The Facts About Iran’s Uranium Enrichment
Iran announced yesterday that it has enriched uranium in violation of a recent U.N. Security Council demand. The development is being hyped with headlines like “Iran Could Produce Nuclear Bomb in 16 Days, U.S. Says.”
But the truth is Iran’s announcement “had less to do with an engineering feat than with carefully timed political theater” to symbolize its defiance of the U.N. Here are the facts:
Iran enriched the uranium using a cascade of 164 centrifuges that spin uranium hexafluoride gas at supersonic speed. This process extracts U-235—usable in power reactors and nuclear weapons—from the gas. The enriched uranium that Iran produced cannot be used in a nuclear weapon because it contains just 3.5% U-235, whereas a nuclear weapon typically requires highly-enriched uranium (HEU) that contains more than 90% U-235. Assuming Iran has perfect luck with the centrifuge, it would need to operate this cascade continually for more than five years to produce enough HEU (15-20 kg, roughly the size of a basketball) for a crude nuclear bomb.
To acquire a credible nuclear weapons capability, Iran’s next step is to use this successful experiment as the basis for building a 3,000 centrifuge cascade at Natanz, as Iran has frequently claimed it would do. In theory, such a facility would be capable of producing enough HEU for 2-3 bombs a year. Building such a facility, however, is far more difficult and demanding than operating the 164 centrifuge cascade.
Even if everything goes right, such a facility would not be fully operational until 2009 at the earliest. This is still too soon for comfort, but it does leave significant time for some hard-nosed diplomacy.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Why let the truth get in the way of a good Rpublican talking point!!!! What are you guys thinking around here…Next you will be saying there is a Civil War in Iraq.
April 12th, 2006 at 3:57 pmHas anyone here read Larry Bond’s “Vortex”?
at one point in the book it talks about this type of cascading centrifuge system. It is destroyed when power is cut to the building, and the centrifuges go out of control.
April 12th, 2006 at 4:01 pmJuan Cole has some insightful comments about Iran’s nuclear capability:
Read the entire story.
April 12th, 2006 at 4:02 pm“Iran Could Produce Nuclear Bomb in 16 Days, U.S. Says.â€\
April 12th, 2006 at 4:13 pm- - Riiiiiiiiight, this from the same bunch that believes the earth is 6000 years old.
“Iran Could Produce Nuclear Bomb in 16 Days, U.S. Says.â€
- - This might be the most assinine statement from this administration in a long time and that’s saying something. For shits and grins, let’s assume it’s accurate. That begs the question to how are intelligence was so faulty that we’re just getting the bad news now.
But here’s the proof it’s complete hyperbole; can anyone with a working eyeball and ear think that this trigger-happy administration would have waited until Iran was about two weeks away from a bomb before reducing the country to a glowing, pock-marked wasteland?
April 12th, 2006 at 4:23 pmBombs in 16 Days?…
Bloomberg is reporting that Iran could produce a nuclear bomb in 16 days. It’s frightening. It’s terrifying. It’s bullshit.
And haven’t we heard this same kind of bullshit before?…
April 12th, 2006 at 4:38 pmYou know, if nothing happens by April 28th, I’m really really going to be disappointed.
April 12th, 2006 at 4:39 pmMan it just prove how well informed people are on this blog. Corinne, you beat me to it. Juan Cole is the bomb! Here is the other side of the coin from one of the most respected Military historians, well worth bookmarking. Enjoy. http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200604070923.asp
April 12th, 2006 at 4:39 pmHow can we have “hard-nosed diplomacy” if the Bush administration refuses to even talk to the Iranians?
That’s like clapping with one hand.
April 12th, 2006 at 4:40 pmBottom line: They really are enriching uranium for peaceful purposes, right? Of course, this fact will go completely ignored by the press. And the WH.
Btw, if you’re just tuning in, I have MoDo’s newest up, “Wag the Camel.” Enjoy while I go write something original.
April 12th, 2006 at 4:42 pmI’ll bet they do too. They’re gonna do it. There is no doubt about it.
They’re gonna get an A bomb, and bomb the bejesus out of Warshington.
It’s a done deal. The camel’s nose is in the tent.
So watch out!
April 12th, 2006 at 4:43 pm“Iran Could Produce Nuclear Bomb in 16 Days, U.S. Says.â€
I love the scare tactics. It’s pathetic. Keep the people scared and convinced that they need George Bush and Co. for protection.
April 12th, 2006 at 4:44 pmwell we got condi working on it! why are we STILL building bases in iraq? i think iran was the intended target all along. we just fucked up iraq to see if we could get all the muslims united, all gathereed in one big jihad against the usa….. then……. BOOM! they all go up together! the retardicans will stop at nothing to get the rapture started…. and the muslims are looking forward to 72 virgins!!!! how can you fight against sex and salvation!! (i always wanted to put those two words in one sentence!!!)
April 12th, 2006 at 4:47 pmIndeed, they could make a bomb in 16 days, if they had 54,000 perfectly functioning centrifuges. As it is, they only have 164, and it will take them at least 6 months to build the 3,000 centrifuges that are the next step in the process. Even if those 3,000 centrifuges were put to work night and day for the sole purpose of creating HEU, it would take around 9 months to create enough for a bomb. So, theoretically Iran could have the bomb by summer next year.
But, they have to *pay* for it. 3,000 supersonic centrifuges and loads of uranium hexaflouride don’t grow on trees, it costs money to produce them. I haven’t seen the numbers yet, but I’m guessing that putting those centrifuges to purely bomb-grade enrichment work isn’t economically feasible for the Iranians yet. They will have to get their civilian reactor online first to make nuclear bomb manufacture economically feasible. And they will need a significant fraction of those 54,000 centrifuges online before their nuke production capacity gets fast enough that the problem reaches crisis level.
Unless of course we start bombing them and they start a crash development program because they see it as their only chance to stave us off. Then we *would* be in trouble.
April 12th, 2006 at 4:48 pmBombs in 16 Days?…
Of course, this is bullshit. Its just an excuse to start dropping bombs as soon as possible becuase finally, people are applying some heat to their butts. Seymour Hersh is a mouthpiece for the military, and they’re saying that they don’t want to see an Iranian “adventure”.
So, WWIII just may get started in a few weeks. It all depends on sane people wresting control of the football and the codes away from the crazies.
April 12th, 2006 at 4:50 pm13
why are we STILL building bases in iraq?
It’s SOP, When in a hostile environment you continue to improve your defenses. For instance it starts as a hasty fighting position, a fox hole, a bunker, a concrete covered bunker etc. You continually upgrade your facilities. They should be improved until the date of pull out.
Not debating the war here or anything else Ryan, just trying to put out a strategic reason for still working on the bases in Iraq.
