Notice, btw the neat complete untruth at the end:
Behind their show of unity about Iran's clandestine efforts to manufacture nuclear fuel, however, is a continuing debate among American, European and Israeli spies about a separate component of Iran's nuclear program: its clandestine efforts to design a nuclear warhead.
The Israelis, who have delivered veiled threats of a military strike, say they believe that Iran has restarted these "weaponization" efforts, which would mark a final step in building a nuclear weapon. The Germans say they believe that the weapons work was never halted. The French have strongly suggested that independent international inspectors have more information about the weapons work than they have made public.
Meanwhile, in closed-door discussions, American spy agencies have stood firm in their conclusion that while Iran may ultimately want a bomb, the country halted work on weapons design in 2003 and probably has not restarted that effort -- a judgment first made public in a 2007 National Intelligence Estimate.
The debate, in essence, is a mirror image of the intelligence dispute on the eve of the Iraq war.
This time, United States spy agencies are delivering more cautious assessments about Iran's clandestine programs than their Western European counterparts.
Last time I checked there was planetwide unanimity on Saddam's and WMD, only over which ones and how much of each was there variance. In this case we, the USA, are DELUSIONAL.
Nations do not create clandestine nuclear fuel plants and the logistical and military programs to defend them and keep them secret, to protect their U-235 and/or plutonium cycle development and keep it safe for generation of electricity when they are sitting on an ocean of oil. They do this for only one reason.
And what can we expect from these talks tmw with this new plant on the table?
The departing chief of the I.A.E.A., Mohamed ElBaradei, recently argued that the case for urgent action against Iran was "hyped." He acknowledged, however, that Iran has refused, for two years, to answer his inspectors' questions about evidence suggesting that it was working on weapons design.
To some people the climax and denouement of this has been quite obivous FOR YEARS.
Iran is seeking delivarable nuclear weapons
Nothing but force can stop that, IF THAT CAN, especially if it is Israel alone which remains to deliver the blow. After all, the problem is not nukes themselves, IT IS THE MULLAHS.
The result of Iran with nuclear weapons WILL BE a nuclear arms race in the middle east, spurring other nations such as South Korea, Japan and Brazil and Venezuela, and a region wide nuclear war.
J Carter will have given us the Iran we have today, and his son on crack, Barack Obama will have begat a nuclear Iran, and it's consequences.
Iran will have enough U-235 THIS YEAR. As for a deliverable weapon, just add a lead lined panel back, one or two or three Hezballah or HAMAS dupes, a coat of paint and a little bad luck. Mosul, Irbil, Juffair or any american base, Tel Aviv, Abqaiq... all within range.
The Iranians see their national security issues in a clear, if different color light and they are not afraid to carry out a set strategy in pursuit of their goal. Why this is not clear is BEYOND ME
6 comments:
Who has the most to lose when Iran goes nuclear? Israel. Who has, due to these threats, proven their intelligence capabilities? Israel.
Obama, with his not well hidden anti semitism combined with his "I am god & will change the world with my tongue" narcisist personality, is calling our intelligence communities shots. Combine that with the admittence of the not so secret second site, the truthfulness of any intelligence coming from the US should be looked at as highly suspicious. I have the utmost respect for Israel and pray they continue on, despite Obama, in doing what is right for their country.
you forgot to mention that for the last 8 years a republican president did even less to stop them than obama.
Anonymous,
The only thing MORE that Obama has done with regards to Iran, is make things worse.
Let's start with Obama's message to Iran. In contrast to Bush's message (which spoke directly to the people), Obama only spoke to the Mullahs.
Then, you have the (obviously) rigged and fraudulent election. Which, despite the obvious outrage by the Iranian people, he refused to condemn. Only stating, that it was up to the people of Iran to make the decision whether it was rigged or not. Did he not see the Iranian people, immediately stand up and condemn the election? Was the message that the Iranian people were sending to him, yes to him directly, not loud enough?
Then, you have the brutality the regime rained down on the people. Obama, in the interest of building is friendship with the mullahs, refused to come right out and condemn this violence.
And that leads us to his illusion of grandour. That despite the evidence that the mullahs will ever give in on their dreams of becoming a nuclear power, he believes he will be able to sit down with them and without any preconditions, somehow talk them out of it.
I believe that Bush wanted to do more about Iran. But due in part to what we now know for a fact were lies in the NIE report, his hands were tied.
Where is the outrage from the left, now that it has been proven the NIE report was a fabrication? The left sure didn't have a problem using it to tie Bush down. Admit he was right and you were wrong.
No, Bush didn't do enough to stop Iran. But do not try to convince us that Obama is doing more to stop them.
They probably stopped working on the design b/c they bought the design from the NoKos or Khan, no?
Looks like we have traitors in the intelligence services. This has nothing to do with the O.
I do blame Bush for his own brand of arrogance and short-sightedness.
And I blame myself for being so damn passive during those years. Guess I did not want to "pile on" with the Left in Bush-bashing.
I was wrong.
Anonymous is right, and we were complicit to an extent.
Although, around 2006-2007, I began writing that any CEO who responded to his board for years on end, when faced with a terrible problem, that "all options are on the table" would have been fired long ago.
I knew Bush was wrong. He was very wrong.
He really fucked us all up.
And, Obama is continuing it.
Bush did NOTHING to stop Iran, Obama is HELPING Iran ... in 2005 one might argue (stupidly, but plausibly) that negotiations might accomplish something, but now?
Obama is a delusional, narcissistic, dupe, filled, when it comes to defending america, or ANYTHING for that fact but attacking those who will never hurt him, the REPUBLICANS AND OTHER POLITICAL OPPONENTS - MORAL COWARDICE
Post a Comment