U.S. report contradicts Bush on Iran nuclear program

[eits]

old news... just a reminder.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Originally posted by: eits
old news... just a reminder.

Yep - since 2003, just took 4 years to flush out the truth from the blanket of deception that covers the nation.


Anyone really stupid enough to continue believing this administration and it's collection of serial liars?

There's a change a coming, you can smell it in the air - kinda like dead elephants . . .

 

[chucky2]

And now we know why the WH doesn't share with Congress....

Chuck

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk

Originally posted by: eits
old news... just a reminder.

Yep - since 2003, just took 4 years to flush out the truth from the blanket of deception that covers the nation.


Anyone really stupid enough to continue believing this administration and it's collection of serial liars?

There's a change a coming, you can smell it in the air - kinda like dead elephants . . .

Coulda sworn that smell was donkey pee, not dead elephants.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Coulda sworn that smell was donkey pee, not dead elephants.

Yeah, the smell of donkey pee is pretty strong around these parts.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Actually, I'm not intentionally making this about Iraq. However, there is no better example of our intelligence community having to interpret information without any or very few inside sources to feed them information that can be verified.

What could you possibly know about our current sources inside, or outside, Iran?

Ya... please continue! :roll:

Considering this administration's apparent urge to go to war quickly in Iraq based on questionable intelligence that could not be agreed upon or verified, do you think that we should allow them latitude in their interpretation of the intelligence on Iran based on the same factors?

No - but neither should we take the military option off the table, based on the same factors.

What this report tells me is that we need more time, more access, and more information. period.

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk

Originally posted by: eits
old news... just a reminder.

Yep - since 2003, just took 4 years to flush out the truth from the blanket of deception that covers the nation.


Anyone really stupid enough to continue believing this administration and it's collection of serial liars?

There's a change a coming, you can smell it in the air - kinda like dead elephants . . .

HAHAHA

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk

Originally posted by: eits
old news... just a reminder.

Yep - since 2003, just took 4 years to flush out the truth from the blanket of deception that covers the nation.


Anyone really stupid enough to continue believing this administration and it's collection of serial liars?

There's a change a coming, you can smell it in the air - kinda like dead elephants . . .

Coulda sworn that smell was donkey pee, not dead elephants.

yeah, it's the donkeys pissing on the dead elephants for their lies.

 

[umbrella39]

The Get-R-Dun crew shows up on cue..

 

[Balt]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Must be true. US intel is never wrong.

People should be more skeptical of intel that supports what the administration wants it to than intel that contradicts what the administration is pushing for. Intel that is politically inconvenient is much riskier for the people that write it.

That applies whether the administration is R or D.

 

[Pabster]

Israel Believes Iran Restarted Nuclear Arms Work

 

[Red Dawn]

It's not the Intel we shoud be questioning, it's this Administrations take on the Intel we should be questioning.

 

[umbrella39]

LOL watching Bush right now and he sounds like a 5 year old trying to explain a lie he told. :roll:

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
It's not the Intel we shoud be questioning, it's this Administrations take on the Intel we should be questioning.

It's the same admin that came up with this newly released NIE.

Maybe what we should be questioning is the BDSer take on the admin's take on the intel because those who actually bother to read about the issue will discover that Bush hasn't been sitting on this information or trying to stash it away, and it's a complete reversal from what the intelligence community had been claiming up to this point.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...3/AR2007120300846.html

"Tehran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005," a declassified summary of the new National Intelligence Estimate stated. Two years ago, the intelligence community said in contrast it had "high confidence that Iran currently is determined to have nuclear weapons."

The assessment, under preparation for more than 18 months, was completed on Tuesday and President Bush and Vice President Cheney were briefed on Wednesday, intelligence officials said. Hadley said Bush first learned in August or September about intelligence indicating Iran had halted its weapons program and was advised it would take time to evaluate.

Several participants said there was strong debate among analysts during the process, but in the end they agreed on nearly every judgment. A majority of the intelligence agencies assessed, with high confidence, that the closure of the military program marks the end of the weapons effort. The Energy Department and the National Intelligence Council said gaps in what they know make them conclude only with "moderate confidence" that efforts remain on hold.

Well waddya know? The new findings aren't quite what the usual suspects in here are attempting to imply. Thank goodness they aren't the ones running our intel agencies. Nobody would ever know what the actual truth of a matter was.

 

[Stoneburner]

CHicken -why interpret? Either there is CLEAR evidence, or there is not. TUrning the decision to go to war into liberal arts analysis doesn't seem very practical.

 

[lozina]

Agreed. Only someone with ulterior motives or some inner prejudice would convict a man of murder and sentence them to death lacking sufficient evidence.