As far as Iran, heck not our problem, there are a lot of closer countries that can worry about it. Not to mention they hate Israel a whole lot more than us (Especially if we don’t get any further involved in this whole mess). If any of their radiation is used on an attack in the U.S then I am all for turning the whole country into a parking lot. Preemptive nah, strict consequences Hell Yeah
April 12th, 2006 at 5:01 pmAnd if by “hard-nosed diplomacy” you mean bombing the shit out of them, then yes, there’s always time for that in this Administration….
April 12th, 2006 at 5:02 pmHard-nosed diplomacy? GW Bush & Co.? You’re funny.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:12 pmYou can drop the ‘IF’s . Bush is going to attack Iran. All the signs are there.
What I find really sad is the Iranians still don’t seem to hear it. Bush and his madmen have set their egos on the road to Iran, and more innocent people are going to die because Bush is in a pissing contest with the Iranian president.
But, until he actually does it, he can deny it and we are all supposed to believe him.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:13 pmThen we are supposed to support him when he drags us into another war. Of course, we have a whole new set of violations to complain about, but he doesn’t give a damn.
He and his lackies get to call us unpatriotic if we don’t rally round the flag.
He does as his little warped mind pleases, and we are the tail of dog. He doesn’t care if we wag or shit.
He’s going to attack Iran.
you know … you liberals want to wait until iran gets nukes… and then everybody else in the region does too. where will you be when the nuclear war breaks out? unsafe anywhere.thats why we must stop iran BEFORE they get the bomb.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:13 pmAnd good ole’ Bill Kristol was on Fox this morning claiming “diplomacy has failed”. This shit is getting scary!
April 12th, 2006 at 5:19 pm#20 Anvilnoggin, I don’t think any one here is saying that we don’t appreciate the threat , we are concerned about the degree of threat. If the Administration was so concerned that Iran would have a wepon why invade Iraq first? Care to step in to that conversation.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:24 pmThe administration keeps saying it’s going to solve this crisis with diplomacy, so any talk of military strikes is just ‘wild speculation.
Which begs the question; seen any diplomacy lately? Judging by the evidence, pretty much everything they’ve said regarding themselves and Iran lately has been false.
–
April 12th, 2006 at 5:25 pmhttp://griperblade.blogspot.com - grumblings from the heartland
you know … you liberals want to wait until iran gets nukes… and then everybody else in the region does too. where will you be when the nuclear war breaks out? unsafe anywhere.thats why we must stop iran BEFORE they get the bomb.
Comment by anvilnoggin
Who came up with this load of shit?
I want someone in America with balls to push bush to the side and do to the Iranians what Kennedy did to the Russians over cuba. PUBLICALLY show PROOF and call their bluff.. at the same time give them an ultimatum just like JFK did.
This sneaking into war bullshit is dishonest, unhonorable, stupid, and wide open for abuse. I want to know that we took DRASTIC measures in the open for all to see that we REALLY tried to get Iran to do all it can to assure us of its intentions … if that fails then OPENLY give them an ultimatum… and if that passes… well bomb their asses. But if we just sneak into the bombing phase we are evil.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:27 pmKristol says “diplomacy has failed” What diplomacy? Bush’s version of diplomacy is an extended middle finger.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:29 pmRice and the neocons are beating the tom-toms — they are preparing for war.
Someone, please, call the adults, and ask them to resolve this — the kids are planning a rumble and it’s gonna be a bad one.
Iran could buy a bomb from someone, but then so could anyone with enough money. Do we attack the whole world? I think talks are better than threats,but keep a big stick at the ready. *Anvilnoggin don’t paint everyone with a liberal or conservitive brush,it won’t stick.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:31 pmIf the Administration was so concerned that Iran would have a wepon why invade Iraq first? Care to step in to that conversation.
Comment by the fly-man — April 12, 2006 @ 5:24 pm
thats right. i hate bush too. i was against iran from before the war
its ironic. but i think this iran problem is better taken care of now than later.
ounce of prevention = pound of cure.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:32 pmBushco knows what war is, but does not have the slightest idea what diplomacy is.
In the last 5 years you seen any diplomacy? I thought not. Of course we have no diplomats, all we have is neo-cons. How are you gonna have diplomacy with no diplomats?
Georgie Porgie couldnt talk his way out of a wet paper sack.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:34 pmTake care of? So the notion of unilateral cooperation from China and Russia, France and Germany are already discounted or antiquated? That’s like saying I’d let the same doctor who took out my infected tonsils with a chain saw now gets to my kidney transplant. Malpractice is malpractice regardless of the life saving mission to remove pathogens. Time for a new doctor. Sorry to the medical profession for the slanderous analogy.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:42 pmThen why are they closing so many bases in the US? Don’t we need protection at home, now that we have pissed off the world?
April 12th, 2006 at 5:42 pmMalpractice is malpractice regardless of the life saving mission to remove pathogens. Time for a new doctor. Sorry to the medical profession for the slanderous analogy.
Comment by the fly-man — April 12, 2006 @ 5:42 pm
this isnt about bush , its about a mid-east future without an arms race.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:45 pmanvilnoggin is an appropriate name. Hard head. No facts get in.
The “threat” Iran poses is not a nuclear weapons one or even a military one. It’s economic. Same with Iraq. It’s all about the oil-backed U.S. dollar and keeping control of the dollar’s value. We’re led to believe it’s a nuclear weapons threat because the small-minded mainstream america are sheep and can’t comprehend something as complex as national debt and global trade. This is just the administration marketing a war. I mean really, if you had as much money as Iran, why wouldn’t you just go and buy a nuclear missle if you wanted one? Hell, Cheney would probaby sell you one if the price was right.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:46 pm#31 If you don’t want an arms race, don’t spur countries into it.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:47 pmThe Bush administration is trying to rush the confrontation with Iran, they know their days are counted, in November they might be losing the grip of congress, so they know they have to get something going with Iran ASAP !! After november, they will only be the clowns in the gross spectacle of perhaps the worst two last years in a presidency in history (that is, if the chimp manages to avoid impeachment)
April 12th, 2006 at 5:52 pmwhere will you be when the nuclear war breaks out? unsafe anywhere.thats why we must stop iran BEFORE they get the bomb.
Comment by anvilnoggin — April 12, 2006 @ 5:13 pm
Following this logic, the US should start by invading those countries that already have nuclear capabilities, lest they turn on the US.
After that, the US ought to invade any country that might, probably, maybe, could potentially have nuclear ambitions, you know, BEFORE the get any ideas and actually build a bomb.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:53 pm[…] Obviously a lot of smart and well-informed people have been thinking about this. Many, like Juan Cole, think that the Iranians are nowhere close to a bomb; ThinkProgress is slightly less sanguine. They are taking the trouble to make this argument because the US is claiming that it would only take 16 days for Iran to make a bomb. There are all sorts of reasons to disbelieve this particular claim: a history of crying wolf, an apparent misunderstanding of the concept of significant figures… Still, is it more like ten days, or ten years? […]
April 12th, 2006 at 5:59 pmAnvilnoggin, you are so PNAC. This IS the last chance power drive by the broken heros. They , the PNAC group, has all but a miniscule bit of time left to exploit the party consent of the GOP before their majority runs out and off to the ashheap of history they and their corrupt feeble game plans will go. They have wasted every ounce of credibility they have garnered by usurping OUR government for their own poorly thought out agendas and have wasted 2400 of the finest American soldiers who they think they can dispose of like the 300+Billion dollars of the treasury they think they are entitled to. They have gambled and lost and now they are asking us to enable them, just once more, honest, really, Iran is going to nuke Israel, honest we can’t afford this to happen. This should called the little boy from the lower east side who cried Wolfowitz. Not on my nickle. Diplomacy first.
