Iran's Nuclear Ambitions, NIE, and Mossad

Discussion in 'Bill Archer's Guestbook' started by Karl K, Dec 5, 2007.

  1. Karl K

    Karl K Member

    Oct 25, 1999
    Suburban Chicago
    So, I took the trouble to watch Bush's press conference yesterday, and the reporter's were a total joke. Basically, the tone of the question can be boiled down to

    "Mr. President, why didn't you know then what you know now.?"

    The Washington press corps would like the the president to overcome the laws of physics and time.

    Meanwhile, I read the NIE on Iran --

    http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf

    . . . and, of course, it's a wondrous example of "consensus" bureaucratic lingo.

    Now comes our friends in Israel, and guess what? They have different take on the subject.

    http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071205/FOREIGN/112050069/1001

    Here are the facts, however, which are indisputable.

    --The guys that run Iran are not good guys.
    --They have been a state supporter of terror
    --Even though they are awash in oil, they have built nuclear power plants.
    --The are spending huge sums of money to enrich uranium -- successfully or unsuccessfully, we're not sure -- even though they could buy all they need on the open market for less cost than they are spending trying to do it themselves (thought that U wouldn't be weapons-level enriched)
    --They clearly have HAD a nuclear weapons program, which they may or may not have stopped, but which they have hidden and lied about

    These are not intelligence conjectures, hedged by graditions of qualifying "confidence" levels -- these are the facts, ma'am.

    Frankly, this NIE strikes me as very very dangerous. It could very well lull us into a state of complacency.

    I am a huge fan of war historian John Keegan, and his book, "Intelligence is War" though interestingly flawed in a number of ways, has this to say at the end of the book...Read it, those on the anti-war left, and think hard on it.

     
  2. Matt in the Hat

    Matt in the Hat Moderator
    Staff Member

    Sep 21, 2002
    Brooklyn
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    My biggest question is why did the program stop? Did they stop because Iraq stopped being a threat or because of the US pressure?

    Answering that question will go a long way in my analysis of this report.

    Until then, Iran still remains little threat to the United States.
     
  3. bojendyk

    bojendyk New Member

    Jan 4, 2002
    South Loop, Chicago
    There could also have been any number of internal pressures (e.g., budgetary issues) to stop or even simple limits on their capability.

    Karl, on a different note, I picked up that Bulmer book at lunch. Thanks for the recommendation.
     
  4. Karl K

    Karl K Member

    Oct 25, 1999
    Suburban Chicago
    The other reason they could have stopped is they ran into problems they couldn't solve -- then.

    ANY country -- not just Iran -- is not much of a direct threat to the USA. Not even China, at this point.

    But think about this hypothetical.

    One day, in downtown Tel Aviv, a 5 kiloton weapon goes off. 10-15,000 people are incinerated instantly, another 10,000 are killed by secondary effects. An Islamo-fascist terrorist organization or one sort or another claims responsibility. Iran, Pakistan, all disavow responsibility. The Israelis deliver a nuclear weapon into downtown Tehran. 100,000 people are incinerated instantly.

    The Islamic world declares war on Israel -- including Pakistan. Nuclear war has arrived.

    So, no, we're not directly threatened. But do we WANT this to happen? Or something like it? It's not, frankly, an outrageous possibility.
     
  5. IntheNet

    IntheNet New Member

    Nov 5, 2002
    Northern Virginia
    Club:
    Blackburn Rovers FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The same National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) laughed at in terms of Iraq being held up as the Bible in terms of Iran? Something remains unsaid here... a missing piece in a puzzle box. Perhaps this backroom agreement by Dr. Rice and Javad Zarif:

    "We'll circulate a public statement saying Iran is not now developing a weaponized nuclear device if the Iranian Qods Force invasion into Iraq stops and Iran stops arming the terrorists in Iraq? That way, we get to say Iran crisis is diffused and you get to say we are the bad guy here. Deal?"

    That's exactly what happened. Why else would Iran, floating on a sea of oil, be at all interested in nuclear power?
     
  6. bojendyk

    bojendyk New Member

    Jan 4, 2002
    South Loop, Chicago
    Matt has to moderate all of those irritating arguments between Israeli and Persian zealots, so my guess is that, yes, he wants it to happen.

    Having had to read some of those threads, I'm inclined to agree.
     
  7. Smiley321

    Smiley321 Member

    Apr 21, 2002
    Concord, Ca
    So can I read from this that you think that Bush got the intelligence right for once?

    Or is it that what Bush wants to hear has changed to be more in conformance with bojendyk?
     
  8. Matt in the Hat

    Matt in the Hat Moderator
    Staff Member

    Sep 21, 2002
    Brooklyn
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If an Islamo-fascist terrorist organization (and we need to be more specific on who this is) bombs Tel Aviv and the Isrealies bomb Tehran, Israel is in the wrong. Now you may say that Israel has the right to defend itself and I agree. But they will be attacking the wrong target.

    I would not support a US based strike under those circumstances.
     
  9. Eric B

    Eric B Member

    Feb 21, 2000
    the LBC
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Well, hopefully they'd just go ahead and turn Mecca into a radioactive crater and be done with it.

    Until we and the Israeli's figure out which Arab/Muslim governments helped the operation, at which time we turn Mecca into a radioactive crater and be done with it...
     
