken by the US in the talks with North Korea, and offer as part of a nuclear agreement guarantees against attacks from the outside and subversive activities inside Iran.
And there we have the entire failure of the UN. The UN stands for status quo. As envisaged by FDR and the formers in 1945 the UN would end aggression of one nation state against another. But here they cannot distinguish between those who seek to be free from a govt like the mullahs have, and some CIA-MI6 Mossadegh repeat mission (the likelihood of which is ZERO). We can guarantee as we did with Cuba that we will not invade, but how can we abandon those who look to us as the beacon of individual liberties?
Since Blix himself admits inspections are of no utility, even if we HAD some agreement how could it then be verified?
Blix also makes the assumption that Iran is a state whose ultimate policy is not OTHER. I'd like to believe that as well. Do we bet the ranch on that?
The only way we can be relatively comfortable is if the mullahs are GONE. Israel has had nukes probably since the 60's. Nobody is worried about it.
Wouldn't a representative democracy in Iran worried about secular education, jobs, roads, and other endeavors remove the onus from their U-235 enrichment efforts?
Read Blix here
This is utter nonsense. The reason why inspections are useless is because of the nature of the accusation against Iran is baloney -- of "intending to seek the capacity" to build nukes. Any country with a nuclear program can be equally accused, including both Brazil and Argentina which have enrichment programs. The fact is that no evidence whatsoever has been found to show that Iran has or intends to have a nuclear weapons program - ever.
ReplyDeleteArgentina and Brazil are not pariah states, Iran is.
ReplyDeleteAs for Iran's weapons program, I guess diagram instructions for molding uranium into warhead shapes, high explosive airburst tests, missile trajectory tests, and re-entry vehicle tests do not qualify as evidence of intent.
Rather than a "pariah state" the Non Aligned Movement which represents the majority of the world's nations expressed their support for Iran's position in the nuclear dispute.
ReplyDeleteAnd diagrams for building nukes can be found at your local library and government agency declassified documents department (Read up on the X Country experiments) IRan wouldn't need the information to mold uranium shapes since it already has more advanced technology. And the claims about "high explosive airbust tests" etc were never substantiated because they were obtained from a phoney-baloney "laptop of death" computer that the US refuses to allow indepedent experts to verify (aka "URanium from Niger")
Sorry, make that the Nth COuntry Experiment:
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nth_Country_Experiment
And for declassified docs, see for example:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1931103.stm
Even David Albright of ISIS admitted that the uranium molding diagram was useless since it had no measurements etc.
Don't be a sheep. THink.
Even if the high explosive airburst tests were never substantiated, how about the re-entry vehicle testing? What would be the purpose of researching a re-entry vehicle for conventional weapon purposes? Was this also apart of this "phoney-baloney 'laptop of death' you speak of? The link you provided from the BBC does not prove anything. All it says is that the know-how to build an atomic bomb is publicly available and easy to do if you have enough enriched uranium. What is not public knowledge, however, is molding the uranium into a warhead and miniaturizing the warhead to fit into a missile. This is speculated to be a major difficulty for the North Koreans in arming their Taepodong-2 ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads, despite the fact they already posses nuclear weapons.
ReplyDeleteRegarding David Albright, please provide a link. The link I came across says quite the opposite:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/14/AR2008061402032.html?hpid=topnews
Perhaps you have a more recent link that says otherwise.
In regard to the Non-Aligned Movement, why would the movement criticize Iran, one of their fellow members, in the nuclear dispute? The organization is completely opposed to hegemony and any country that is at some sort of odds with the United States is largely supported in their activities, whatever they may be. Iran is a self proclaimed arch-nemesis of Israel and openly claims to seek its destruction with its rhetoric ranging from the Ayatollahs to the President. We all know how much the Non-Aligned Movement loves Israel (See Havana Declaration of 1979). If you look at many of the members of the Non-Aligned Movement, they are indeed the paragon of democracy, human rights, and everything that is good in this world.
As for the sheep remark, I have thought and still don’t find your argument compelling. You may not think there is any evidence available that indicates Iran’s intent towards a legit nuclear weapons program, but I will continue to disagree. You can have a constructive discussion without the necessity to act like an elitist smartass.
EPA - would come on our Gathering Storm Radio Show on 3/6 to discuss the stock market/economy/ etc. for 30 minutes?
ReplyDeleteEmail me at gsradio@mail.com
yup and yup..will do
ReplyDeleteAnonymous no other nation ON THE PLANET has ever had every SINGLE leader utter plans to destroy another for the sake of ending their peoples lives, and their religion FOR RELIGIOUS reasons.
ReplyDeleteAchmadinejad is not only not alone, he is just ONE of them all.
WHY?
Next, while it is true that enrichment is a generalized process, 5000+ P2 centrifuges are not necessary to achieve this, ESPECIALLY since the Russkies have volunteered to provide all the U-235 fuel needed. Of course in this way it's all audited, PRECISELY what the Iranians refuse to do.
WHY?
Last and worst, warhead and delivery developments have continued FULL SPEED.
Bleatings about support by third world nations not only are unimpressive they are IRRELEVANT to the discussion.
In Iran we have BOTH the capability, AND the demonstrated, intent broadcast by every leader they have had to destroy the LITTLE SATAN .. those are both unarguable facts
Your problem is that you require the head of the program to be displayed in the building on the Eat River admitting they are doing what we all know they wish to do and have said they wish to do... as Rafsanjani the 'pragmatist', the 'moderate' said unequivocally...
"The use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground whereas it will only damage the world of Islam"
EPA
ReplyDeletePlease call into the show on Friday, 3/6 at 12:30 PM PST.
Number is (646) 915-9870.
Thx
EPA - sorry wrong time.
ReplyDeletePlease call in at 12:05 PM PST on Friday 3/6.
Number is (646) 915-9870.
Thx