April 12th, 2006 at 5:59 pmYes, nip ‘em in the bud. Then get rid of anyone outside of the US that neocon paranoia points to! Didn’t China say something out of line? They have the bomb. Nuke ‘em! The press in Britain has been getting a little big for it’s britches lately too. The English have nukes. Bomb them! Then bomb me, because I’m thinking very dangerously toward the neo-cons lately.
April 12th, 2006 at 6:05 pmif you had as much money as Iran, why wouldn’t you just go and buy a nuclear missle if you wanted one? Hell, Cheney would probaby sell you one if the price was right.
Comment by Mikey — April 12, 2006 @ 5:46 pm
each countries uranium has a unique chemical fingerprint
we would find out who the iranians bought it from and theyd be next people bombed.
April 12th, 2006 at 6:13 pmThen why are they closing so many bases in the US? Don’t we need protection at home, now that we have pissed off the world?
Closing bases back home allows the money to be spent on improving the quality of life for the soldiers. If there is more money for body armor/equipment etc, it saves lives. It also allows the money to be used for other DoD programs. Currently the U.S mainland isn’t a hostile zone so upgrading the current installations (in the US) doesn’t follow that logic. Same as upgrading the bases in japan/Germany etc, no reason for added defense at this time (Personally I don’t think we need to be at either of those any longer and can bring the money back here). Iraq is a hostile zone so in order to give them the best protection available they need to continue to improve the installations.
While you may advocate not building up the current bases in Iraq, and leaving the soldiers on the ground with what they currently have, I do not. Here is where we will disagree (Which we are allowed to do).
April 12th, 2006 at 6:16 pmanvilnoggin,
Iran has its own Uranium deposits - 6 QUADRILLION BTU by the US government’s own estimates. It’s one of the reasons they’ve claimed the right to nuclear power all of the way back to 1976 when Cheney/Rumsfeld sold them a Plutonium Enrichment reactor against the wishes of the Democrats in Congress.
April 12th, 2006 at 6:22 pmInteresting article from Atlantic Monthly:
more info here:
http://www.thoughttheater.com
April 12th, 2006 at 6:22 pmthe move was widely perceived as an indication that Iran has decided to pursue nuclear weapons, whatever the consequences.
Comment by Daniel DiRito — April 12, 2006 @ 6:22 pm
Wrong. The move only clearly indicates that Iran has decided to produce energy with nuclear reactors.
Anything else is speculation, conjectures, and/or fearmongering.
April 12th, 2006 at 6:27 pm41,
Ryan what is your stance on this one? I realize that Chowderhead and Goober sold them a reactor, but now that they have the 6 QUADRILLION BTU, what action/if any does the U.S take?
April 12th, 2006 at 6:29 pm“Then why are they closing so many bases in the US?”
I thought bases were being closed in the U.S. as political retaliation against Blue States.
April 12th, 2006 at 6:29 pmeach countries uranium has a unique chemical fingerprint
we would find out who the iranians bought it from and theyd be next people bombed.
Comment by anvilnoggin
natural uranium has the unique fingerprint. The fingerprint is scrambled when it’s refined into fuel or warhead grade.
April 12th, 2006 at 6:42 pm“, but now that they have the 6 QUADRILLION BTU, what action/if any does the U.S take? Comment by Tundra”
The BTUs aren’t a problem, unless they get diverted into a bomb.
We must work the world community and the security counsel and come up with a unified strategy on how real the threat is, and what to do about it. If we fail diplomatically because of our failures, the world won’t back any response. If we fail because of Iran, they will. The problem is our ‘team’ is not very competent so I fear the first scenario is likely. Bolten is one of the most arrogant and bumbling diplomats this country has ever had. You’d think someone with his educational credentials would have half a brain, but I think he must have gone psychotic with all of the sex parties and freaky crap he’s into.
April 12th, 2006 at 6:45 pm“I thought bases were being closed in the U.S. as political retaliation against Blue States. Comment by Mikey ”
That’s right, and the stupid crackers who did it now have to be stationed in those hell hole red state bases that are left. It’s called KARMA - it’s great to be a Hindu :)
April 12th, 2006 at 6:46 pmwe would find out who the iranians bought [the uranium] from and theyd be next people bombed.
Comment by anvilnoggin — April 12, 2006 @ 6:13 pm
I see the Bush cultist followers never get tired of war and death.
Iran is developing nuclear technology for civilian purposes -the consensus among intelligence agencies is that Iran is a decade away from developing nuclear weapons at best (or worst, depending on how you look at it).
That country would not be the first one to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. The “nuclear threat” is simply another excuse for the Bush administration to bully, and potentially invade, another oil-rich country.
April 12th, 2006 at 6:49 pm[…] The Facts About Iran’s Uranium Enrichment Iran announced yesterday that it has enriched uranium in violation of a recent U.N. Security Council demand. The development is being hyped with headlines like “Iran Could Produce Nuclear Bomb in 16 Days, U.S. Says.” […]
April 12th, 2006 at 6:52 pm“I see the Bush cultist followers never get tired of war and death”
Yeah, the supposed superior christians elitists have surely lost sight of “turn the other cheek” and “do unto others as you would have done to you”
April 12th, 2006 at 6:53 pmStop passing these blatant facts around - the rhetoric is what’s key.
April 12th, 2006 at 6:55 pm49
I see the Bush cultist followers never get tired of war and death.
51
Yeah, the supposed superior christians elitists have surely lost sight of “turn the other cheek”
Anvil said that if Iran bought a nuke and used it, they would be bombed next. Are you suggesting if Iran nuked us we should turn the other cheek and proclaim a stance of no war?
47
The BTUs aren’t a problem, unless they get diverted into a bomb.
April 12th, 2006 at 7:01 pmSo what was the problem with Cheney and Rumsfeld selling them a reactor that could do that?
Anvil said that if Iran bought a nuke and used it, they would be bombed next.
Comment by Tundra — April 12, 2006 @ 7:01 pm
Wrong. Here is the conversation:
if you had as much money as Iran, why wouldn’t you just go and buy a nuclear missle if you wanted one?
Comment by Mikey — April 12, 2006 @ 5:46 pm
anvilnoggin’s reply:
each countries uranium has a unique chemical fingerprint
we would find out who the iranians bought it from and theyd be next people bombed.