  10. Karl K

    Karl K Member

    Oct 25, 1999
    Suburban Chicago
    You know, I am not one to believe in conjectures, but I have to say: this makes a lot of sense. Who knows if it's true, but it certainly is plausible.

    Here's another wrinkle. We strike this deal -- really just a deal about public statements -- while we have an additional deal with the Israelis that they will come out immediately and dispute it, as they did. Of course, the Irsraeli's have nothing to lose in the court of public opinion -- all the Muslim world hates them anyway.

    And now a THIRD wrinkle. The other thing this NIE does is defuse the demagogic anti-war cries of the Democratic left. Now they will no longer be able to say the Republicans are beating the drum of war with Iran. That has zero credibility. It's taken off the table as an election issue. And with Iraq becoming more stable and less violent that TOO is coming off the table as an election issue, except for the fringe left.

    Taken in the entirety of its effects, the whole shebang has a very interesting political dimension to it. Now the Republicans can paint the Democrats as big tax, big spend, big government socialist defeatists with little or no extraneous noise.

    Has Karl Rove REALLY left the White House, I wonder?
     
  11. CUS

    CUS New Member

    Apr 20, 2000
    Thomas Fingar (one of the main authors of this NIE) in testimony to Congress in July of 2007:

     
  12. Matt in the Hat

    Matt in the Hat Moderator
    Staff Member

    Sep 21, 2002
    Brooklyn
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    So why the change in tone?
     
  13. Anthony

    Anthony Member+

    United States
    Aug 20, 1999
    Chicago
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Who else thinks our intelligence agencies are totally useless.

    That said, anyone here ever see the Godfather? Sure you did. Remember the "peace conference"? Here is what Iran (and Pakistan for that matter) should be told:

     
  14. Karl K

    Karl K Member

    Oct 25, 1999
    Suburban Chicago
    Not totally...

    ...but pretty much.
     
  15. Karl K

    Karl K Member

    Oct 25, 1999
    Suburban Chicago
    John Bolton rips the NIE to shreds.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../12/05/AR2007120502234.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

    Boy, the man may have a really ugly moustache, but he can turn the English phrase.

    My favorite parts:

     
  16. Sachin

    Sachin New Member

    Jan 14, 2000
    La Norte
    Club:
    DC United
    How do we know the CIA wasn't involved in the Kennedy assassination?

    He's dead.
     
  17. CUS

    CUS New Member

    Apr 20, 2000
    That will make praying to Mecca that much easier--just face the glow in the sky. </ducks and covers>
     
  18. Matt in the Hat

    Matt in the Hat Moderator
    Staff Member

    Sep 21, 2002
    Brooklyn
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Amedinejad responds

     
  19. Owen Gohl

    Owen Gohl Member

    Jun 21, 2000
    Clausewitz on intelligence:

    If we consider the actual basis of this information [i.e., intelligence], how unreliable and transient it is, we soon realize that war is a flimsy structure that can easily collapse and bury us in its ruins. . . . Many intelligence reports in war are contradictory; even more are false, and most are uncertain. This is true of all intelligence but even more so in the heat of battle, where such reports tend to contradict and cancel each other out. In short, most intelligence is false, and the effect of fear is to multiply lies and inaccuracies.[/I]


    I ran across the quote at Jim Miller on Politics, a blog I've read for years and highly recommend:

    http://www.seanet.com/~jimxc/Politics/
     
  20. Roel

    Roel Member

    Jan 15, 2000
    Santa Cruz mountains
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Netherlands
  21. Sachin

    Sachin New Member

    Jan 14, 2000
    La Norte
    Club:
    DC United
    Where does he say that? And what president truly has control over the intelligence community?
     
  22. Owen Gohl

    Owen Gohl Member

    Jun 21, 2000
    Not even Hitler was able to achieve this. His chief of intelligence was actively plotting against him:

    http://www.canaris.dk/
     
  23. johnh00

    johnh00 Member

    Apr 25, 2001
    CT, USA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Based on what came out last week, I guess we know how accurate the NIE was.
     
  24. Anthony

    Anthony Member+

    United States
    Aug 20, 1999
    Chicago
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    According to news reports I've read, US intelligence is standing by the NIE -- they believe that the Iranians stopped trying to build a bomb in 2003 (Libya stopped in 2003 also, what happened that year?) and what is happening is not bomb making but other nuclear activities (it is one thing to enrich uranium, another to build a bomb and put it on a missile).

    The Israels think the Iranians stopped then restarted.

    The Germans think the Iranians never stopped.

    The French apparently think the Iranians are about to take over the planet and install IM as supreme overlord or something.

    So there some mild disagreement
     
  25. Karl K

    Karl K Member

    Oct 25, 1999
    Suburban Chicago
    I'm shocked, SHOCKED that this so .

    By the way, thanks for resurrecting this thread. The more things change...

    I guess this all boil down to what the meaning of "is" is.

    It's like the guy who is about to go out on date with a babe who has been a bit coy with him and he says to his friend, "I'm not planning to get laid tonight" ....though he makes sure he brings a pack of condoms.

    So, President Acqua-Velva-Dad is not PLANNING to f--k us, but he won't be unhappy if he does.
     

Share This Page