Hyperventilating About An Iranian Nuke
By Cernig Thursday Nov 20, 2008 7:00pm
The IAEA has produced its latest report on Iran and there are few surprises therein, certainly no "smoking gun".
"To date, the results of the environmental samples taken at FEP and PFEP2, and the operating records for FEP3, indicate that the plants have been operating as declared (i.e. less than 5.0% U-235 enrichment). Since March 2007, twenty unannounced inspections have been conducted at FEP"...."The Agency has been able to continue to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran."
Most importantly, the IAEA guarantees that all known activities are under Agency seal and surveillance, and cannot be used to produce a weapon without Agency knowledge.
That doesn't stop the New York Times publishing a wonderful bit of hyperventilation involving (as is usual) the fine journalism of David "Judy Miller In Drag" Sanger and Bill Broad.
Iran has now produced roughly enough nuclear material to make, with added purification, a single atom bomb, according to nuclear experts analyzing the latest report from global atomic inspectors.
The figures detailing Iran’s progress were contained in a routine update on Wednesday from the International Atomic Energy Agency, which has been conducting inspections of the country’s main nuclear plant at Natanz. The report concluded that as of early this month, Iran had made 630 kilograms, or about 1,390 pounds, of low-enriched uranium
But the really important part, underplayed by that lede and the headline "Iran Said to Have Nuclear Fuel for One Weapon", is that there's no sign of a "breakout"- kicking out the inspectors, breaking seals and switching of cameras - which would be a dead giveaway. It would take months thereafter (about half the time it took to enrich the stuff to LEU) to enrich that LEU to weapons grade, and that's to say nothing of actually building a bomb with it afterwards. A minimum timeframe is in the order of a year and a half, in which the West could decide what to do next.
In that regard, all the NYT piece has to say is that "The atomic energy agency said Iran was continuing to evade questions about its suspected work on nuclear warheads."
Whereas what the IAEA report really says is that:
"the Agency currently has no information — apart from the uranium metal document — on the actual design or manufacture by Iran of nuclear material components of a nuclear weapon or of certain other key components, such as initiators, or on related nuclear physics studies (GOV/2008/38, para. 21). Nor has the Agency detected the actual use of nuclear material in connection with the alleged studies."
and that:
Regrettably, as a result of the lack of cooperation by Iran in connection with the alleged studies and other associated key remaining issues of serious concern, the Agency has not been able to make substantive progress on these issues. For the Agency to make progress, an important first step, in connection with the alleged studies, is for Iran to clarify the extent to which information contained in the relevant documentation is factually correct and where, in its view, such information may have been modified or relates to non-nuclear purposes.
What alleged studies? The ones contained on the infamous Laptop of Death, which was given to an Iranian anti-regime group (read: the utterly-nutterly terrorists of the Mujahedeen e-Kalq) and thence to US intelligence, which the Bush administration has refused to turn over to the IAEA or let the Iranians see.
Many analysts, including those at the IAEA, have serious doubts about the authenticity of all the documents on the laptop. That hasn't stopped Sanger and Broad continually recycling their fearmongering and misdirection though - since at least 2005. The US says it won't turn its copies of documents over because it could reveal sources. It could also reveal fabrication, in a way that no amount of contra-declaration from Iran will. There's at least one instance where a document with handwritten notation on, Iran has produced an original which is un-anotated. Only examination of the US version has any chance of determining whether the handwriting was fraudulently added much later or whether it was added nearer the time of the original's production (which would suggest its part of a series of official Iranian copies, one written on when the original wasn't). In Iran's favor - worldwide practise is that small copy series are numbered in such tight-security circumstances, but the US-held version isn't numbered and neither is the original Iran-held one shown to the IAEA.
The spin that Iran's civilian nuclear power program is dangerous hinges upon whether the Laptop of Death is a credible source or not. The easiest way to find that out is by examining the US documents, not asking the Iranians to prove a negative, that it isn't. Neither Sanger and Broad nor any of the other war boosters, from Dick Cheney and Walrus Bolton on down, are likely to admit that though - and in the meantime the IAEA is being pressured behind the scenes to pressure Iran instead of stating the obvious. But recall that the last US National Intelligence Estimate came to the conclusion that the Iranian weapons program was cancelled in 2003, while it was still at a very early stage. Even if the laptop is genuine, all its information still refers to that pre-2003 period. That's what all the hyperventilating is based upon. Without that laptop information, with the dates carefully not mentioned, then we are left with the NIE and IAEA's finding that the Iranian weapons program ended in 2003 and that there is no sign that it has been restarted.