Comment by anvilnoggin — April 12, 2006 @ 6:13 pm
No word about using the nuclear missile.
anvilnoggin says Iran should be bombed before they get a nuclear missile or as soon as they buy one, and that whoever sold it to them should be bombed too. It is a highly hypothetical scenario but anvilnoggin already has his mind made up: Killed ‘em all!
And then people wonder “Why do they hate us?”
Are you suggesting if Iran nuked us we should turn the other cheek and proclaim a stance of no war?
You forgot the second quote: “do unto others as you would have done to youâ€.
April 12th, 2006 at 7:12 pmThanks Gregor,
I made an Assumption about usage there. Makes sense now.
Yeah no bombing yet
April 12th, 2006 at 7:16 pmThat’s right, and the stupid crackers who did it now have to be stationed in those hell hole red state bases that are left.
Some of those Red State bases are wonderful. I was at Ft Ord CA and Schofield Bks HI, and neither of them held a candle to Bragg, Campbell, Sam Houston or even Benning. Getting rid of Ord was a smarter choice if you had to choose one (opinion noted).
April 12th, 2006 at 7:26 pmIt’s called KARMA - it’s great to be a Hindu :)
Actually the “Stupid Crackers” (Racism noted) who choose which bases to close were all in the Pentagon or retired military. They didn’t have to move anywhere. Congress had it’s approval process as well. The people slammed with the base changes had no bearing on it. Was it Karma by association?
April 12th, 2006 at 7:30 pm“Actually the “Stupid Crackers†(Racism noted) who choose which bases to close were all in the Pentagon or retired military. They didn’t have to move anywhere. Tundra”
It was Karma for the organization, because these same military have recruited and kept increasingly more conservative leaders, and between those that retired, and those that were still serving, they allowed it. Yes it’s absolutely karma.
“Was it Karma by association? Comment by Tundra”
And Karma is always by association, when I have time I’ll explain it sometime…
April 12th, 2006 at 7:43 pm#53 “Anvil said that if Iran bought a nuke and used it, they would be bombed next. Are you suggesting if Iran nuked us we should turn the other cheek and proclaim a stance of no war?”
No, I’m not suggesting that, but I’m not out on a pedestal proclaiming that I’m a saved, god-fearing, christian either. My point was tounge-in-cheek to illustrate all of the hypocrisy going on with this administration. They’re Christian when they need Christian vote; they’re lying, fear mongering war hawks when they need control of oil; they use war in the promotion of peace; they don’t want Iran to have nuclear capability, but it was OK in 1976 when Cheney wanted to make a buck on it. Etc. Etc. B.S. by the truckload.
April 12th, 2006 at 7:48 pm“Some of those Red State bases are wonderful. I was at Ft Ord CA and Schofield Bks HI, and neither of them held a candle to Bragg, Campbell, Sam Houston or even Benning. Getting rid of Ord was a smarter choice if you had to choose one (opinion noted). Comment by Tundra ”
I can see how you’d hate to be in some place as ugly as Monterey compared the beautiful sites of ‘lovely’ Houston.
Alas, as I said Karma…
Then again, if all of your time is spent on the base, then you could have a fort built on a city dump, and would it matter if you had a good place to drink? Is that what you’re saying Tundra? ;)
April 12th, 2006 at 7:48 pm60,
I can see how you’d hate to be in some place as ugly as Monterey compared the beautiful sites of ‘lovely’ Houston.
I’m saying that if you are there to do a job, the onbase features are more important. Personally the PX, Dining Facilities, On-Post Recreational Activities and Family Advocacy groups were superior (It is what I looked for). The readiness of the units at those locations was always rated much higher as well. I suppose If I only was concerned for my personal ability to “party” Monterey would have been a better choice.
April 12th, 2006 at 7:56 pmTundra,
Like I said - Karma… Thanks for proving my point ;)
April 12th, 2006 at 8:04 pmBase realignment:
1988
16 Major Closures
11 Realignments
1991
26 Major Closures
19 realignments
1993
28 major Closures
13 realignments
1995
27 major Closures
17 realignments
26 redirects
2005
22 (Not broken down by major minor)
Congress had a hold off till 2007 for an official breakdown. They did allow the 22 above to be taken down for 2005.
April 12th, 2006 at 8:06 pmWhen you call yourself an Indian or a Muslim or a Christian or a European, or anything else, you are being violent. Do you see why it is violent? Because you are separating yourself from the rest of mankind. When you separate yourself by belief, by nationality, by tradition, it breeds violence. So a man who is seeking to understand violence does not belong to any country, to any religion, to any political party or partial system; he is concerned with the total understanding of mankind.
April 12th, 2006 at 8:08 pm–J. Krishnamurti, Freedom from the Known,
From a May 15, 2005 Arizona Republic Article: http://www.azcentral.com/ arizonarepublic/ news/ articles/ 0515bases15.html
“Defense Department data show that “blue states,” those that voted for Democrat Sen. John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election, are slated to lose a combined 24,289 military jobs while their “red state” counterparts, those states carried by President Bush, will gain nearly 12,000 jobs.”
Coincidence?
April 12th, 2006 at 8:18 pmis no one concerned that israel has nuclear weapons in that region?? surely it is as insane letting them keep their stockpile, as it could be, if iran was to develop their own… not forgetting both pakistan and india..
man if i was an iranian i would want to have nculear weapons to keep the others in check..
cause and effect
April 12th, 2006 at 8:36 pm#40- Tundra, you cannot be serious?!? Here we are, 3 years, and 300 Billion dollars later, and our troops STILL do not have body armor, or properly armored vehicles. And the soldiers who have armor that their families have sent to them, have been ORDERED not to wear it! And as long as Rumsfeld is the SecDef, nothing good is going to happen. The DOD is a bottomless pit, TRILLIONS of dollars cannot be accounted for, and they don’t have any process in place to investigate. “I don’t know.” That is all Rumsfeld has to say. But if he doesn’t, who does? He should be declared a “natural disaster”, and dealt with accordingly.
April 12th, 2006 at 8:53 pmTundra how long did you serve / have you served? Were you enlisted or officer? I don’t mean to pry, just curious…
April 12th, 2006 at 8:55 pmHersh reveals the truth about an imminent attack on Iran using bunker buster nukes, then the Bush Regime denies the story, but then today Condi Rice demands that Iran be bombed > lol. Everybody with a brain in America knows that Bush intends to attack Iran ASAP, so Bush needs to admit it! Cut the crap and tell the American people you are a certified nut Dubya!
April 12th, 2006 at 8:57 pmThe main argument on this thread seems to be over the amount of time it will take for Iran to develop nuclear weapons. Do we really want to play the waiting game?
