Norman Podhoretz takes note of some questions about it:
…I entertain an even darker suspicion. It is that the intelligence community, which has for some years now been leaking material calculated to undermine George W. Bush, is doing it again. This time the purpose is to head off the possibility that the President may order air strikes on the Iranian nuclear installations. As the intelligence community must know, if he were to do so, it would be as a last resort, only after it had become undeniable that neither negotiations nor sanctions could prevent Iran from getting the bomb, and only after being convinced that it was very close to succeeding. How better, then, to stop Bush in his tracks than by telling him and the world that such pressures have already been effective and that keeping them up could well bring about “a halt to Iran’s entire nuclear weapons program”—especially if the negotiations and sanctions were combined with a goodly dose of appeasement or, in the NIE’s own euphemistic formulation, “with opportunities for Iran to achieve its security, prestige, and goals for regional influence in other ways.”
Me, too; I haven’t read the actual NIE, but it is reported that while the NIE is highly confident that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003, Iran continues to enrich a sort of uranium which is really only useful in a nuclear weapons program. In technical terms, to say something like that is known as bullsh**. Its like saying that the illegals have stopped trying to cross the border, but are still digging that tunnel under the fence…
Someone at State and/or CIA is merely trying to undercut the President’s stated policy of not allowing Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. Yet another lesson in the absolute necessity of any future GOP Administration to fire each and every person hired or promoted by a previous Democratic Administration. Aside from that, I don’t think this NIE will amount to a hill of beans as far as President Bush is concerned – it won’t be an NIE which decides what to do about Iran, but President Bush after carefully weighing all the available data.
Blogs For Victory 
Iran stopped AFTER being surrounded by US troops and BEFORE sanctions.
AND he stopped the programs in North Korea (who used the stuff Clinton gave him to build it up) and in Libya.
He did what Democrats could not do. He eliminated the nuclear programs in three hostile countries. You yourselves are arguing he did this according to the NIE.
How can you hate so much? This is objectively a good thing. Iraq must have actually played a part. His legacy is in fact vindicated.
Kahn.
The argument is that to this day, he is still sabre rattling for no reason.
The argument is that just a month or two ago Bush AND Cheney were both talking about WWIII and how Iran must be stopped at all cost.
Meanwhile at the same time one of two things were true:
1) He was a genius and stopped their nuclear program and didn’t know it, hence the saber rattling. OR…
2) He knew that it stopped and just didn’t care.
You know Kahn, you seem to be the only one reveling in this absurdly outrageous meme of Bush having ANYTHING to do with nuclear deterrence.
I find it great fun watching you live in, and justify your fantasy world.
Agent Fear,
Maybe the problem is that we keep asking the Iranians if they are trying to build a “nucular weapon” and they keep looking at each other, shrugging their shoulders and replying, “No, we are not trying to acquire a ‘nucular’ weapon.”
Wisdom, talent, moxie…and a sense of humor.
Thank you for being here Diana Powe.
You are entirely too kind, but thanks.
agent fear
Q: What do you get when you cross a bad politician with a lawyer?
A: Chelsea.
Q: Why did God create Democrats?
A: In order to make used car salesmen look good.
Q: What happens if Bill Clinton gets a shot of testosterone?
A: He turns into Hillary.
Question: What’s the difference between Carville and a bald monkey?
Answer: A sports jacket.
Question: Why can’t liberals find facts?
Answer: They aren’t looking for any
Kahn
Does a guy making threats to wipe Israel off the map, that insists on his rights for enriching uranium, sound like something that could be a big disaster ?
I agree with you Bush has made the world a safer place, Libya, North Korea, gave up their nuclear weapons programs, No more Saddam lobbing scuds into Israel or Invading Kuwait.
G.W Bush is greener than Al Gore he protected some wetlands for wildlife right here south of Detroit. The ten percent ethanol cut was a excellent idea, it replaced an ether cut that polluted more. And Ultra low sulfer diesel, that pollutes the air less than regular diesel and biofuels developed as well. From federal grants to the U of M and tank factory up here.
Agent, then why did Libya, Iran, and North Lorea stop?
Eric,
I know that Iran is still a threat and I know they are still enriching uranium. They still need to be stopped ans their program could easily be restarted. In some ways, there’s no reason to restart until they stockpile uranium. I get that.
