"The inspectors found that Iranian engineers were already using roughly 1,300 centrifuges and were producing fuel suitable for nuclear reactors, according to diplomats and nuclear experts here."
By David E. Sanger in the New Duranty Times:
VIENNA, May 14 — Inspectors for the International Atomic Energy Agency have concluded that Iran appears to have solved most of its technological problems and is now beginning to enrich uranium on a far larger scale than before, according to the agency’s top officials.The findings may change the calculus of diplomacy in Europe and in Washington, which aimed to force a suspension of Iran’s enrichment activities in large part to prevent it from learning how to produce weapons-grade material.
In a short-notice inspection of Iran’s operations in the main nuclear facility at Natanz on Sunday, conducted in advance of a report to the United Nations Security Council due early next week, the inspectors found that Iranian engineers were already using roughly 1,300 centrifuges and were producing fuel suitable for nuclear reactors, according to diplomats and nuclear experts here.
I'm shocked.
Time for another Israeli raid ala Osirak.
But I'm guessing the current mindset in western government will be more discussions and a major giveaway/appeasment agreement for Iran to renege on.
"Hey why not? It's worked for Kim Jong (Mentali) Il how many times?"
Not saying we or Israelis will hit them this summer. But the time to waste their nuclear program is during warm months when heating oil and natural gas spikes have limited impact. Please notice that every winter Russia/Vlad Putin make threats about gas and oil deliveries to get client nations to pay higher prices and to kow-tow. Estonia being the latest victim. This scummy tactic isn't so effective when it is warm
As someone with an advanced degree in science, I can attest to the fact that an effective method of slowing down the enrichment program is to blow it up. Q.E.D.
There are Iranian agents, and Iranian-trained Iraqi collaborators, in Iraq right now. So far they are merely supplying deadly war materiel to those who intend to use it against the Americans -- and if we are to believe reports, that includes Sunnis.
And right now, as well, 4,000 troops have spent four days -- with no end in sight -- looking for three abducted American soldiers. Does this modus operandi tell you everything you need to know about the hopelessness of Tarbaby Iraq? If three abducted soldiers can tie down 4,000 troops, for four days, five days, a week, perhaps longer, then how conceivably is all of Iraq to be secured? It isn't. The only way that things will settle, whether through large-scale warfare, small-scale warfare, even very little warfare at all is a possibliity, is having each side allowed to deal with the other as it sees fit. There will never be an end to Sunni bombing of Shi'a mosques and markets until the consequences, to Sunni civilians, are as grave, and the American presence and new rules during this surge have prevented the Shi'a militia from doing what comes naturally.
Meanwhile, three soldiers, 4,000 troops, four days. That's a lot of man-hours, and a lot of equipment. Humanly understandable. But what does that mean if the Americans are making plans to attack the Iranian nuclear project, and have to worry about hundreds or possibly thousands of well-trained Iranian agents attacking or kidnapping American troops in retaliation should any such attack take place?
It is a nightmare situation.
And still more of a nightmare, the one that no one talks about, is how to get out of Iraq unscathed? The Viet Cong were happy to wave us goodbye, and placed no impediments in the way. But will Sunnis do so? No. Will Shi'a do so? No. Both sides will, when the Americans leave, have no further use for them. Both sides, however, will want to grab as much of the American equipment as they can. And what route will be taken? South, through Shialand? West, through the Syrian desert, to Syria itself? Or to Jordan, whose people express their hatred for America in every opinion poll? North, through Kurdistan and then to..Turkey, while throughout the Arabs in the north,will no doubt be trying to make life hell as well (though the Pesh Merga may provide some protection).
Is this being planned for? Or is everyone still involved in the "surge" and the walls to be put up around neighborhoods, and all that stuff some counter-insurgency experts have been deeply impressed by -- the Galula book, with what some have embraced as the Seven or Ten or Twenty Rules of HIghly Effective Counterinsurgency Managers, for so many now have descended to the business-school-bookstore-offering level of thought -- -- even, apparently, in official Washingotn, among both the military and civilian leadership.
The Founders would not have been pleased. Nor Liincoln. Nor Holmes. Nor any of the great men of the past. They would not recognize the country, and especially, would not recognize those who claimed to be able to instruct, protect, and lead. No, sorry, how silly of me. Not lead. "Take a leadership role."
Let's see...The most incompetent, stupid, and Evil president the US has ever known, an "intelligence" community that couldn't get laid in Tijuana on a Friday night with a badge, gun, and a fist full of c-notes, a military that can't plan a trip to the toilet, and we're going to deal decisively with Iran?
Right.
Israel? Not only did they lose the last war against a handful of sand fleas, but they couldn't even feed their soldiers in the field. The once mighty and fearsome IDF's only recent success was against unarmed, civilian, religious Jews. Their own citizens!