April 12th, 2006 at 9:10 pm65,
Soldiers pay Federal taxes and their home state taxes. Losing a military job isn’t that big of a deal. You lose the servicemembers spending (It gets more complicated than this though). If the unit is a reserve unit the members go to the closest location and fill vacancies there (There are thousands of vacancies, not new jobs). This means they still do their normal job at home, but for their weekend a month and 2 weeks a year they go to a different place (Within the state, the federal gov’t cannot take the national guard members elsewhere).
If it is a Active duty unit then the servicemember will go whereever the job is (Still paying home state taxes) So any of the units listed that happen to be reserve or National Guard only lose the Civilian workforce (Which can be huge though).
The real loss is the civilian workforce. They lose the income from them as well as the spending they do. I’ve been looking for numbers but have been unable to find anything yet.
The 2005 base closings were.
Athens Navscsol - Georgia
Barstow MCLB - California
Brunswick NAS - Maine
Buckley Annex - Colorado
Concord NWS - California
Crane NSWC - Indiana
Eielson AFB - Alaska
Ellsworth AFB - South Dakota
Fort Gillem - Georgia
Fort Mcpherson - Georgia
Fort Monmouth - New Jersey
Fort Monroe - Virginia
Grand Forks AFB - North Dakota
Kansas AAP - Kansas
Leased Space - Virginia
Lone Star AAp - Texas
New Orleans NSA - Louisiana
Newport Chemical - Indiana
Onizuka AS - California
Orange NRC - Texas
Portsmouth NSY - Maine
Rock Island Arsenal - Illinois
68,
Tundra how long did you serve / have you served? Were you enlisted or officer? I don’t mean to pry, just curious…
April 12th, 2006 at 9:12 pmJust 4 years. U.S Army Infantry Enlisted.
Stationed at Fort Ord CA, Schofield Bks HI, Southcamp Sinai Egypt (I did training at several other locations though)
By all means lets wait until Iran has nukes to figure out what we should do.
April 12th, 2006 at 9:13 pm70,
The main argument on this thread seems to be over the amount of time it will take for Iran to develop nuclear weapons. Do we really want to play the waiting game?
That’s a fair question I think. I am of the mindset that it can be someone elses problem. Frankly let them develop (or even get close) and that chowderhead will begin his Israel must die BS. Israel will then bomb the hell out of them.
Personally I think the U.N is a joke and won’t do a darn thing even after Iran drops a bomb on someone. I also think we won’t be their first choice though, especially if we leave them be at this point. That being the case, let a million people get toasted in a millisecond and see if the rest of the world reacts. If they do I was wrong. If they don’t then public support will switch over to support a war.
April 12th, 2006 at 9:19 pm71 Clarification
(Within the state, the federal gov’t cannot take the national guard members elsewhere).
As in moving a unit’s home base (Reserve’s can be but it’s not really the same people just a flag change) Yes they can deploy them to hot zones though (as we have seen)
Just getting that out there because I noticed my poor wording (Nothing new)
April 12th, 2006 at 9:33 pm72
libertariandy
Whoooo another Libertarian. Welcome!!
April 12th, 2006 at 9:35 pmYou are missing the point. Losing a military base isn’t just about losing jobs, it is about losing security.
We had the Tustin, CA helicopter base and El Toro Marine base both close. Not sure if you are familiar with Orange county, CA, but we are one of the wealthiest economies in the world. currently we have nothing but a couple of recruiter stations here now.
And no, that is not all Bush’s fault. Tustin was closed during Clinton, but Clinton didn’t run on the national security ticket. Bush did. If he wants people like me to believe him when he talks about national security, reopen our bases damn it. They are just sitting there empty.
April 12th, 2006 at 10:15 pmThat should read BASEBALL not BASKETBALL. One of the little things I picked up while getting my Ph.D. in physics. Please double-check these things… such ‘obvious’ errors undermine your credibility. The jist of the article is on the money though, keep up the good work and strive for continual improvement. Cheers!
April 12th, 2006 at 10:16 pmAnvilnoggin has apparently forgotten that most of the countries in the region have the bomb and,unlike Iran,are not signatories to the NNPT (Israel,India,Pakistan.
April 12th, 2006 at 10:18 pmIran has large technical issues to solve in order to enrich sufficient uranium to make a bomb (see http://www.armscontrolwonk.com). The uranium most prevalent in Iran is contaminated with molybdenum which must be removed or the cascade will crash.
Iran has no experience in constructing and operating the number of cascades needed.
The leadership of Iran appears willing to put on a show of resolve against the world in part because there are and have been indications that support throughout the country is low.
The dangerous part of this equation,of course,seems to be that a politically damaged leader of one country is negotiating with the politically damaged leader of another. That alone would require a critical look at all the reporting here.
77
That should read BASEBALL not BASKETBALL.
Thanks Petey! In the grand scheme I won’t be touching either but it helps on perspective.
Thanks!
April 12th, 2006 at 10:40 pmAnvilhead,
You are sooooo wrong. I am so tired of having to listen to these fools spout forth with their perceived threats. The sky is falling! Wake up you idiot! Iran has a long long way to go before they become a real threat to the US. Another war is the last thing we need right now. Instead, we should be trying to figure out how to fix this major mistake we made in Iraq. We should try to deal with Afganistan, which is falling apart before our eyes. Solve that shit before you even think about Iran
April 12th, 2006 at 10:41 pm76
You are missing the point. Losing a military base isn’t just about losing jobs, it is about losing security.
Everyone has their pour whatever money is needed into it issue and mine is the military (I can feel the wind up by Ryan now :)
That is the single most important thing the Federal Government is for (Opinion noted) Protect us from foreign invasion (Not justifying Iraq/Iran here just a general point) and defend the population.
Being as they have to play on a specific budget (I watched C-Span and neither side was complaining about the cost, which I was happy with. They did want to know what they were getting which makes sense) They have to try and make it more effecient. If the military isn’t running in the most effective effecient way, our dollars are being poorly spent. I demand it from the other Government programs so I must expect the same from the military. If combining bases helps to save money by having less administration costs, building upkeep etc, I have to be for it. Would I like to see all of those bases back up and us at Cold War statistics yeah pretty much. But I want the money spent the best way possible. Extra money should be spent on protecting the soldiers and improving their quality of life. Not keeping/updating aging facilities with little strategic value (Opinion noted again)
April 12th, 2006 at 11:00 pmI’m a little dissapointed that there isn’t more discussion of Pakistan - a country with a leader who took power in a military coup and who HAS nuclear weapons. How is that less of a threat than Iran - a democracy (of sorts, kind of like America) - that doesn’t have nuclear weapons?
A little coverage of Israel’s nuclear capabilities would also help round out the discussion if anyone is going to pretend this is about security.
Sadly, it seems more likely to be about politics. I expect the bombs to start falling shortly before the November elections. Until then it’ll just be more and more lies villefying Iran.
Oh, and some discussion on HOW Iran came to be the country it is would be nice too. America, self-appointed global defender of freedom, supported a murderous torture-loving dictator in Iran - the Shah - until the situation became so intolerable that there was a revolution. THIS is all Amerca has to offer as evidence of the effectiveness of it’s foreign policy in the region.
