And Iran, Iran so far away...

[Balta1701]

Well all except for when countries hide facilities away from inspectors.

Which, I already noted, Iran has in fact done...but the IAEA has managed to get into those facilities (the key one was in fact revealed when the Khan network was taken apart), and again verified that there has not been production of any weapons grade highly enriched material.

 

Going past what the place they just opened is designed to do...that's the point of no return. But it's a point that Iran hasn't crossed yet, it's a point which they know will provoke a military response, and it's a point that will go screaming to the IAEA when it happens.

[southsider2k5]

Which, I already noted, Iran has in fact done...but the IAEA has managed to get into those facilities (the key one was in fact revealed when the Khan network was taken apart), and again verified that there has not been production of any weapons grade highly enriched material.

 

Going past what the place they just opened is designed to do...that's the point of no return. But it's a point that Iran hasn't crossed yet, it's a point which they know will provoke a military response, and it's a point that will go screaming to the IAEA when it happens.

 

I'm glad you are 100% convinced we know everything about what is going on in every square mile of Iran. I'm not. You're the one who always uses the Bonds analogy about being willing to cheat at one point, and assuming they are willing to cheat more.

[Balta1701]

I'm glad you are 100% convinced we know everything about what is going on in every square mile of Iran. I'm not. You're the one who always uses the Bonds analogy about being willing to cheat at one point, and assuming they are willing to cheat more.

That would be a reasonable assumption had I not been able to fire back the mountains of evidence that the inspectors actually worked incredibly well in Iraq and North Korea. The NPT framework worked perfectly. North Korea was able to develop technology that it never deployed, in conjunction with the Khan network. They then built a bomb once they withdrew from the NPT, and the international community was able to sit around knowing that the plutonium reprocessing was happening almost to the day. The inspections in Iraq worked wonderfully, and the cost in lives and treasure from when we decided not to believe that is catastrophic.

[StrangeSox]

I'm glad you are 100% convinced we know everything about what is going on in every square mile of Iran. I'm not. You're the one who always uses the Bonds analogy about being willing to cheat at one point, and assuming they are willing to cheat more.

I don't get what you're arguing at here. You're right in that we demonstrably have no good reason to trust Iran. On the other hand, Balta is right that the NPT allows for peaceful nuclear power programs to be developed.

[southsider2k5]

I don't get what you're arguing at here. You're right in that we demonstrably have no good reason to trust Iran. On the other hand, Balta is right that the NPT allows for peaceful nuclear power programs to be developed.

 

I don't believe Iran for a second when they say they aren't pursuing nuclear weapons.

[StrangeSox]

I don't believe Iran for a second when they say they aren't pursuing nuclear weapons.

 

I don't either. That doesn't make Balta's explanations of the terms of the NPT, to which Iran is a signatory, incorrect.

[southsider2k5]

I don't either. That doesn't make Balta's explanations of the terms of the NPT, to which Iran is a signatory, incorrect.

 

I never said the terms were incorrect. I did, however, laugh at the idea that they were going to prevent Iran from constructing a nuclear weapon.

[NorthSideSox72]

I never said the terms were incorrect. I did, however, laugh at the idea that they were going to prevent Iran from constructing a nuclear weapon.

Just want to interject here, mostly at Balta... Iran Iraq. Two very different circumstances.

 

[Balta1701]

Just want to interject here, mostly at Balta... Iran Iraq. Two very different circumstances.

Yeah. Military action against Iran is a lot riskier and much more foolish.

[StrangeSox]

But significantly more so if they have the bomb.

[NorthSideSox72]

Yeah. Military action against Iran is a lot riskier and much more foolish.

 

Yes, but also...

 

But significantly more so if they have the bomb.

 

Yes.

 

[Balta1701]

Iran has *Not* yet decided to undertake a program to build a nuclear bomb. That was the conclusion of the National Intelligence Estimate a few years ago, and it remains true today. They have infrastructure that could be developed to allow them to do so over a 3-5 year period, if they chose to do so. Just as has been the case for the last 15+ years.

 

If they chose to do so, then 1 of 2 things will happen. Either the IAEA will come screaming out of there that Iran has begun producing weapons grade material, or Iran will kick the IAEA inspections out permanently (and they still might well start screaming that Iran is producing weapons grade material, just from other measurements).

 

Until one of those 2 things happens, Iran is not developing a nuclear bomb.

[Milkman delivers]

Iran has *Not* yet decided to undertake a program to build a nuclear bomb. That was the conclusion of the National Intelligence Estimate a few years ago, and it remains true today. They have infrastructure that could be developed to allow them to do so over a 3-5 year period, if they chose to do so. Just as has been the case for the last 15+ years.

 

If they chose to do so, then 1 of 2 things will happen. Either the IAEA will come screaming out of there that Iran has begun producing weapons grade material, or Iran will kick the IAEA inspections out permanently (and they still might well start screaming that Iran is producing weapons grade material, just from other measurements).

 

Until one of those 2 things happens, Iran is not developing a nuclear bomb.

 

Agreed. It seems that people are already willing to make the same mistake that occurred in Iraq. The whole "c'mon, they're definitely making nuclear weapons" theory.

[NorthSideSox72]

Agreed. It seems that people are already willing to make the same mistake that occurred in Iraq. The whole "c'mon, they're definitely making nuclear weapons" theory.

These situations are nothing alike. Iraq was nowhere in the vicinity as far as Iran is right now, first of all. Second, it was mostly chem and bio weapons that we were supposedly targeting in Iraq. Third, even if it was the first line of excuse given to the public, it has since become crystal clear that the real reasons for invading Iraq were not at all about WMD.