How long would it take Iran to build a nuke if it has no intent to turn that LEU into HEU for a weapon that it has no intention of designing, let alone building? Forever.
Login or Register to post comments.
But you know what? These guys are dangerous and we should watch them. I grew up during the cold war and have had my share of fake enemies, but Iran is a country we should watch. Call me naive, but any nation getting any nuclear weapons, however miniscule, is dangerous to us and israel. If Israel gets nuked, we are all in it together, like it or not. Iran with nuclear capabilities scares the s@#t out of me.
I could be wrong.
Your argument would carry a lot more weight had we not invaded a nation on false pretenses and have a nuclear arsenal capable of destroying the world 50 times over.
I guess we've burned a few international bridges that may take years to mend. Yeah, I worry more about our ridiculous nuclear arsenal a lot more than I do Iran's.
Case in point: what if Sarah Palin somehow became president? How would she use our vast nuclear arsenal? I shudder to think. I really do. So much power in the hands of our totally incompetent government. It's frightening.
It's all going to end badly.
I've never actually stayed up at night worrying about a nuke attack from Iran. They've not invaded any soverign nations for quite a long time and pretty much know they would, in fact, be obliterated, if they did the first strike.
Truthfully, I've been much more concerned that some fool in our own gov't., the one with his finger on the button, would fall off the wagon.....and, blammo!
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!
Iran wants electrical power for its people. The problem is, they are behind the times. Their capital didn't even have below ground sewage 30 years ago. They don't understand what a nuclear power standard will do. Instead of working on enrichment, they could be making deals with Germany to buy up photovoltaic panels.
[Yes it is. PS: Deleted. Flame bait-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. Uncle Joe, let us site monitor. You can help by flagging the offending comment-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. I am ending this flamefest now. I realize this was a reasonable statement, however it is a continuation of a flame war and it's off topic now-Sitemonitor]
Yes. You are wrong.
If you love Israel so much, as someone who was born and raised there myself, and later moved to the US, I have to tell you, move there. The government will welcome you in open arms and will start feeding you bullshit about how vulnerable that state is, surrounded by all the haters in the region. Heck, you'll even be able to go shoot yourself some Ayrabs in the West Bank and get some government subsidies to start your own illegal colony. It'll be fun. Just like in biblical times, except with more bigotry and arrogance. I say go for it.
Actually you know what, forget it, stay here. I get the sense you've already been fed that bullshit by your friends. No need to bother researching Middle Eastern politics either. No need to understand the economic counterweight that Iran serves against so-called Western hegemony in the region. Israel is already cutting deals with Persian Gulf states, over security and trade, the same goes for Saudi Arabia. The U.S. and Israel along with Sunni states are all buddy buddy now. The Shiah in Iran are a minority in the region.
So, yeah. Your dear beloved little innocent Tinker Bell is under siege. Someone call the Waaaaaambulance.
Lieberman will bomb Iran into oblivion. I'm so glad he's there to protect me. /snark
[Deleted. Abusive-Sitemonitor], the third holiest site in all of Islam, the place where Mohammed reportedly rose to heaven, IS IN JERUSALEM! No Islamic state will EVER nuke ISRAEL. EVER. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.
As long as Israel's terrorist acts against its neighbors continue unchecked and unabated (e.g. the carpet bombing of Lebanon with cluster bombs, which are a weapon of mass destruction, or the unprovoked bombing of Syria, among others), the likelihood of an "islamic bomb" increases every year.
Israel could have peace if it wanted (Palestinian autonomy, the 1967 borders) but instead wants the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their homeland. The deliberate isolation and starvation of Palestinian citizens (similar to what happened in the Lodz Ghetto) is just the latest example.
is there something wrong with my logic? even if iran developed a nuke are they really going to use it against us? we've been searching for an excuse to nuke them for years now. what do they stand to gain?
Don't put it past the right wing to fabricate evidence if it results in the US attacking Iran.
Seems to me the US is the only nation that has dropped nukes on civilian populations- so who the f**k is the US to decide which nations can and cannot have nukes? Is it to make the world safer- or to make sure the US maintains it's position of military superiority?