April 12th, 2006 at 11:01 pmhow does this sort of small scale production fit in the idea of a “dirty bomb”?
April 12th, 2006 at 11:56 pmBUSH/CHENEY HAS TO INVADE IRAQ BY OCTOBER FOR ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL REASONS
The Bush/Cheney administration has manufactured propaganda that has taken Iran’s previous ability to make a bomb in 10 years and whittled it down to just over two weeks!
Head for the hills folks! We’re all doomed! Bush/Cheney’s ratings are down, so we need another war on terror!
http://www.bloomberg.com/ apps/ news?pid=10000087&sid=awSzbHpjozAo&refer=top_world_news
http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Editorial/151589/
Didn’t we already see this show a few years ago? This is a rehash of the propaganda that brought us the Iraqi quagmire. The only thing different about it is back then they demonized Iraq instead of Iran, and the threat was WMDs and mushroom clouds instead of now just being a mushroom cloud, as in one mushroom cloud.
Of course, this time around, we have the added propagandized threat of illegal immigrants who want to take away our crappy minimum wage and under the table jobs.
Never mind that North Korea now has several nukes. Why aren’t we bombing the hell out of them? No O-I-L.
Besides low poll ratings, the other reasons Bush/Cheney wants to bomb Iran, is not just to control their oil, but because Iran intends to switch their oil sales from petrodollars to petroeuros. Venezuela is also threatening to take a similar action. That’s why Chavez is being smeared. We may attack them too.
If these two countries switch to petroeuros, you can be assured the dollar will plummet creating a snowball effect. Interest rates will rise to double digits. Inflation will rise to double digits. Gold will hit $1000. Oil will hit $100 a barrel. The stock market will crash. Unemployment will rise to double digits. The housing market bubble will explode. All of this will lead to a deep recession and put the U.S. into negative GNP territory.
But the worst side effect, at least for the Republicans, is they will lose the majority in the Senate and in the House, plus they will also lose the presidency as well, for at least a generation.
That is why I believe they HAVE to attack Iran and they will do it by October, because they are in danger right now of losing the majority in at least the Senate or the House. They cannot afford that, because the Democrats will then be able to halt all of their lobbyist friendly legislation. Plus, if the Democrats take back the House, impeachments will be their main order of business in 2007.
So, if you want to stop the upcoming attack on Iran, and it could very well be a nuclear attack, you better get ready to march on Washington. The immigrants have shown us the way, and it looks like college students have also awakened and are starting to get into the act:
http://sfgate.com/ cgi-bin/ article.cgi?f=/ c/ a/ 2006/ 04/ 12/ BAG3KI7INT1.DTL
Nothing short of massive demonstrations over several weeks or months can stop another war in the Middle East, a war that could very well turn into WWIII.
Get ready folks, it’s the return of the 60’s, man!
April 13th, 2006 at 12:33 amWhy does this story remind me of Ghandi making sea salt?
April 13th, 2006 at 1:05 am# 84
well written..
internal problems always seem to be dealt with through external means..
April 13th, 2006 at 1:41 ami so wished you americans had voted him out at the last election.. oh well, i suppose you thought it was worth finding out how much more of this fragile world he could destroy before his time ran out… we have saddam hussien on trial for crimes against humanity, bush should be next…
The 16 days to a nuclear weapon is as phony as the 16 words Bush used in his SOTU to suggest Iraq was seeking yellow cake Uranium from Niger.
April 13th, 2006 at 3:31 amFor reference please read Gilles Kepel’s book “The War for Muslim Minds” This explains the PNAC crowds plan to the T. This has been in the works with Bill Kristol, Richard Pearle, and Paul Wolfowitz at least since 1998. That’s why I reccomend cutting off all Pentagon funding for any Iranian operations by the congress until we have had substantial hearings, I dont care if they’re classified, on what the end game will be if we DO attack Iran. Everyone here has made some great and very logical points and plain common sense dictates we get answers.The main gist of the PNAC fools is that they are living in a post Cold war era and still think all can be solved with smart weapons. We know how the “They’ll greet us as Liberators” line went. I want to know what is the next step, and I’d really like to hear what the State Dept. has to say this time. http://www.amazon.com/ gp/ product/ 0674015754/ qid=1144927586/ sr=8-1/ ref=pd_bbs_1/ 103-0699631-7571806?n=507846&s=books&v=glance
April 13th, 2006 at 7:23 amBeing as they have to play on a specific budget (I watched C-Span and neither side was complaining about the cost, which I was happy with. They did want to know what they were getting which makes sense) They have to try and make it more effecient. If the military isn’t running in the most effective effecient way, our dollars are being poorly spent. I demand it from the other Government programs so I must expect the same from the military.
Comment by Tundra — April 12, 2006 @ 11:00 pm
Our defense budget is around $280 billion dollars. The country with the second highest defense budget is $52 million. Makes it IMPOSSIBLE for me to sympathize with teh military budget on any level. It’s too much money. As long as people are starving, it will remain too much money.
April 13th, 2006 at 7:29 amCheney/Bush may be the best friends the Mullahs have to keep them in power.
April 13th, 2006 at 7:42 amthe ‘16-Day’ piece is just more propaganda intended to stirr-the-pot,
another scenario is that the Anglo-American leadership is developing world wide consensus that something must be done about Irans nuclear aspirations…
Israel is being set up as the agent to undo Irans secret nuclear facilities
which will soon be discovered to be already operational at the 3,000 centrifuge level.
the US-UK-ISraeli Axis, cannot let a Muslim Republic become a regional power,
April 13th, 2006 at 8:34 ammuch less allow a Muslim Republic gain the status of a Caliphate or a regional power/attractor…which would blow the lid off the Outpost-Iraq long term strategy.
It wouldn’t have matter if Iran had developed a soda pop to compete against coke or pepsi .troops are in place and bush co are out to own and control the oil rich middle east.
April 13th, 2006 at 8:42 amI’m much more affraid of the Bushites than I am of the Mullahs at this time.
April 13th, 2006 at 8:43 am[…] Think Progress has The Facts about Iran’s nuclear capabilities… […]
April 13th, 2006 at 9:38 am16 days is the new 45 minutes.
April 13th, 2006 at 9:50 amI’m much more affraid of the Bushites than I am of the Mullahs at this time.
Comment by Edward Deevy
They you are stupid and don’t deserve the protection of the US Armed Forces or the US Constitution. Leave the country loser.
April 13th, 2006 at 9:54 amWow! No offense folks, I have plenty of problems with the current administration, and they deserve lots of criticism, but perhaps you should READ the Bloomberg article before posting. It specifically states that using 50K centrifuges could produce enough weapons-grade uranium for a bomb in 16 days. It does NOT say they can do this using their current 164 centrifuges. No I agree that the headline is meant to “shock” the reader, just like a cheap tabloid cover, but the knee-jerk reactions here are no better. Instead of criticizing the administration, why not criticize Bloomberg for scare-tactics journalism? And why criticize the US administration for “not negotiating†with Iran, when the UN and the European three are doing such a fine job?