 

Now, that all said, I am not advocating invading Iran. I think that is a terrible idea. I think the sanctions are good and are working, more of them will work more, and honestly I am 100% OK with Israel or whomever picking off nuclear people over there to further slow them down. I have no issue with asymetrical warfare in this case.

 

[Milkman delivers]

These situations are nothing alike. Iraq was nowhere in the vicinity as far as Iran is right now, first of all. Second, it was mostly chem and bio weapons that we were supposedly targeting in Iraq. Third, even if it was the first line of excuse given to the public, it has since become crystal clear that the real reasons for invading Iraq were not at all about WMD.

 

Now, that all said, I am not advocating invading Iran. I think that is a terrible idea. I think the sanctions are good and are working, more of them will work more, and honestly I am 100% OK with Israel or whomever picking off nuclear people over there to further slow them down. I have no issue with asymetrical warfare in this case.

 

If an American scientist were blown up in a car bomb in order to slow us down from reaching a technology that others already had (especially if we weren't in open war with them), it'd be clear terrorism.

[NorthSideSox72]

If an American scientist were blown up in a car bomb in order to slow us down from reaching a technology that others already had (especially if we weren't in open war with them), it'd be clear terrorism.

OK. And?

 

[Milkman delivers]

OK. And?

 

Sorry, I was just going back to the idea that the Iranian scientist being killed was terrorism.

[NorthSideSox72]

Sorry, I was just going back to the idea that the Iranian scientist being killed was terrorism.

Maybe.

 

See, to me, terrorism has to involve inciting terror in the public - it is an attack that is outside "normal" war tactics whose purpose is to incite fear in a larger number of people, like the population of a country or the military of a country.

 

This, to me, fits more with either an act of war (since it has a military and political purpose that is not at all about fear and terror), or possibly even just plain murder.

 

But its all terminology and it doesn't really matter what we call it. I was just saying, if we feel Iran is on the doorstep, I have no problem with Israel or the US using asymetrical tactics like this to achieve the end goal of preventing Iran from having a nuclear weapon. In fact, these sorts of methods have a lot less collateral damage than going in and bombing the place.

 

[Milkman delivers]

Maybe.

 

See, to me, terrorism has to involve inciting terror in the public - it is an attack that is outside "normal" war tactics whose purpose is to incite fear in a larger number of people, like the population of a country or the military of a country.

 

This, to me, fits more with either an act of war (since it has a military and political purpose that is not at all about fear and terror), or possibly even just plain murder.

 

But its all terminology and it doesn't really matter what we call it. I was just saying, if we feel Iran is on the doorstep, I have no problem with Israel or the US using asymetrical tactics like this to achieve the end goal of preventing Iran from having a nuclear weapon. In fact, these sorts of methods have a lot less collateral damage than going in and bombing the place.

 

I have no problem with it either, strangely and possibly hypocritically. It's just an interesting aspect that needs to be considered.

[StrangeSox]

I have no problem with it either, strangely and possibly hypocritically. It's just an interesting aspect that needs to be considered.

 

this is pretty much where I'm at, too.

[Balta1701]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/04/...E8031DI20120104

 

(Reuters) - European governments have agreed in principle to ban imports of Iranian oil, EU diplomats said Wednesday, dealing a blow to Tehran that crowns new Western sanctions months before an Iranian election.

 

The prospective embargo by the European Union, along with tough U.S. financial measures signed into law by President Barack Obama on New Year's Eve, form a concerted Western campaign to hold back Iran's nuclear program.

Oil dropped to a three-week low after two European Union officials said an embargo on Iranian crude imports may be postponed for six months.

 

Crude fell 0.4 percent as officials said that the ban would be delayed to allow nations to find new supply. International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors will go to Tehran to discuss Iran’s nuclear program, two diplomats said. Futures also declined after French Finance Minister Francois Baroin said Standard & Poor’s is stripping France of its AAA credit rating.

 

“We’re still digesting the Iran news,” said Chris Dillman, an analyst and broker at Tradition Energy in Stamford, Connecticut. “Prices dropped on the news that the EU had pushed back the embargo and may fall further when we get more information about the inspectors’ visit. Anything that reduces tension with Iran sends prices lower.”

Yeah, no one ever means that.

[southsider2k5]

Yeah, no one ever means that.

 

They had said from the beginning that it was going to be delayed six months. Not sure why this is news

[Balta1701]

Iran has not yet decided whether to make a nuclear bomb, according to the intelligence assessment Israeli officials will present later this week to Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff.

 

Dempsey will be arriving on his first visit here since being appointed chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in September. He will meet with various senior defense officials, including Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Benny Gantz.

 

The Israeli view is that while Iran continues to improve its nuclear capabilities, it has not yet decided whether to translate these capabilities into a nuclear weapon - or, more specifically, a nuclear warhead mounted atop a missile. Nor is it clear when Iran might make such a decision.

 

Israel also believes the Iranian regime now faces an unprecedented threat to its stability, which for the first time combines both external and internal pressure: from abroad, increasingly harsh sanctions and threats of military action, and at home, economic distress and worries about the results of the parliamentary election scheduled for March.

 

Israeli intelligence sees signs that the regime in Tehran is genuinely worried about the possibility of an opposition victory in March. Should that happen, the regime will have to choose between conceding the loss or falsifying results - as it apparently did in the 2009 presidential election - which could incite anti-regime protests thanks to the tailwind provided by the Arab Spring, which toppled the regimes in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya.

Link

[StrangeSox]

Hard to morally justify killing civilian scientists if they're not actively pursuing the bomb.

[southsider2k5]

Hard to morally justify killing civilian scientists if they're not actively pursuing the bomb.

 

I was just about to say their actions and their words don't add up. But then again Israel is about as big of a liar as there is on the world stage. How long did it take them to admit they had the bomb?