Will America ever practice what it preaches????
Especially when the US is handing such technology to Pakistan.
"WASHINGTON (AP) - An aide to Barack Obama's transition team says the president-elect is on track to nominate Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of state after Thanksgiving."
As tweety would say ,"Ha!"
I doubt Iran will commit suicide.
"Hillary Clinton - 'Would Obliterate Iran'":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u1nmGmtD18
Nuff said.
She said: '..we would BE ABLE to obliterate them'. Iran knows this,so I wouldn't get to excited...Nuff said.
i was still hoping for richardson....who i think is the best choice
honestly, why give the right meat to chomp on
Why make our decisions based upon their perferences? You think if we made all our choices with the right wing stamp of approval, they wouldn't chomp about something anyways?
While Richardson would be a fine choice, Clinton is a far better choice. She has considerably more experience on the international stage, and those people already like her and her husband. They know her and are comfortable with her.
do you know richardson's background?
Quit being so patronizing. I believe Senator Clinton's 8 years as First Lady and her current work, committees and travel she's done in 8 years as Senator is a bit more than the 18 months or so Richardson was Ambassador to the UN. She's more current on the national stage than Richardson is, I mean, his last 6 years as Governor of NM isn't much of an international job. Like I said in my prior post, he'd make a fine choice ... just Clinton is better, so no, I'm not kidding.
Of course Iran would never attack us but if made to look like they have the stuff (WMD'S) it makes it easier to pull off a false flag operation blaming Iran.
Worked in Iraq.
I'm for a declared nuclear free Middle East ,Right Mr. Spector?
Do civilized nations possess a nuclear arsenal? Really? I mean Really ?
The difference between nuclear fuel for a power plant and weapons grade uranium is the difference between 4% U-235 and 80% U-235. Enriching uranium to 80% is a far more involved process than enriching it to 4%. If Iran is only enriching to below 5%, then it doesn't matter how much uranium they have. They still can't make a bomb out of it.
Even if they do finally produce a bomb. Iran is of almost no concern in the scheme of things nukular.
The real powderkeg is Pakistan and India, two countries at each others throats continuously. If nuclear war occurs it's likely going to be between those countries.
India is a nuclear power, but India is not led by religious fanatics advocating suicidal behavior that also kills unwilling participants.
But the Hindu supremacists are, as always, awfully close to the levers of power. They're just religious fanatics advocating murderous behaviour that also kills willing participants, however. That's an important distinction...must be...
I see you're still monitoring this thread. I may have just made the last post here. If you get a chance to read it I'd be interested in your views. I posted it to more or less clarify my own point of view.
I am so tired about all this crap about how "terrible" Iran is.
Iran is no worse than most countries and is in fact better than many of the countries the US supports. It is long past time for the US to get over Iran throwing out the Shah and taking hostages to ensure he stayed gone. The US screwed up big time when it overthrew the ELECTED DEMOCRATIC government of Iran in 1955 and it quite rightly got its head handed to it in the 1970s for that.
Then the US funded and supplied all sorts of terrible weapons (chemical, etc.) to Saddam so he could attack Iran. One of the lessons Iran learned is they needed to be self sufficient in modern weapons (Hence their large military design and manufacturing sector) and that the US could NOT be trusted. If Iran gets nukes, it will be because they can not trust the US and/or Israel from attacking them again (the US for the THIRD time). Iran needs nukes to keep the US and/or Israel from attacking.
The sooner Iran tests a few nukes under their desert, the sooner both the US and Israel will be forced to deal with Iran as a peer instead of as someone to control by force.
Sure, Iran with nukes changes the balance of power in the ME (Israel loses big - Saudis have to accept Iran as peers) but that power shift is happening anyway. The US has shot itself in the head with a shotgun (Iraq and Afghanistan) and the situation in Israel with the Arabs is unstable and unsustainable. The settlers have very effectively prevented any realistic peace agreement so it is only a matter of time before a massive Israel/Arab war breaks out.
The hard reality Israel refuses to face is the world is awash in weapons that are equal to or BETTER than anything Israel has or will ever have (Israel has no "magic super weapon" hidden in a cookie jar). Israel's ability to force an unjust situation on the Arabs with the help of the US is ending, regardless whether Iran has nukes or not. Iran with nukes just accelerates the process.