But the official estimate is that they stopped.
So, arguing with the liberals thats its a put up job is pointless. But putting them in the position to acknowledge the logical conclusion of their argument is good. Bush saved us, but he’s trying to cover it up?
No – Bush saved us, but he recognized that the job isn’t finished.
Well since this is turning into comedy night, let me put in my 2 cents worth. There is a ringtone for teens that adults can’t hear. you can find it at:
[audio src="http://www.smh.com.au/audio/teenringtone.wav" /]
I tried it today with my kids. I can’t hear it, but it bugs the heck out of them (I tried it out several times to make sure). One of my students asked if there was a tone adults could hear, but they couldn’t. I told them yes. Then I said “Do your homework”. They all said they couldn’t hear me. LOL
How long before 3,000 centrifuges produce enough material for a dirty bomb or two?
I’m sure Iran would be more than happy to provide Al Qaeda with enough material to use on a few American cities!
“…roughly 55 pounds of highly enriched uranium or plutonium is needed in most instances to fashion a crude nuclear device. …a tiny fraction of that is enough for a dirty bomb.”
“A facility with 3,000 centrifuges could produce enough enriched uranium to produce one atomic bomb in about a year, according to experts.”
“…the head of Iran’s atomic energy organisation reaffirmed Tehran’s ultimate aim of installing 50,000 centrifuges to enrich uranium.”
“The two Hungarians and one Ukranian arrested were allegedly trying to sell just under half a kilogram of weapons-grade uranium in powder form – enough, police say, to build a dirty bomb.” (Roughly 1 pound!)
With just 3,000 centrifuges, Iran could produce roughly 55 pounds of enriched uranium per year, or about 1 pound per week — enough for 1 dirty bomb per week!
A month’s production is enough for simultaneous attacks on 4 American cities.
The results of such an attack on America’s and the World’s economy would be devastating, not to mention the many tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars and months or years it would take to clean up the mess, added to the hysteria, fear, and disruption it would create in America, Europe, and the entire world!
Anyone who believes Iran has given up on it’s nuclear weapons program is a fool!
AAR
Tiredofliberalbullshit,
“LiberalTwit, the UN still has documention stating that 1000s of Iraqi WMDs are UNACCOUNTED…..you know MISSING.”
Those would be the same weapons that the White House sanctioned weapons inspectors David Kay, and Charles Duelfer both said don’t exist any more. It’s amazing how little facts mean to you. Anything that conflicts with your personal worldview, and beliefs can’t possibly be correct. The two American Weapons inspections teams, and the President of the United States have all admitted that there are no WMD in Iraq. Yet you still cling to the belief that there were. Unbelievable.
“Up until 2001 libs publicly stated that Saddam and his WMDs were a threat.
Funny what political expediency does…….”
No it’s called being logical. See the difference is that Democrats (and independents, and, well the majority of the country really) have come to the logical conclusion that since there is no evidence that Iraq possessed WMD, then they almost certainly didn’t possess WMD. Republicans on the other hand invent wild theories on where the non existent WMD went, all in an effort to avoid facing responsibility for helping to cause one of the worst strategic disasters in a American history.
The difference is that Democrats (and the majority of the country) NOW believe, based on all the available evidence, that Iraq did not possess WMD. Republicans still cling to the belief that Iraq did possess WMD, despite all the evidence pointed to the exact opposite conclusion.
Kahn: No – Bush saved us, but he recognized that the job isn’t finished.
I’m afraid you can’t have it both ways: one alternative indicates finality, the other doesn’t. For the record though, I agree that the job isn’t finished. It’s not finished in Iraq, in Iran, in Afghanistan, in North Korea, in Pakistan, in Lebanon, in Palestine, and various other places.
I also understand what you’re saying, and I also understand that in many respects we’re playing devil’s advocate from somewhat different perspectives. But I suspect that if we were inclined to sit down over a beer, or a green tea or whatever, there might be a lot we’d agree about. We might have to rumble around on the floor a while before we did, but still, lol!