I'm sure achmadineajad is scared.
Let's get it over with already. Let's hand the Iranians a few ready to use H-Bombs and tell them to use them as they see fit. We seem unwilling to stop them at all so we might as well make it easier for them to have them.
Maybe after they take possesion we will have the excuse to finally hit them. Maybe?
Come on, peeps, get off the Iranians' case..afterall, the administration is seeking their help in Iraq..how we gonna get their help if we keep harping about the nuke thing?
Early Nov 2008 until late January 2009. Thats Bush's window for Iran.
Where did you get your concise and damning information from Geddon? Wasn’t the left wing media was it?
Anyway fella take off your tin hat and point your satellite dish at Earth, you’ll find it’s near the small star just to the right of the Cylon battle base.
We don’t need leave Iraq; we’ve got nice safe places to store the men and machines until needed to prevent the organization of ‘Al Qaeda’ or to ‘enforce UN resolutions’. The link shows four major bases:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0321-10.htm
Don't count on the carriers' continued ability to operate in the Gulf. Even the Democrats seem to support a military footprint in Iraq for, in Senator Schumer’s words, a ‘Counter Terror’ mission once we disengage from the ‘Civil War’ mission. These are things you can do from the air.
I've been shouting all year that we're going to mess this up.. we have no idea how close they are ... we've been hearing "iran is [x] years away" for like 10 years now.
We had carriers moved down there last summer, I was sure they were going to do it then, but they didn't.. they keep setting deadlines that Iran laughs at and then we do nothing.
This is so maddening.
Three words.
Hit.
Them.
NOW.
This January, 2006 webpage claimed that, based on the number and kind of centrifuges Iran was assembling, and other time factors, Iran, under the worst case scenario, could have a nuclear weapon by the end of 2008:
Notice that the estimate the website made seems to have turned out on target. About one and a half years has passed since that webpage was posted, and Iran now has 1300 centrifuges on line and producing. So in another year and a half, at the current rate, Iran could have made a nuke. Of course, this scenario doesn't take into account that Iran might have already purchased highly enriched uranium on the black market, and be in the process of weaponizing it now, so that it could be ready within months, if not already.
Hugh
Bush said "I'm The Decider"!
This could turn into the worst military debacle in American history. The only thing that will save us will be our technology and brave troops who as individuals will have to fight their way out.
Like little big horn only many times larger!
At the end of WWII, our intelligence overestimated by roughly a factor of 2 the time it would take Russia to build a bomb -- that is, Russia did it in half the time or even a bit quicker than that.
I'm with Vince. Time is running out.
And meanwhile the jihadist cells in the US are making their own plans ... and our intelligence is underestimating these.
You'd think intelligence agencies would get something right just by chance ... oh wait, they did ... the Six Dix ... via the intelligence work of a teenager.
when the iranians get those nukes and smuggle them into america, prolly about 7 nukes with the aid of alqueda in the USA (prolly easily smuggle them across the mexican/US border.
then the USA will be brought to its knees in blackmail.
prolly a threat of leave the middle east or the first one will go off.
If one Western city gets hit by a nuclear weapon -- which could be assembled in the nation to be hit, and driven to the target by a few men in a van -- what next? Won't the West be forced into barely imaginable forms of retaliation? Won't we be forced either to destroy, or else take total and ruthless control of, large parts of the Muslim world, as well as North Korea? Might we be forced to implement systems of surveillance and transparency everywhere -- especially to watch Muslims, but also to watch any conceivable pathway or person that might convey a nuke or other WMD into a city? Wouldn't we need to alter international and domestic commerce to a huge extent, so huge that the world economy would crash? And if a Hiroshima-type bomb is detonated in a U.S. city, won't there be a huge exodus from the largest cities of the U.S., to avoid being targets of further detonations?
Yet despite all we might end up doing to get the situation "under control," isn't it likely that at best we will be able only to slow the growth of the WMD threat and the ever faster scientific development of ever cheaper, ever more accessible, ever more deadly, ever more various, forms of WMD?
Why do I have this strange and almost ere feeling that the Iranian Mullahcracy, and Mahmoud Amadinejad are working hard to shore up any allies they can that might or will be on their side when they begin throwing nukes out against anyone who disagrees with them?
Does anyone out there have some opinions on this?
And here is my reaction to it...
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=344_1177939388
There will not be any attack. The white flags are being raised all over. Bush and Blair are lame ducks. Any attack will pull the world into an abyss that no one can handle (or let them handle). The whole middle eastern region is being handled with kidd gloves, half war measures due to infiltration of PC even in the military. We don't fight wars to win anymore. That's fact.
Meanwhile, as Mackie wonders, Iran is pulling itself onto a pedestal, empowering itself, becoming the new standard OF ACCEPTANCE for the entire middle east, standards that are dangerous and very hard to reverse.