April 13th, 2006 at 9:56 amAnvilnoggin has apparently forgotten that most of the countries in the region have the bomb and,unlike Iran,are not signatories to the NNPT (Israel,India,Pakistan.
Iran has large technical issues to solve in order to enrich sufficient uranium to make a bomb (see http://www.armscontrolwonk.com). The uranium most prevalent in Iran is contaminated with molybdenum which must be removed or the cascade will crash.
Iran has no experience in constructing and operating the number of cascades needed.
The leadership of Iran appears willing to put on a show of resolve against the world in part because there are and have been indications that support throughout the country is low.
The dangerous part of this equation,of course,seems to be that a politically damaged leader of one country is negotiating with the politically damaged leader of another. That alone would require a critical look at all the reporting here.
Comment by TJM
Israel, India and Pakistan do not make up “most” of the countries in the region and none are currently under the control of insane jihadi Muslims. There are no technical difficulties Iran must overcome that Russia or Red China are not willing to help them with. There is ONE solution to this problem and that is to destroy the work they have done thus far, destabilize the regime in power and assist in a take over of the country by a less virulent group of leaders.
It would also help immensely if we’d stop trying to negotiate with the fundamentalist Muslim clerics and kill them instead. Islam lives by the sword and must surely die by the sword.
April 13th, 2006 at 10:03 amI-R-I spews death to Muslims as usual on here > lol. But he thinks that Pakistan is cool > lol. Most of the 9/11 hijackers were Pakistanis, but I-R-I does not have a clue about that, and Pakistan has about 100 nuclear bombs at present with Osama living there!
April 13th, 2006 at 10:32 amIndia has around 200 nukes, Israel about 400 nukes, North Korea about 10 nukes so far, South Africa secretly has a few nukes, Britain several hundred nukes, France the same, China has a couple thousand, Russia several thousand, and the United States 10,000+, so Iran with a couple nukes is not the danger that Bush spews!
April 13th, 2006 at 10:39 amso Iran with a couple nukes is not the danger that Bush spews!
Comment by Jay Randal
You can’t compare the suicidal worldview of the Iranian headchoppers with any other culture on earth that has the bomb. For example. You have 10 handguns and a closet full of rifles. I have a pocket knife. You’re a pussy and wouldn’t lift a finger to defend yourself. I’ll cut your throat for looking at me the wrong way. Who’s more dangerous?
April 13th, 2006 at 11:22 amI-R-I spews death to Muslims as usual on here > lol. But he thinks that Pakistan is cool > lol. Most of the 9/11 hijackers were Pakistanis, but I-R-I does not have a clue about that, and Pakistan has about 100 nuclear bombs at present with Osama living there!
Comment by Jay Randal
I don’t think Pakistan is cool. I think we should wipe them off the map or have India do it for us. I think it should be done today. Oh, as far as I know most of the 9-11 highjackers were Saudi. Everybody knows that. You just make this shit up as you go along don’t you?
April 13th, 2006 at 11:24 amLol I-R-I you make up everything on a daily basis! I believe you are more dangerous to yourself than anybody else! As for Iran > Why would they use a nuke on anybody since all those other nations I mentioned have lots of them to blow them to smithereens?!
Yes Saudis were also involved in 9/11, but Bush loves Saudi Arabia, so go yell at him about it!
April 13th, 2006 at 11:36 am[…] Andy Grotto at Think Progress explains: Iran enriched the uranium using a cascade of 164 centrifuges that spin uranium hexafluoride gas at supersonic speed. This process extracts U-235—usable in power reactors and nuclear weapons—from the gas. The enriched uranium that Iran produced cannot be used in a nuclear weapon because it contains just 3.5% U-235, whereas a nuclear weapon typically requires highly-enriched uranium (HEU) that contains more than 90% U-235. Assuming Iran has perfect luck with the centrifuge, it would need to operate this cascade continually for more than five years to produce enough HEU (15-20 kg, roughly the size of a basketball) for a crude nuclear bomb. […]
April 13th, 2006 at 11:39 amIran will have a nuclear bomb within 16 days..and if you believe that, you still believe Saddam had drones capable of delivering chemical and biological weapons.
The following countries HAVE nuclear weapons:
USA
Russia
United Kingdom
France
China
The following countries have CONDUCTED TESTS:
India
Pakistan
Israel is SUSPECTED of having an arsenal of nuclear weapons
North Korea has DECLARED possessing nuclear weapons
Let’s bomb them all, including ourselves. If the world blows up, no one will have nuclear weapons! What a solution!
April 13th, 2006 at 11:41 amPost 105 > Pakistan and India went beyond testing of nukes years ago > they have an arsenel of them now! Australia supposedly has nukes too, but nobody talks much about it! Israel is not suspected to have nukes > they have them! I talked to an Israeli officer once and he told me they have about 400 of them, but nobody is supposed to mention it!
April 13th, 2006 at 11:59 amJay - my information was from Wikpedia. It may not have been updated. Thanks.
April 13th, 2006 at 12:13 pmWho’s more dangerous?
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — April 13, 2006 @ 11:22 am
According to you? Jay for being a progressive.
April 13th, 2006 at 12:15 pmIf any of their radiation is used on an attack in the U.S then I am all for turning the whole country into a parking lot. Preemptive nah, strict consequences Hell Yeah
Comment by Tundra #16
Tunnelvision,
Funny how casual and cavalier talk of murdering millions of human beings becomes…
…when it’s not YOU who are the victim…
…but always remember…
…”what goes around comes around”…
…that’s just an oversimplification of that “history repeats itself” cliche…
…and YOU MAY not escape it…
April 13th, 2006 at 12:24 pmYou can’t compare the suicidal worldview of the Iranian headchoppers with any other culture on earth that has the bomb.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I #101
I’rresponsible-R’apacious-I’nbred,
…all one has to do is…
…spend a day reading your (and your TREASONOUS inbred Bushite siblings’) posts…
…to find the perfect companion ideology to the…
…as YOU call it “suicidal worldview of Iranian headchoppers”…
…as I’ve often said…
,,,the Islamists have “al Qaida”…
…and the anti-Christians (that’d be you inbred Bushite “conservatives”)…
…have you “al Crackers”…
…you’re just dying (pun intended) to get to “the rapture”, aren’t you inbred?
April 13th, 2006 at 12:33 pmI’m much more affraid of the Bushites than I am of the Mullahs at this time.