Iranian leaders are not stupid nor irrational, so even after Iran has nukes, it will not attack Israel with the nukes. But, Iran may help facilitate an Arab/Muslim conventional armed attack on Israel and as I noted above, Israel no longer has the capability of resisting a modern Arab conventional weapon attack, and Israel would probably be overrun or would be forced to surrender on terms that would effectively end Israel as a Jewish state.
If Israel is stupid enough to attack Iran it will suffer greatly and if Israel is stupid enough to use their nukes when they are losing a conventional war, then Israel will just get nuked in return and over half the Jews on earth will disappear in a flash.
NOTE for all those that get your panties in a bunch at the mention of Israel getting nuked, I am NOT advocating it and expect if Israel just acts rationally and never uses its nukes, Israel will not get nuked. Sure it will lose its last war, but most of the people in Israel will only be forced to leave the ME and return to the places they (or their parents) came from, but will not be killed. I will grant that when the Israel/Arab war occurs, many Israelis will die (along with lots of Arabs/Muslim - that is just what happens during wars), but it will not be the Holocaust that Israelis threaten.
it is redicules to worry about iran possesing a nuke , even if they can make one its probably for self defence from americas agression and certainly the agression from israel, no nation would use a nuke in an act of war except in retaliation after being attacked especially since that nation would be completly destroyed for such an act by the us and certainly by israel, this is just so much bullshit , more of the same chicken little the skys falling in ! change your diapers and grow up!
say a prayer for him and his family
Thank you for continuing to debunk this, Cernig.
It's clear what the agenda is, with respect to Iran, and it's clear where that agenda is coming from... at least it seems clear to me.
would seem to be a key point here. The IAEA is pretty good at its' job but they can only inspect and monitor what they are allowed to inspect and monitor. This program, whatever it is, seems pretty lame. If the quantities stated are accurate then it's going to take a lot more than two years to secure usable quantities of weapons grade material. On the other hand, if this enrichment program is designed to produce fuel for power reactors it is equally lame and one would have to ask why'd they'd bother to reinvent a technology when the country is awash with hydrocarbons. The scale of this thing seems to be designed to annoy the West while remaining within the legal guidelines of the NPT. It doesn't mean you stop looking though. If the Iranians get caught gathering Polonium for an initiator or using the neutron flux from their existing facilities to generate Tritium or Lithium Deuteride then all doubt is removed.As far as the collateral technologies associated with weapons such as explosive lenses for implosion devices or timing circuits, they could be doing that at any number of facilities and no one would ever know. Certainly the Israelis managed to keep their program secret for a very long time indeed.
Maybe the reason they're trying to produce electricity with nuclear, is because most countries don't use oil to produce electricity, but to produce fuel. Iran doesn't have much (if any) coal, it does have a lot of natural gas, but doesn't produce much.
First, under the Nuclear treaties, Iran has every right to do what it is doing. In fact it is more closely monitored than any other country on Earth. Israel has not agreed to the treaty and refuses any inspection.
Second the IAEA is a lot more knowledgeable than you appear to understand. The uranium is fully controlled from the minute it is mined from the earth until it is disposed of after being used. Unless Iran has some super secret uranium source (very unlikely, since uranium mines are very visible to satellite images) and processing labs (possible but hard to keep secret over time), the IAEA knows everything. Note that every "fact" the US and Israel has given to the IAEA about Iran has PROVEN to be false! The US and Israel have sent the IAEA on hundreds of wild goose chases (this is one of the reasons Iran is starting to be harder to work with, they are tired of all the crap that the US and Israel make up).
As to why Iran wants nuclear power that is entirely "home grown," that is easy. The Iraq/Iran war (which Saddam started with US help) convinced the Iranian leadership that it must not rely on outsiders for anything, since outsiders could stab them in the back and leave them bleeding. Their goal is to be as self sufficient as possible. Look at how long it has taken Russia to get the first nuclear power station on-line. In addition, the hydrocarbons they have, are their primary source of wealth and they have decided that it should only be used to increase the national wealth, not used (wasted) internally since the longer they can sell it, they longer the country will have wealth. It appears the leaders of Iran understand the Peak Oil concept much better than the people in the US and want to have their country using non-oil based energy as soon as possible.
