At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them
answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in
answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you
will be able to:
Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+
topics.
So what is the truth about Iran's nuclear program ?
Everyone hung their hat on the December 3 NIE about the Iranian nuclear program ,that they had stopped development programs in 2003 . The assumption was then that the threat about the Mullahs getting a bomb and the Mahdi Hatter making Jerusalem glow was being overstated .
But yesterday National Director of Intelligence Admiral Michael McConnell sang a different tune to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence ,testifying that "If I had 'til now to think about it, I probably would change a few things." ......., "I would change the way we describe the Iranian nuclear program. I would have included that there are the component parts, that the portion of it, maybe the least significant, had halted."
He said that the part of the program that had been suspended was a specific Iranian program to design warheads.Yesterday he admitted that "Declared uranium enrichment efforts, which will enable the production of fissile material, continue. This is the most difficult challenge in nuclear production. Iran's efforts to perfect ballistic missiles that can reach North Africa and Europe also continue."
"We remain concerned about Iran's intentions and assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons."
He warned in his annual threat assesment that Iran "would be technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a weapon" by the end of 2009.
Meanwhile the Russians have raised new doubts about Iran's program due to a missle test they conducted .Perhaps that will convince them of the folly of providing Iran with enriched uranium and upgraded anti-aircraft missile systems .
Well, I'm gonna ridicule you for suggesting that Bush bomb Iran and leave THAT mess to the next guy (or chick). If Iraq was dumb, and it was, this would be 100 times dumber.
I don't put it past the dufus in chief to do it, though.
Leaving a mess for the next president is of no concern when it comes to the defense of the country. We have to stop trying to manage the greatest country in the world by planning in 4 year increments.
I think that any action against Iran should occur when the chances of military success are best. The day after they nuke one of the middleast countries would not be the best timing. I can't envision the middleast with a nuclear-armed Iran.
Committing the country to a disastrous war (even more disastrous than the one he DID commit us to) and then going back home to clear brush would be the most stupid, short sighted and craziest thing he could do.
Well, Obama wants to smoke the peace pipe, or something, with the puppet/dictator; he believes he can charm his way through Tehran, similar to Roosevelt's notion with Uncle Joe. He views the ruling mullahs like the editorial board of a northeastern newspaper.
I dunno when diplomacy became a dirty word to you folks. I also didn't know that diplomacy meant lying down. Do you really think we ought to bomb them, and talk later???
You do, don't you?
Well, fortunately for us, your way of thinking is on the outs.
smearcase yes the remarks about Russia were partly tongue in cheek. Despite the fact that the Ruskies know that eventually the Frankenstein they create will turn on them; it is in their interests to have us engaged in a struggle against Iran .They have in fact helped them upgrade surface to air capability.
I personally think the decision could be out of our control . The Iranians have been testing our fleet by deploying speed boats in an attempt I guess to recreate a Gulf of Tonkin moment or at least test our defenses . Given the history with things like the USS Cole attack ,the fleet will respond before they let a repeat sneak attack occure.
The world and the region may publically make phony outcries if Iran and us came to blows but the choice of a nuclear armed Iran is intolerable and they know it . I also think it would not serve the Iranians best interest. Either proliferation would spread to the wealthy Gulf States ;or they would come under the American nuclear umbrella. Iran would indeed guarantee a permanent US presence in the region.
As for your speculation ;I think that President Bush may indeed decide that he has to make a move before the end of his term. The problem we have had with Iran post revolution is that we have too often settled for talk. We have talked weakly and we have talked tough. But besides the Tanker War ,we have not backed it up. The case can easily be made for action . US troops continue to take casualties from Iranian trained proxies and Iranian made weapons.
Iran is looking at the real possibility of having a weaker President to deal with in the future. They also believe that in the election year ;and with our other commitments they have a carte-blanche to act with impunity this year.That is why the Hezbollah take over of Lebanon occured this month. Don't be mistaken by their pullback . That came in the wake of heavy concessions by the pro-government forces .They are negotiating the terms of their dhiminitude now.
ok the terms of the Lebanon surrender to Hezbollah are in : The surrender agreement gives Hezbollah the following:
1) 11 seats in the Cabinet and a veto power over final decisions
2) It keeps Hezbollah's weapons intact despite a UNSCR 1559 that called for disarming the militia
3) It will give Hezbollah significant influence over foreign policy
It will give Syria :
1) A capacity of using its allies in the new Lebanese Government to delay the process of the Hariri Tribunal.
2) A growing ally inside Lebanon
According to the agreement, a new President is to be elected next Sunday, General Michel Sleiman.The pro-US Lebanese Government of Seniora will be disbanded next week .The Cedar Revolution is dead because we did not give them the support they deserve.
Expect Israel to be attacked via Lebanon again this summer. That may be the time that President Bush moves against Iran.
My belief is thae Israel will launch a pre-emptive attack against Iran's nuclear assets. Since they (Israel) know that the first application of Iranian nuclear weapons will be against them, they have no choice.
Linear Mode