Comment by Edward Deevy #93
Edward,
As well you should be…
…Bushiva and L’il Dick are politically “nuked”…
…This Iran thing is just to SCARE up oil and gas prices so that their corporate co-conspirators…
…can lap up the last of the profits BEFORE Bushiva and L’il Dick attempt to make good…
…their escape…
…like the Wizard of Oz the curtain has already been pulled back on this criminal TREASONOUS administration…
If the American people allow Bushiva, L’il Dick and the corporate mass murdering, war profiteering TRAITORS to abscond with their ill-gotten gains…
…America deserves to be brought to her knees…
…an pay NO attention to that cretin (I-Right-I #96)…
…he’s bitter and lost (literally)…
April 13th, 2006 at 12:41 pmAnd why criticize the US administration for “not negotiating†with Iran, when the UN and the European three are doing such a fine job?
Comment by CL
If they were doing such a fine job then we would no longer have a problem. The bottom line is we saw during the JFK years what COULD be done to force this issue out of back rooms where semi promises are made and not kept, but everyone is allowed to keep face. Screw that! Bring it all out in the open. If Iran is wrong PROVE them wrong in front of the TVs of the world. Make them explain to the world why it is the IAEA cannot have monitors over every square inch of every facility if they are only wanting peaceful nuclear power. Then lets hear what they have to say.
How can you on the right honestly say that a real attempt has been made? NO attempt has been made. Quite secretive meetings are BS. Use your freakin brains and corner Iran out in the open and put the spot light of truth on them. Make them either given in or show that they are after the bomb… in which case you could actually have MOST Americans behind you… most Americans do not like being tricked into war.
April 13th, 2006 at 1:06 pmIran Can Now Make glowing Mickey Mouse Watches
Despite all the sloppy and inaccurate headlines about Iran “going nuclear,” the fact is that all President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Tuesday was that it had enriched uranium to a measely 3.5 percent, using a bank of 180 centrifuges hooked up so that they “cascade.”
The ability to slightly enrich uranium is not the same as the ability to build a bomb. For the latter, you need at least 80% enrichment, which in turn would require about 16,000 small centrifuges hooked up to cascade. Iran does not have 16,000 centrifuges. It seems to have 180. Iran is a good ten years away from having a bomb, and since its leaders, including Supreme Jurisprudent Ali Khamenei, say they do not want an atomic bomb because it is Islamically immoral, you have to wonder if they will ever have a bomb.
The crisis is not one of nuclear enrichment, a low-level attainment that does not necessarily lead to having a bomb. Even if Iran had a bomb, it is hard to see how they could be more dangerous than Communist China, which has lots of such bombs, and whose Walmart stores are a clever ruse to wipe out the middle class American family through funneling in cheaply made Chinese goods.
What is really going on here is a ratcheting war of rhetoric. The Iranian hard liners are down to a popularity rating in Iran of about 15%. They are using their challenge to the Bush administration over their perfectly legal civilian nuclear energy research program as a way of enhancing their nationalist credentials in Iran.
Likewise, Bush is trying to shore up his base, which is desperately unhappy with the Iraq situation, by rattling sabres at Iran. Bush’s poll numbers are so low, often in the mid-30s, that he must have lost part of his base to produce this result. Iran is a great deus ex machina for Bush. Rally around the flag yet again.
If this international game of chicken goes wrong, then the whole Middle East and much of Western Europe could go up in flames. The real threat here is not unconventional war, which Iran cannot fight for the foreseeable future. It is the spread of Iraq-style instability to more countries in the region.
Bush and Ahmadinejad could be working together toward the Perfect Storm.
http://www.juancole.com/ 2006/ 04/ iran-can-now-make-glowing-mickey-mouse.html
April 13th, 2006 at 1:23 pmHow can you on the right honestly say that a real attempt has been made? NO attempt has been made. Quite secretive meetings are BS. Use your freakin brains and corner Iran out in the open and put the spot light of truth on them. Make them either given in or show that they are after the bomb… in which case you could actually have MOST Americans behind you… most Americans do not like being tricked into war.
Comment by Gerald Gibson
It’s been done already by the UN. The Iranians have flatly stated they will build a bomb and have thumbed their nose at the international community. Why don’t YOU know this? Most Americans do know this. And don’t ask for links. Look it up yourself.
April 13th, 2006 at 2:29 pmIRightI #110 - “You can’t compare the suicidal worldview of the Iranian headquarters with any other culture on earth that has the bomb.”
April 13th, 2006 at 5:01 pmWhat about North Korea where they regularly line up and shoot their own people? And your answer I’m sure would be who cares if they shoot each other, because you’re an ignorant, pompous ass.
“It’s been done already by the UN. The Iranians have flatly stated they will build a bomb and have thumbed their nose at the international community. Why don’t YOU know this? Most Americans do know this. And don’t ask for links. Look it up yourself.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I ”
Maybe because Gerald listens to REAL NEWS, and not the fabricated claims of the REICHWING PROPAGANDA machine that you so adore.
Give me one quote from the Iranian government that says they clearly intend to build a bomb. Your SPECULATION AND FEARS not withstanding, you’re just making crap up again MORON.
April 13th, 2006 at 8:56 pmWhat about North Korea where they regularly line up and shoot their own people? And your answer I’m sure would be who cares if they shoot each other, because you’re an ignorant, pompous ass.
Comment by Audrey
I don’t disagree that N. Korean totalitarian communism is a threat as we’ve seen in the past 100 years the resulting mass slaughter of scores of millions at the hands of the Soviet and Red Chinese not to mention the communist insurgencies that deal wholesale death in Africa and Latin America. Is it your point that we should suffer one because we suffer the other?
My dear, I’m far from ignorant and I can be an ass but are you suggesting that it’s my fault that I’m smarter, richer and better looking than the rest of you? Pompous, moi?
April 14th, 2006 at 8:49 amI-Right-I
April 14th, 2006 at 10:51 amYou do have a sense of humor, I’ll grant you that.
I-Right-I
You do have a sense of humor, I’ll grant you that.
Comment by Audrey
Thanks. It’s the only reason Judd hasn’t banished me once and for all. That and my sister said if he did she’d cut him off. HA!
April 14th, 2006 at 12:04 pmwhy again does a country that is soaked in oil need nuclear power? It dosn’t!
April 16th, 2006 at 3:19 pm[…] Ignoring the fact that when Krauthammer writes “every city in the civilized world,” he means every city in America and Israel, he is presenting a vision of fear defined by Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon at the earliest eight years from now. The fear of Iran is an idea, like the fear of Al Qaeda, that taken at its face value has real merit. If Iran had a bomb, if Iran supported terrorists who were concerned with the US and not Israel, if Ahmadinejad and the mullahs wanted to see their nation turned to glass, then it would Iran would merit a serious discussion as a threat to American national security. But as of now, Krauthammer and his ilk are describing dangers of an enemy that does not exist outside the minds of the most war hungry pundits and Bush administration officials. Apparently that does not matter. These are the questions. These are the calculations. The decision is no more than a year away. […]
September 18th, 2006 at 10:14 amVisit Bona Hardwood Floor Cleaner
December 15th, 2006 at 7:06 am