Basically, Iran is doing what the US should have been doing for the past 30 years, moving away from an oil energy economy to an alternative energy economy.
When you have a sucker customer, like the US and can use alternative energy internally, why not do it?
As for why Iran should build a nuclear weapon, that is also easy. Iran has been under constant deadly threat from the US for most of the last 50+ years. Even when the Shah was in power, most of the people of Iran were under deadly threat. Added to this is the irrational threats from Israel, who understand that if Iran can force the US to back down, Israel's ability to scare the Arabs is in deep trouble. The only thing keeping Israel alive is the US threat to wipe out anyone that threatens Israel. Once the US is neutered (which it is doing a fine job of doing to itself), Israel has a dismal future.
Ultimately Israel is the elephant in the room. the key to this whole mess. Unfortuately, the US is unwilling and unable to deal with Israel in a rational, non-emotional, realistic way, so the US keeps digging itself further into trouble and scares Iran into "needing" nuclear weapons to protect itself from Israel and the US.
From a realistic Iranian perspective, needing self sufficiency with nuclear power and nuclear weapons is a perfectly rational response to US aggression and how the rest of the world kowtows to the US.
Maybe if the rest of the world was more willing to slap the US around a little, Iran wouldn't be so nervous.
but I think it worthwhile to reply to this statement. See if you can find a post where I have indicated that I have less than respect for the IAEA and the excellent work they do. I have equal respect for Cernig's political analysis. He and I tend to analyze things from a different perspective however. I do tend to view things from a more technological viewpoint because that is how I was trained. The idea you have advanced that the IAEA is all knowing is nonsense. I am both a firm believer in the non-proliferation treaty and that nuclear power is essential to the future of all of humanity. I have never suggested that Iran does not have a right to peaceful applications of nuclear power. However developing nuclear technologies from first principles instead of working with any number of nations who could legally provide it to them is ridiculously expensive compared to their existing energy alternatives. They are not economically ahead selling oil to finance a nuclear power development. Furthermore Iran is the proud possessor of a very limited quantity of low grade ore that is prohibitively expensive to beneficiate into fuel so that if they decided to pursue any large scale power reactors they would very likely be dependent on foreign supplies in any event.
Aside from the fact that the world will never become safer when a nation of whatever stamp joins the nuclear weapons club, especially one as unstable and ideologically driven as Iran, Israel will never be persuaded to eliminate their own arsenal as long as the possibility exists of their sworn enemies developing or acquiring it's own. You'll pardon me if I find your argument that Iran isn't developing weapons but that it would be "rational" for them to do so somewhat contradictory. I don't think developing nuclear weapons is ever a rational response yet I fear Iran is very much tempted to do so. Hence I believe it is the duty of the IAEA and every other intelligence agency to keep an eye on this situation.
The idea that a country like Israel with as many as two hundred nuclear weapons and large well trained conventional forces would be at the mercy of their neighbors were it not for the US is frankly silly. I don't propose to engage the anti-AIPAC/Jewish world conspiracy nonsense on this thread. It isn't worth commenting on.
"I am both a firm believer in the non-proliferation treaty and that nuclear power is essential to the future of all of humanity."
You claim nuclear power is essential to the future of all humanity but don't want Iranian physicists developing "first principles"? I would first counter your claim that nuclear power is vital to the future of humanity on the basis of Solar Deserts alone which can produce hundreds of times more energy than all humanity currently consumes from all other sources combined, and without a single toxic element or classified technology. Second, you should be aware that Iranians were being trained in nuclear technology by the US government all through the 1970's, and that they are in fact working from first principles we created. Third is that the future of nuclear science will and should continue, but not for the primary power-grid, but for physics advancement in general and special applications, ie, environmental resets of chronically toxic hazards, H3 production in isolated regions, and many uses not even thought of yet.
Iran's stated and confirmed ambitions for the technology allow them the potential to innovate new or better uses, in part because they don't think like the west does, but they also have seen the proof that they cannot depend on the west as a source for anything vital to their own future. You know the history.
"especially one as unstable and ideologically driven as Iran, Israel will never be persuaded to eliminate their own arsenal as long as the possibility exists of their sworn enemies developing or acquiring it's own."