Perhaps I’m being overly pithy in saying this, but my big problem with the Bush administration (at least insofar as his adventures in the ME is concerned) is that I do very earnestly feel that he was too quick on the trigger in Iraq. And because he was so it created all kinds of problems all over the place — the repurcussions rippled not only within Iraq, but all over the region and elsewhere. They still do. Bush has improved in the latter part of his second term, but my impression is that he’s still scrambling to play catch-up. I don’t hate the man, far from it. But I do think he allowed to many in his administration to operate on automatic pilot for too long. Trust and loyalty are admirable traits, but I really do think he was too trusting and too loyal to too many people, even when it became apparent that they weren’t worthy of it. I’m a big fan of Ronald Reagan. I’m not saying he was perfect — no one is. But he had a saying that I think applies on every level, from international relations to intergovernmental relations, to interactive relations, to interpersonal relations… trust but verify.
So yeah, I understand it when you and others say that the findings of the current NIE on Iran should not be overstated. The report indicated high confidence that Iran’s suspended their nuclear weapons program, but made no intimations at all that they abandoned it. Rather, it indicated that Iran has pursued those elements those elements that could be construed as “peaceable”, even though they are dual purpose. And that should be a concern for everyone. Then again, how to effectively deal with it should also be a concern for everyone. But I’m guessing both those levels of nuance gets lost in the political cacaphony.
Sorry… in my last post I said: “I do very earnestly feel that he was too quick on the trigger in Iraq.” What I should have said was: “I do very earnestly feel that he was too quick on the trigger in Iraq and too unprepared for the consequences.”
AAR: “The two Hungarians and one Ukranian arrested were allegedly trying to sell just under half a kilogram of weapons-grade uranium in powder form – enough, police say, to build a dirty bomb.” (Roughly 1 pound!)
Was the source Iran? I don’t freakin’ think so. I mean really… WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU!!?? For goodness sakes!
AAR
Ricorun,
Anyone who has read or seen the story knows the source was not Iran. I thought that was obvious, but apparently not.
The quote was intended to show a real life example where terrorists are already trying to obtain nuclear material for a dirty bomb, and to point out (reaffirm) the small amount needed to produce one — approximately one pound.
Iran could produce that amount in one week with the 3,000 centrifuges it claims to have in operation now or in the near future. At that rate, one month’s production — given or sold to Al Qaeda — would be enough to attack four major American cities. If the American people think Katrina was a disaster, imagine making New York, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, and San Francisco uninhabitable at the same time. Imagine what would happen to America’s and the World’s economies if those cities, their economies, their government and financial institutions, their output, and everything about them just ceased to operate — for years!
Not only could such a device be delivered by conventional transportation, but that relatively small amount of nuclear material and the associated conventional explosives could be delivered by SCUD or similar missiles, including Iran’s latest models, launched from barges or ships operating off our coasts or Israel’s coast from international waters!
Are you going to deny that too?
AAR
Wow! What a thread!
DP, you certainly have a way with words, but have you ever heard the phrase “keep it pithy”?
I always thought we were here to express our opinions, fight for our political preferences and allow anyone with an opposing view (as long as it’s conservative…LOL)to chime in…but not to write a book about it! Just kidding.
But your posts are enlightening DP. hat tip to your writing skills.
Rico – I disagree. Getting three of our enemies to abandon their nuclear programs is a major accomplishment.
But I think he feels the celebration on Iran is a little premature, as they are still producing uranium. Liberal poster here however seem to think it’s not premature and conservatives are warmongers. OK, I say. You’re right it’s over. You’re welcome.
BUT, since WE did this, can ya back off a little and admit we know what we’re doing while we just kinda pour water on the embers?
Get it. North Korea and Libya alone are major – Iran also is incredible.
AAR: Ricorun, Anyone who has read or seen the story knows the source was not Iran. I thought that was obvious, but apparently not.
I appreciate the difficulty. Many times when I follow a comment with “lol”, some don’t recognize the joke I’m trying to make. It’s gotten so I don’t always bother anymore — if you get it you get it, and if you don’t you don’t. I do still thow in a “so to speak” when I’m trying to be ironic or metaphorical. And sometimes I’m downright cryptic because I try to be overly pithy and end up making too many assumptions. Pithy is faster though, so I appreciate the pressure I’ve received in that regard. But I always try to be honest — even when you, or others, don’t understand me.