Dipolmacy doesn't work in that region, otherwise, it would be all resolved after 60+ years.
We'll only thro one when we see theirs coming first.
My 2 cents.
Hugh's post reminds me of the painter who painted hiself into a corner.
So....will this be the "lagacy" W leaves the world, that on his watch he let the Iranians get nukes while he invaded the less dangerous country and by taking out Saddam enabled Iran to be raised up as the strong man in the region ?
I still keep asking but no one ever answers me, what would Saddams reaction to the Iranians getting so close to nukes have been ?
Resistance:
Iran may have to be taken down one way or another, but I believe that the U.S. could do this effectively enough with its conventional weapons even if it wanted to level the country to the ground. If nuclear weapons were used, this would render the place, and the entire region around it, unliveable for generations. This could include the Israelis as well as the Assyrian Christians of Iraq.
I hope the makers of the video you posted have considered that.
When it comes to Irans proxies, could we see Hezbollah stepping up to be the nuker of Israel on Irans behalf?
Is it possible that these radical Islamic factions are so steeped in hate for Israel and the great satan (USA) that they will commit to nuclear action if given the weapon to do so, never mind the consequences, so that they will all become martyrs, or shahids?
Templer to be honest with you I have mixed feelings about using nuclear weapons against Iran. The only good thing about nuclear weapons is that it saved thousands of lives when the bombs were dropped on two Japanese cities.
Second thing to consider is that there are many Iranians, if not thousands who want Ahmadinejad removed. A nuclear bomb would kill many of those civilians who are not part of this war. What if Ahmad'd strikes first with a nuclear weapon? What then? We can't turn the other cheek like we did in 9-11. Personally I think the best pre-emptive strike would be the assassination of Ahmadinejad. The brains has to be removed from Iran.Once the brains are removed, then their strength are useless.
Nothing good is going to come out of any of this in any case.
We need to cut our loses and get this over with -- there is nothing nice about war.
Let's face it the man says he is going to destroy Israel and the US intimating that he will use nukes to do it.
I believe him; so should you.
We don't need nukes; we need a small team in place, a 10 second window, and about $3.75 worth of ammo, and the will to do the job. Nothing more, nothing less.
War averted, nuclear problem solved.
What we don't have is the will to win a damn war.
Without that, we're screwed.
"Is it possible that these radical Islamic factions are so steeped in hate for Israel and the great satan (USA) that they will commit to nuclear action if given the weapon to do so, never mind the consequences, so that they will all become martyrs, or shahids?
Posted by: Mackie "
Gee ya think ?
You see here is the problem in very simple terms..
(1) Iran is Shia
(2) Iraq is majority Shia and Pro Iranian for the most part
(3) Bush has based his Iraq plan on Shia support
Thus if Bush attacks Iran he will lose Iraq but if he does not attack Iran will get nukes.
Now everyone who supports the Iraq war please explain to me how you will deal with a mass Shia revolt in Iraq when we bomb Iran? I mean if Hugh is so wrong then write out a reasonable plan for how you will deal with a major uprising in Iraq.
Also tell me considering the current troop numbers in Iraq, the intergration of Iraqi forces (many of which are Shia) with American forces, current U.S. troop positions and tactics (like street patrols etc), current leadership etc how you think it will turn out when the Shia do revolt.
Remember we are talking a major Shia revolt not some street protest. Lets say half of the Shia Iraqi army joins the revolt including many sitting in the Iraqi government now.
Mini-poll time...
Which is more likely to happen?
A) bush al-saud launches and wins a decisive military victory against the hitler of our time - a genocidal demon pursuing nuclear annihilation of our ally Israel.
- or -
B) bush al-saud announces the U.S. Navy's first muslim nuclear submarine commander as testimony to this nation's commitment to diversity, inclusiveness, and religious tolerance.
Arm A. Geddon
Oh Oh I Know I know! Choose me!
I say "B"!
l cannot understand the "loser mentality" of some of the posters here on this thread. The US has the most powwerful and displined military that the world has ever seen. The military can exact hits on iran without using nukes and topple the gov't of iran.
This thinking of doom and gloom is so unAmerican. some of your are thinking like Carter, that the best years of American are past, where is the can do attitude that l appreciate from the US?
Resistance and Witness:
Your idea of an assassination of Ahmadinejad would likely not be effective. There is no shortage of other idiots ready to take his place. Any nation in its right mind would not have elected a lunatic like that. I'm finding the analogy with the madness in Nazi Germany in the 1930s more and more convincing these days. I think war with Iran is inevitable unless and until the Iranian people change their government and its policies.