Funny you would compare a culture surviving some 6,000 years continuous, and that hasn't declared war in some 300+ years, to Israel which is founded on military aggression, possesses un-inspected/non-IAEA-compliant nuclear weapons, as if Israeli's will somehow become more civil, give up their nukes, or suddenly decide to comply with IAEA if Iran disappears...hmmm
Finally,
"a country like Israel with as many as two hundred nuclear weapons and large well trained conventional forces would be at the mercy of their neighbors were it not for the US is frankly silly"
The Israeli army is tiny compared to the number of enemies it has created in the past 50 years. It is surrounded by a hundred million people who believe the Israeli's respect one thing and one thing only: Their US Military-Backed Military Force. Nuclear weapons, even the 200 you mention are no match for their enemies because they would have to blanket the entire ME and they would go down too. But it is funny you mention those speculated 200 weapons because that's what Israel's neighbors point out, and the IAEA is refused compliance... talk about "unstable and ideologically driven" power!
The fact you pipe up whenever Iran is the topic of discussion tells me you're getting paid to be a shill by some AIPAC jagoff.
"Certainly the Israelis managed to keep their program secret for a very long time indeed."
Yes they have, by playing the victim card and practicing deception at every turn. And thanks to people like you, Israel's job has been easier.
to have accidentally hit the "m" key instead of the "n" key when typing your handle. You might want to fix that.
Gotta throw a little gas on the fire so it's burning nice and hot when President Obama takes office. Not going to speculate on who's tossing the gas but I would guess the usual suspects.
Seems a little transparent, even for "them."
Israel is not an ally. Israel is the 51st state. Like it or not. We're in this together. If Israel gets nuked, the Palestinian suffering will end and no one wants that. Especially, none of you who feign loyalty to the United States. So, join me in rallying against Iran. The same country that held vigils after 9/11 in solidarity with the United States. The same way Benjamin Netanyahu showed his solidarity when he said "This is good for Israel", knowing full well that 9/11 gives Israel a carte blanche to commit atrocities against the Palestinians while asking for the world's sympathy 60 years after the Holocaust. Talk about milking it for all its worth.
And don't even start with that Anti-Semitic bullshit drivel.
Has anyone forgotten that it took only one bullet to start World War I? Iran has certainly made no secret of its desire to annihilate Israel, nor has it bothered to concede its intent to supplant more moderate Saudi Arabia as the Islamic power broker in this unstable region. What most people either don't realize or choose to selectively ignore is that the United States and Israel have mutual defense treaties with one another (i.e. if Israel is attacked, the United States is required by this treaty to come to Israel's aid and defense). Iran really only has two uses for a nuclear weapon: use it immediately against Israel, or use the threat of it to menace other nations in the region. We're not talking about reasonable, rational, stable people in charge of Iran. We're talking about leaders who talk favorably not only of committing suicide for their religion, but in taking along unwilling participants in their religious suicide in the name of their fanaticism. OK, so it's only one nuke. Has anyone ever studied the effects of a nuclear blast? Even if you are not immediately incinerated and survive the blast, you still suffer second and third degree burns, leukemia, radiation poisoning, and the entire region will be contaminated for decades or even centuries. We're talking about millions of people dying and suffering. That's just from one nuclear bomb. Do you really think a fanatical nation like Iran will stop with just one bomb? How many of these weapons should Iran have before it becomes a "problem" for those who think people are "hyperventilating" over one nuke? If the potential annihilation of millions isn't a problem for you, then you have a problem far more serious than a nuclear weapon: you don't take the threat of nuclear annihilation and radiation poisoning seriously. Iran is a nation that has stated pretty clearly it does not intend to live peacefully with Israel or any other nation that does not share its fanatical views.
"We're talking about leaders who talk favorably not only of committing suicide for their religion, but in taking along unwilling participants in their religious suicide in the name of their fanaticism..."
All this low budget Iran drama is over supposed "talk"? What Iranian "leaders" are you even referring to? Sticks and stones? glass houses?
Ahmadinejad is not a commander'n chief president, he never advocated wiping Israel off the map and couldn't order it done even if he wanted to.
Iran wants a nuke to keep another 'Operation Ajax' from happening, remember that? the US overthrew Irans democracy, replaced the elected president Mosaddeq, Time magizenes Man of the year, and installed a despot puppet who made Iranians miserable. Meanwhile US/UK oil interests were flat out no apologies STEALING Irans resources literally right out from under them.
