Like Iraq, US intel on Iran faulty - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

rabbitproof · 12-03-2007, 11:22 PM

By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent 2 hours, 14 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - First Iraq, now Iran. The United States has operated under a cloud of faulty intelligence in both countries.

In a bombshell intelligence assessment, the United States has backed away from its once-ironclad assertion that Tehran is intent on building nuclear bombs.

Where there once was certainty, there now is doubt. "We do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons," the new estimate said Monday.

Compare that with what then-National Intelligence Director John Negroponte told Congress in January. "Our assessment is that Tehran is determined to develop nuclear weapons."

Just last month, President Bush, at a news conference with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, said, "We talked about Iran and the desire to work jointly to convince the Iranian regime to give up their nuclear weapons ambitions, for the sake of peace."

----

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071204/..._iran_analysis

Can we all breath a sigh of relief? Whew.

Arne · 12-04-2007, 03:15 PM

Don't expect a response to this one... Neo-Cons ignore stuff like that. In a few months they'll just start their war propaganda again as if nothing had happened.

dude1394 · 12-04-2007, 08:25 PM

WOW!! This is great. So dubya' has gotten rid of wmd programs in iraq, libya, north korea and now Iran as well!!

dude1394 · 12-04-2007, 08:27 PM

Hm...this is kind of interesting. So like iraq, us intel on Iran is faulty NOW or BEFORE? Are you only going to believe the rosy picture?

dude1394 · 12-04-2007, 08:31 PM

Obviously Iran (like Al Queda) is hoping for a democrat win in the US elections.

Thanks dubya, for doing the heavy lifting and not kicking problems down the road.

http://engram-backtalk.blogspot.com/...s-wrought.html

Quote:

In light of all that has happened over the last couple of years, you may not remember that one of the most compelling arguments in favor of invading Iraq was that, in addition to putting an end to Saddam's pursuit of WMDs, the use of American force against a genocidal dictator with the blood of a million people on his hands would deter other state sponsors of terror from pursuing WMDs (without having to fire a shot at them). Against this way of thinking, the received wisdom on the left has been that the plan backfired because it caused other terrorist nations to accelerate their nuclear programs -- not to mention the fact that it also handed a propaganda victory to al Qaeda on a silver platter. Here is one example from last year:

Quote:

President Bush vowed to never let the world’s most dangerous regimes get the world’s most dangerous weapons. Rather than pursue treaties to eliminate weapons, Bush opted to eliminate regimes. Rather than follow the successful strategies of decades of Republicans and Democrats, including his own father, President Bush followed the untested prescriptions conjured up in neoconservative Washington think tanks.

Iraq was the first direct application of this radical new strategy. It failed catastrophically. The invasion of a state that did not have nuclear weapons produced chaos in Iraq and diverted U.S. attention from other, more pressing nuclear challenges in North Korea and Iran. Both states took advantage. Both advanced their nuclear programs more in the past five years than they had in the previous ten.

Is that so? As it turns out, Iran halted their program shortly after the invasion of Iraq according to the latest National Intelligence Estimate:

Quote:

We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program...We judge with high confidence that the halt, and Tehran’s announcement of its decision to suspend its declared uranium enrichment program and sign an Additional Protocol to its Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Safeguards Agreement, was directed primarily in response to increasing international scrutiny and pressure resulting from exposure of Iran’s previously undeclared nuclear work.

I've been hearing for years that Bush's folly in Iraq largely accounted for Iran's frantic push to produce a nuclear bomb. Guess not. And let's not forget that Iran was not the only Islamic state sponsor of terror to make that decision in late 2003:

Mavdog · 12-05-2007, 11:58 AM

the nie report says that iran stopped the nuclear bomb program, however iran continues to enrich uranium to weapon grade level.

while the report is good news, for with the publication of the estimate the hawks who prefer military solutions to diplomatic ones will have to step back, iran remains an adversary and a problem to a peaceful world.

iran continues to support groups who advocate war rather than dialogue, and iran continues to develop military arms and missles which are only offensive in nature.

the world must continue to presssure iran to stop its nuclear program and for iran to contribute to, rather than work against, a peaceful resolution to the conflicts in the mid east and afganistan.

unfortunately, due to the mistakes by the current administration in iraq, and the use of phrases by our president as recent as a couple of weeks ago about iran's acts leading the world to "world war 3", iran is able to use this intelligence estimate as supportive of its conduct and as a very able tool to portray the current administration as being completely irrational towards them.

a double edged sword it seems.

dalmations202 · 12-05-2007, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mavdog

the nie report says that iran stopped the nuclear bomb program, however iran continues to enrich uranium to weapon grade level.

while the report is good news, for with the publication of the estimate the hawks who prefer military solutions to diplomatic ones will have to step back, iran remains an adversary and a problem to a peaceful world.

iran continues to support groups who advocate war rather than dialogue, and iran continues to develop military arms and missles which are only offensive in nature.

the world must continue to presssure iran to stop its nuclear program and for iran to contribute to, rather than work against, a peaceful resolution to the conflicts in the mid east and afganistan.

unfortunately, due to the mistakes by the current administration in iraq, and the use of phrases by our president as recent as a couple of weeks ago about iran's acts leading the world to "world war 3", iran is able to use this intelligence estimate as supportive of its conduct and as a very able tool to portray the current administration as being completely irrational towards them.

a double edged sword it seems.

While I actually agree with most of what you write here, my question is how do you get the world to pressure Iran, when Russia is providing the scientist to develop the nukes?

I mean when Russia, France, China, and Germany sent military equipment to Iraq between 1991 and 2003 against all the NATO resolutions and did it for oil......how do you trust them to do what's right, and Pressure -- Iran.

Have you heard/seen what is happening in Sudan because China wants the oil?

Russia want to be a power again, and Putin plans on staying in power till that happens.
China is coming out of third world status, and is so largely populated.
Germany and France want out of the depression and to make Europe a major player again.

Right and Wrong are gone.

$$$$, Power, and Oil will rule.