There is no concrete evidence showing Iran to be building a nuke. Nothing. Nada. Zip. There is just a hell of a lot of speculation including the words "if, maybe, possibly".

Just imagine that in a court of law:

"This man was seen carrying around a spoon. And a spoon could possibly be used to kill someone! We must sentence this potential cirminal to death!"

Same logic being applied to Iran

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: bamacre

U.S. report contradicts Bush on Iran nuclear program

Gee, I read it quite a bit different than you.

I believe it would have been more accurate to say that the report doesn't confirm GWB's warnings about Iran. The report doesn't refute that they have nuclear weapon ambitions, merely can't confirm or deny (they don't know).

Yet the report does confirm that Iran continues to develop technical capabilities that could be used to biuld a nuke bomb? What do they require as convincing evidence? A confession by the leading Ayatullah?

Looks like a BS wussy report to me. Like they don't wanna take the responsibility of making any kind of decision.

Which agency is responsible for this report (the article doesn't say).

Finally, I'll note that Iran is moving forward with generatoring fissable nuclear material suitable for weapon purposes when other nuclear generating capabilities were offered. Yet they purposefuly choose this route - which makes weapons grade material. Manufacturing weapons grade nuclear material is prrecisely that, no matter what the report does or doesn't conclude.

Fern

But in a finding likely to surprise U.S. friends and foes alike, the latest NIE concluded: "We do not know whether (Iran) currently intends to develop nuclear weapons."

That marked a sharp contrast to an intelligence report two years ago that stated Iran was "determined to develop nuclear weapons."

But the new assessment found Iran was continuing to develop technical capabilities that could be used to build a bomb and that it would likely be capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon "sometime during the 2010-2015 time-frame."

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: bamacre

U.S. report contradicts Bush on Iran nuclear program

Gee, I read it quite a bit different than you.

I believe it would have been more accurate to say that the report doesn't confirm GWB's warnings about Iran. The report doesn't refute that they have nuclear weapon ambitions, merely can't confirm or deny (they don't know).

Yet the report does confirm that Iran continues to develop technical capabilities that could be used to biuld a nuke bomb? What do they require as convincing evidence? A confession by the leading Ayatullah?

Looks like a BS wussy report to me. Like they don't wanna take the responsibility of making any kind of decision.

Which agency is responsible for this report (the article doesn't say).

Finally, I'll note that Iran is moving forward with generatoring fissable nuclear material suitable for weapon purposes when other nuclear generating capabilities were offered. Yet they purposefuly choose this route - which makes weapons grade material. Manufacturing weapons grade nuclear material is prrecisely that, no matter what the report does or doesn't conclude.

Fern

But in a finding likely to surprise U.S. friends and foes alike, the latest NIE concluded: "We do not know whether (Iran) currently intends to develop nuclear weapons."

That marked a sharp contrast to an intelligence report two years ago that stated Iran was "determined to develop nuclear weapons."

But the new assessment found Iran was continuing to develop technical capabilities that could be used to build a bomb and that it would likely be capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon "sometime during the 2010-2015 time-frame."

So "we don't know" now somehow justifies invoking World War 3 as Bush has? That's not a very sane response. Especially since they have gone from "determined" to "unknown", and the specific program which they based their stance that Iran wanted nukes has been shut down.

The report was actually a collaboration of all US intel agencies, so it is the collective finding of all sources within the US government. It's not a BS wussy report at all actually, most intel reports look something like that. You always get terms such as levels of confidence and lots of caveats.

What's strange is that Bush supporters are taking just the wrong message out of this. This is a success for him for christ's sake. I'm sure that US pressure played a significant part in getting Iran to abandon its nukes, and so he should be taking credit for that. Just because the intel doesn't justify the warmongering he's been doing lately doesn't mean that he still didn't (maybe inadvertantly) do something that helped.

Shockingly enough, war isn't always the answer.

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Israel Believes Iran Restarted Nuclear Arms Work

EITS Believes Pabster To Be An Idiot

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
-snip-

Shockingly enough, war isn't always the answer.

It seems to me that the only people mentioning "war" are Dems. I suppose it makes for a good campaign boogeyman.

IMO, our intel sucks and the report should have been edited down to three words "We don't know".

You can't know the unknowable. You're just gonna have to make educated guesses as to others intentions unless they wanna confess them to you. This report simply chose not make a guess.

I don't know if it would be irony, or just some kinda "cosmic balance" if our gvernment, screwing up the Iraq intel and over-estimating capability, makes a huge mistake in underestimating the next time.

Fern

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: bamacre

U.S. report contradicts Bush on Iran nuclear program

Gee, I read it quite a bit different than you.