Operation Ajax was accomplished via 100% US / UK "terrorism": journalists killed, jailed, tortured, car bombs at mosks, targeted political assassinations, decent violently crushed... stuff that makes Saddam look like Mother Teresa.
People here in the US are ignorant to the suffering caused in the name us the USA, but Iranians remember... they wake up every day under the rule of brutal mullahs because the land of the free murdered their freedom in its infancy.
Who could blame them for wanting to protect themselves from a repeat? look at the sociopaths, reprobates and losers in charge of the DC Mafia these days.. they'll gleefully summarily destroy an entire nation causing millions to suffer to get what they want.. just like we did back in the 50s.
Israel has nuclear weapons. Pakistan and India do too. Great Britain, France, China and North Korea have a bunch. The US and Russia have thousands of them. Iran has none. If it had one or some, it would never launch one at Israel which has hundreds and even without overkill assistance from the US could Iran into radioactive glass. The Iranians know this. They might be fools, but they are not stupid, and they have given no indication that they are suicidal. Nuclear weapons are deterrents against conventional military invasion. While nuclear powers peddle and steal nuclear technology from each other, it is unlikely that any of them would ever willingly transfer nuclear weapons technology into the hands of a terrorist organization, it is virtually certain they would never give up an actual weapon to anyone. Would you?
Yes, I am, apparently. I thought Iran was a place where women and children are subjected to Biblical mores of caste-system subjugation. Why is it ok for such a "backwards" society to develop nuclaer weapons if they have demonstrated such a lack of progressive culture? Doesn't it speak volumes about their GOVERNMENT'S irresponsibility?
Iranians enjoy 1000s of years of history we cannot even begin to comprehend. They are allowed to ignore "progressive culture" in favor of their ancient culture if they so choose. Its none of our business.
Our laws came from THEIR backward culture, code of Hammurabi anyone?.. who was the progressive culture then? eh? Oh wait, the US wasn't even a sperm-culture when those backward culture savages were writing our future penal code in 1760 BC.
But if the USA did exist then.. their culture of laws could claim "culture superiority" over ours. Then they could justify invading North America to keep whatever backward culture "freedom" thing we had going on from spreading.
Thankfully for us, the ancient cultures of the world minded their own business.. now there's a concept.
Great article by cernig and comments by spyguy, but one thing overlooked was that when the US "lost" 6 nukes last year Russia woke up and immediately announced a Caspian Basin Security Initiative which then mysteriously resulted in the release of the suppressed Iran-NIE that Darth Cheney was sitting on, for no apparent reason... Yes, it looks like a rather evil faction within the US was attempting to divert stray weapons to Barksdale, making it look like incompetence, something impossible within the parallel nuclear chains of command. Lots of heads have rolled including the highest civilian and military commanders who were in charge of the oversight, but we can probably all thank Patriots within the Air Force who universally refused to fly off to the ME with live nukes. Oh, and Yes, I think Darth Cheney is that evil.
More on point is that just because we've elected a non-neocon doesn't mean we've gotten rid of them. The NYT has long been infiltrated, like WSJ since Murdoch's purchase (I wish that family and others like the creator of myspace would stop selling out to this monster out of principle no matter how many billions he waves in their face!).
I will state the obvious: The only ones pushing the nuclear threat of Iran is the US MIC and Israel whose tentacles are so global and deep especially in Western Media that it only sounds like it's coming from diversified sources and opinions. When we American people finally get the neocons out of power and exposed for good, we will discover in Iran one of the richest cultures on Earth and true friends for progress.
The US overthrew Iranian democracy in 1953 to prevent Iran from profiting on their own oil, and then spent the last 55 years preventing it from refining raw crude in their own country - first when the puppet Shah government did as he was told, then since 1979 when the US prevented Iran from buying the technology to refine its own oil.
It's well known in enlightened and non-warmongering circles that the Iranians were after nuclear power for energy self sufficiency. The Iranians having to import oil and gasoline after exporting crude is like a nation having to import food because it's own grown food is exported.
But as always, it's all about keeping other countries in perpetual servitude to the US. How ironic that today the US "intelligence" community admits the US is a floundering empire that by 2025 will have lost its influence to India, China, Brazil and - of all countries - Iran.
Login or Register to post comments.