As for a retaliatory strike following an Iranian deployment of nukes against the U.S. (something unlikely as long as Iran hasn't yet produced any of its own), that would change things considerably. I'm simply saying that I don't think an American first strike with that kind of weapon is necesary or in anyone's best interest.
Gee...another shocker. *yawn*
Frantically trying to catch up & get back on track for this summer's scheduled showtime.
Keep the powder dry...and close by.
We need to get the whole Middle east involved with Irans Nuclear program. Let all the leaders of these Countrys know that if a Nuke is used against us we will Vaporise all of them. We just consider them all Guilty of partisipating.
History shows how Armys suffer the most casulties when running away. Better to flatten Iraq once and for all. Then leave via Iran. If one is going to suffer losses, then better to suffer them under our own terms rather than by others.
Would be nice...only one small problem.
The shanghai cooperation organization won't let that happen without a response (that includes both china & russia-both of whom still have nukes pointed at us).
The end is nigh!!
Catherine
Your sign off...
Part of the Ammerican Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
Are these song lyrics ?
Just curious.
Anyone besides me think that the spike in gasoline prices now is a way of preparing the public for some drastic measures?
Giving us a chance to adjust our spending habits before the balloon goes up?
Assalamau Laikum all,
I think you need to listen to Hugh here. As he says the Amerike is a spent force both in terms of monies spent ($1 trillion...and counting) and the exhaustion of the soldiers who are becoming an ever dwindling number.
Amerike mums no longer want to their loved sons serving in Iraq, fathers are overruled...they want live sons in preference to IED'd ones...and who can blame them. You peoples work too hard for this sad and sorry state...you need to get yours blond sons out with the minimum causilities out of Iraq, a generation of fatherless blond childrens are hard to bring up...the womens too need mensfolk in their lives.
At the moment it's a hopeless situation, your soldiers and the postees here are really down...and before bowing out I think it is worth setting up a meeting between US and Iranian officials with discussions limited to Iraq.
The Amerike could plead with Iran to talk to who ever they have influence with to let you leave Iraq with the least possible casualties... possibly even through Iranian ports to increase the safety factor.
Lets face it, Iraq will divide along tribal loyalties...parts will be completely Sunni and other completely shia...and a separate bit of the kurds...it happened in the India/Pak split and so it will be here, you cannot prevent it...Bush is a loser...don't listen to him...take your loved ones back.
In India you had the Hindoo factor (which made things a lot easier for the muslim), here joint sunni/shia patrols could guard the lines of split...and the split maybe very difficult.
Listen, there will always be peoples dying....this is an occurance that happens even today in my beloved Pak. Why only yesterday about 50 peoples died in Karachi...on a strike and support of the judishary, that's fate, that's Alla T'alah's wish for his chosen.
In helping the Amerike leave in relative peace, the Amerike needs to thank Iran by not offendiing them talking about the nucleur issue.
Even bombing Iran will make little difference....the Amerike cannot stop Iran from aquiring the nucleur card.
Iran does not need to attack anyone, a lot of rhetroic comes from Iran ...but it's just bark not bite.
The best way to avoid being hit is to be at one with Iran...and the magic word for that is wuslim.
Imagine for a moment if Europe was Eurabia and the Amerike was the ISA.
All of a sudden we are all the same peoples , all wuslim...why would there be a need to attack?
Israel coould be persuaded to drop their aggressive standards through the UN, a general understanding world wide would start to take place...with the Mullah dudullah's all becoming yesterday's men.
Remember the fate of ice is to melt into it's surrounding water...this is as it should be.
Surrounding you is the wuslim...and that is your fate too...forget the aggressive stance...melt as ice does...into the oneness that Allah SWT has created for you...Kafur is a false state...it cannot remain intact...ice is melting everywhere...take the sahada...become a wulsim..talk to Iran...show them your wuslim credentials...there is nothing to worry about..Isreal is sure to follow you...melt like butter...into wuslimness
...may Allah speed my Dua and your hand to global peace...do it please listen to me.
ZenaWarriorPrincess,
Long term optimistic, short term pessimistic.
Politicians still fail (or refuse) to acknowledge the enemy.
Regrettably, we need to take a few more hard hits before anything will change.
I'm predicting those hits will come this summer.
Some jihadists are going to get by our vigilant teenager safety net.
Naseem, I'd be angry at your crap if you didn't just BORE me so...go peddle your wuslim claptrap to the Left, where they might just buy it.
*YAWN* Off with you, pathetic LITTLE BOY.
Sidenote - Can't wait for the muslim missionaries to try this at my door. Gonna be fun for me! >:D
Naseem states, "Why only yesterday about 50 peoples died in Karachi...on a strike and support of the judishary, that's fate, that's Alla T'alah's wish for his chosen."
Your allah sounds like a sadistic monster. Maybe because allah is not the one True God, but his adversary satan.
If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it must be allah.