I believe it would have been more accurate to say that the report doesn't confirm GWB's warnings about Iran. The report doesn't refute that they have nuclear weapon ambitions, merely can't confirm or deny (they don't know).

Yet the report does confirm that Iran continues to develop technical capabilities that could be used to biuld a nuke bomb? What do they require as convincing evidence? A confession by the leading Ayatullah?

Looks like a BS wussy report to me. Like they don't wanna take the responsibility of making any kind of decision.

Which agency is responsible for this report (the article doesn't say).

Finally, I'll note that Iran is moving forward with generatoring fissable nuclear material suitable for weapon purposes when other nuclear generating capabilities were offered. Yet they purposefuly choose this route - which makes weapons grade material. Manufacturing weapons grade nuclear material is prrecisely that, no matter what the report does or doesn't conclude.

Fern

But in a finding likely to surprise U.S. friends and foes alike, the latest NIE concluded: "We do not know whether (Iran) currently intends to develop nuclear weapons."

That marked a sharp contrast to an intelligence report two years ago that stated Iran was "determined to develop nuclear weapons."

But the new assessment found Iran was continuing to develop technical capabilities that could be used to build a bomb and that it would likely be capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon "sometime during the 2010-2015 time-frame."

So "we don't know" now somehow justifies invoking World War 3 as Bush has? That's not a very sane response. Especially since they have gone from "determined" to "unknown", and the specific program which they based their stance that Iran wanted nukes has been shut down.

The report was actually a collaboration of all US intel agencies, so it is the collective finding of all sources within the US government. It's not a BS wussy report at all actually, most intel reports look something like that. You always get terms such as levels of confidence and lots of caveats.

What's strange is that Bush supporters are taking just the wrong message out of this. This is a success for him for christ's sake. I'm sure that US pressure played a significant part in getting Iran to abandon its nukes, and so he should be taking credit for that. Just because the intel doesn't justify the warmongering he's been doing lately doesn't mean that he still didn't (maybe inadvertantly) do something that helped.

Shockingly enough, war isn't always the answer.

Shockingly enough, neither is diplomacy, particular where Iran is concerned and as the EU discovered.

There's a difference between war and keeping the military option on the table. It's that big stick Teddy spoke about. We are walking softly too, at least as softly as Iran deserves considering its own rhetoric. This is all part of the diplomatic tango that is necessary when dealing with Iran. Believe it or not we are making progress but neither side is going to suddenly soften their stance. There are slow, deliberate steps being taken to diffuse all of the history between us now though and we may actually be able to have somewhat normal relations in the not too distant future. Of course both Dubya and AhMad-boy will have to be gone for that too happen.

 

[First]

It doesn't matter what information comes out, Bush just won't change his mind. He's a man of convictions more than he is a reasonable man willing to concede errors and defeat. He would rather win a fake war (whether that's with Iraq, Iran, etc.) than admit mistakes, correct them, and take the logical course of action. He believes what he believes. He is what he is. He's Popeye.

Originally posted by: Pabster
Israel Believes Iran Restarted Nuclear Arms Work

No where is this stated in that article. Go troll somewhere else.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: eskimospy
-snip-

Shockingly enough, war isn't always the answer.

It seems to me that the only people mentioning "war" are Dems. I suppose it makes for a good campaign boogeyman.

IMO, our intel sucks and the report should have been edited down to three words "We don't know".

You can't know the unknowable. You're just gonna have to make educated guesses as to others intentions unless they wanna confess them to you. This report simply chose not make a guess.

I don't know if it would be irony, or just some kinda "cosmic balance" if our gvernment, screwing up the Iraq intel and over-estimating capability, makes a huge mistake in underestimating the next time.

Fern

Actually a direct quote from Bush was "So I?ve told people that if you?re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."

In effect: Nuclear Iran = World War 3. That sounds like he might be mentioning war personally.

Intel is always educated guesses, that's simply what it is. Everyone knows those making the reports aren't certain about the details, they are just giving the people in charge their opinion. There was considerable pressure on the intel community before the Iraq disaster, but I have heard no reports of pressure from the WH or more specifically the VP this time. So, with any luck they have been left alone to get it right this time.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: compuwiz1
Hasn't the Iranian president openly admitted that they have been developing nuclear technology and would continue to do so?

Nuclear energy. He denies they're developing nuclear weapons, despite the case he could make for why they should.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: Pabster
Israel Believes Iran Restarted Nuclear Arms Work

No where is this stated in that article. Go troll somewhere else.

Oh, really, smartass?

"There are differences in the assessments of different organizations in the world about this, and only time will tell who is right," he added.

And what do you think that might convey?