But in your case you have a more difficult problem: as you stated, sometimes your intent is to be honest and sometimes your intent is propaganda. I have yet to refine my ability to distinguish between the two. And I suspect others are suffering from the same difficulty. I have no problem if you want to spew propaganda. That’s fine with me. I’d just rather not partake in it.
Now, back to the original issue — about rogue sources for “dirty bombs”… It seemed to me that you were implying that Iran was not just a possible source, but a probable source. In fact, I’m inclined to think you were INTENTIONALLY implying it. If so, you should be ashamed. But in all honesty, I don’t know when you’re exaggerating for purposes of propaganda (which is fine, I guess), or just sloppy or mistaken (I have even less problem with that), or outright lying — and that’s a problem. The trouble is, if I were to choose, I have to say I think you were lying. Listen to what you said. Either you’re lying or you’re downright ridiculous.
If you as a Republican are so afraid in this world it is high time for you get a dog. There are plenty waiting for adoption after Katrina.
I was thinking of getting a cow; are you up for adoption, plaindumbcowjane? And, btw, you don’t stagger when you walk, do you?
btw, it’s not the government’s job to protect animals during hurricanes. The USCG pulled some 30,000 people off rooves during Katrina, you stupid cow–these people should’ve evacuated when they were advised, days in advance, that a major hurricane was coming their way. But, like yourself, they expected the government to come to their rescue. So, my question to you is, why didn’t ol’ “Chocolate City” Nagin and Governess Blanco rescue them? Last time I checked, NOLA was a city, in a state, governed by local and state governments.
Why are you such a stupid beyotch???
How long will it take for intelligence “experts” to conclude they restarted it in 2004?!!!
Wait’ll late next year, AAR, when the report comes out that they have a weapon. Then, Bush can invade, unilaterally declare WWIII, and impose martial law here in the homeland. You and I can join his new anti-dissident task force, and round up all the cows. Hell, with all this warrantless surveillance going on, I’m sure the administration has names and addresses of all dissenters. We can round them up and send them to Git’mo for some good-ol’ American interrogation.
plaincowjane, what size prayer mat will you be needing? I can see Git’mo in your future.
Disclaimer: By stating “I can see Git’mo in your future,” I was in no way, shape or form, threatening to apprehend plaincowjane, without the authority of the administration. I am a peace-lovin’, lib-hatin’ redneck who loves his country, and who doesn’t want it to fall into the hands of neo-Stalinists such as plaincowjane and the rest of the MoreOn/DailyKooks crowd.
Have a nice day, and beware–big brother is listening!!! lol!!!
Hatecows: Thought I’d throw this one in for ya
SOCIALISM: You have two cows. State takes one and give it to someone else.
COMMUNISM: You have two cows. State takes both of them and gives you milk.
FASCISM: You have two cows. State takes both of them and sell you milk.
NAZISM: You have two cows. State takes both of them and shoot you.
BUREAUCRACY: You have two cows. State takes both of them, kill one and spill the milk in the sewage system.
CAPITALISM: You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull.
Pure capitalism will cannabalize the poor like myself first. But as A general rule is the right answer. I think opening the Alternative Energy market is what is best for the U.S
Ricorun,
…if I were to choose, I have to say I think you were lying.
If you had to choose, you’d be wrong! Although, I can understand your conclusion.
My intent was to provide a list of short “bullet like” talking points and facts which served as the basis for my conclusion.
Perhaps I should have said something like: Terrorists are already actively trying to obtain nuclear materials for a dirty bomb as evidenced by the recent story of “…two Hungarians and one Ukranian arrested … [for] allegedly trying to sell just under half a kilogram of [non-Iranian] weapons-grade uranium in powder form – enough, police say, to build a dirty bomb.” (Roughly 1 pound!)
I don’t recall saying anything about me deliberately lying. I do recall saying that propaganda techniques work just as well for spreading the truth, as Liberals so effectively use it for spreading lies!
That’s at least twice in the past few days you’ve said I should be ashamed, but in fact, I don’t have anything for which I should be ashamed!!!
I have never claimed to be an eloquent speaker or exceptional writer. I just manage to get by — most of the time!
AAR