Report Claims Iran Has Data To Build a Nuclear Bomb
reporter writes "According to a startling report just covered by the New York Times, 'senior staff members of the United Nations nuclear agency have concluded in a confidential analysis that Iran has acquired sufficient information to be able to design and produce a workable atom bomb.' In 2007, American intelligence erroneously concluded that Tehran in 2003 stopped further research into designing a nuclear bomb. This conclusion was contradicted by German, French, and Israeli intelligence. Recently, London also concluded that the American assessment is incorrect. So, here we are. The Iranians have the knowledge to build a nuclear bomb and have been working relentlessly to perfect its design. Tehran is apparently able to create the components (e.g. enriched uranium) that can be assembled into such a weapon. Meanwhile, Jerusalem is communicating with the Kremlin about a list of Russian scientists it believes are assisting Iran's efforts to develop the bomb."
Right, because nukes are so impossibly hard to build that a layman, say a truck driver, couldn't possibly figure out how gen 1 atomic bombs were constructed.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/12/15/081215fa_fact_samuels
"You can see I know very little about pimp policy." George McGovern.
Umm, no.
The USA used the Bomb to avoid killing millions of people. Instead, we killed a couple hundred thousand between the two Bombs (we killed more people bombing Tokyo than both Bombs killed), and saved a few million of our own people (sorry, in the calculus of war, casualties on your side count for more than casualties on the other side).
As well as saving the millions of Japanese that would have been killed if we'd invaded the Home Islands. Not, I think, that we had nearly as much interest in saving Japanese civilians as in saving the lives of the American soldiers who would've died in an invasion.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
For roughly 400 days they Iranians held those hostages. Why? Nobody remembers why, but they did it - and if nobody remembers why, it must not have been a very memorable reason (if any.)
Yeah, something about a military coup d'etat organized by the United States that overthrew their democratically-elected prime minister. Obviously, not very memorable.
"The pre-1948 violence was mutual."
I really don't know how you can draw that conclusion. No Israeli villages were massacred, no Israeli village was simply wiped from the map, and it's name forgotten. No Israeli prisoners or bodies were dragged through the streets, for people to gawk at, spit at, and curse.
"The bombings were unfortunate, however, the state of Israel later disclaimed any responsibility for acts of terrorism and, AFAIK, did not support any of them."
What you are actually pointing out is, Israel won the propaganda war. Former terrorists were elected to head Israel's government, and others were held up as heros. Israel can no more disclaim responsibility for the terrorism of it's activists than the US can "disclaim" the anti-slavery activists before the Civil War.
I won't defend Iran's funding of Hamas, or Iran's denial of the holocaust - but I can't see that it is any worse than the activities of Zionists prior to 1950. There simply aren't any good guys in the conflict. Only fools believe either side to be innocent, or good.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
And I really have no idea about Spain.
Here, the church is fighting with teeth and claws to maintain their level of influence, but to me it seems that since Franco died it is declining steadily. For instance, Since 2005 Spain allows same-sex marriages and adoption of children.
I'm guessing you weren't alive in 1979 when the US Embassy in Iran was overrun and everybody inside taken hostage. For roughly 400 days they Iranians held those hostages. Why? Nobody remembers why, but they did it - and if nobody remembers why, it must not have been a very memorable reason (if any.)
The why goes back to 1953 and an event codenamed "Operation Ajax" which involved a CIA backed coup to remove Iran's democratic government and install a (US friendly) dictator. This dictator was ousted, by popular revolution, in 1979. The US Embassy was an obvious target given both the initial coup and the continued CIA connections to SAVAK.
"Israel deserves more trust than Iran? Are you serious?"
I don't know about him, but I am, absolutely.
"Iran has not, in recent military history, conducted a single war of aggression against its neighbours
No, they've been smart enough to let terrorist proxy groups like Hezbollah do it for them, groups funded, trained, and equipped by Iran. And taking over an embassy is considered an act of war. And I was in the area when they unilaterally tried to cut off traffic in the Persian Gulf, and one of their mines almost sank the U.S.S. Samuel B. Roberts. No, no aggression against other states there.
For all of its history, most of Israel's neighbors have denied its right to exist, and sworn to push them into the sea. They've attacked them literally since the day the Jewish state was founded. After several failed invasions, Jordan and Egypt now have peace treaties with Israel that recognize her right to exist. There's been no wars with those countries since then. Syria, however, tired of losing to Israel in conventional warfare, conquered Lebanon and made it a vassal state... which it has stayed, from one degree to another ever since... and continues to launch attacks on Israel from that territory, using its terrorist proxies to do the dirty work. Want to keep Israel out of Lebanon? Keep Syria out of Lebanon.
Israel, on the other hand, have no such doctrine, and history demonstrates they have adopted a first strike policy.
Considering that in every major war, Israel was invaded by surrounding states, you honestly think this is bad? Are you going to seriously make the argument that taking out Saddam Hussein's nuclear facilities (which were going to produce weapons-grade material) wasn't a smart thing to do?
Iran has been co-operating with the IAEA - not flawlessly, and there are problems, but they have been co-operating.
Yeah, they've been cooperating so closely that they built a second uranium enrichment facility that stayed secret until now.
Iran does not deny the holocaust took place
Wow
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
http://www.theodora.com/wfbcurrent/israel/israel_economy.html
GDP (purchasing power parity):
$200.7 billion (2008 est.)
$193.2 billion (2007)
$183.3 billion (2006)
note: data are in 2008 US dollars
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/17/world/middleeast/17israel.html
Israel to Get $30 Billion in Military Aid From U.S.
This is a better breakdown, year by year:
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/114bill.html
This estimate of total U.S. direct aid to Israel updates the estimate given in the July 2006 issue of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. It is an estimate because arriving at an exact figure is not possible, since parts of U.S. aid to Israel are a) buried in the budgets of various U.S. agencies, mostly that of the Defense Department (DOD), or b) in a form not easily quantifiable, such as the early disbursement of aid, giving Israel a direct benefit in interest income and the U.S. Treasury a corresponding loss. Given these caveats, our current estimate of cumulative total direct aid to Israel is $113.8554 billion.
It must be emphasized that this analysis is a conservative, defensible accounting of U.S. direct aid to Israel, NOT of Israel's cost to the U.S. or the American taxpayer, nor of the benefits to Israel of U.S. aid.
One or two percent of GDP? Hmmmmm - how many nations are donating that much to MY country? I can't recall any headlines proclaiming the generosity of foreign nations giving aid to the United States.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
You got modded up for this bullshit?
The same Israelis that have constantly warred with their neighbors
You mean the same Israelis that have warred with their neighbors after being invaded by those neighbors, right?
The same Israelis who now threaten to bomb Iran, despite Iran having been non-aggressive for more than 20 years
How is sponsoring terrorist organizations compatible with being "non-aggressive"?
The same Israelis who claim Iran hates the Jewish faith, despite Iran having a sizable number of citizens who are Jews that it has never bothered?
Yeah, except for the tens of thousands of Iranian Jews that got driven out of the country during the Iranian revolution and whom now primarily reside in Israel and the United States. I guess being forced into exile is your definition of "not being bothered".
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.