CIA: No Evidence of Iranian Nuclear Weaponization Program

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/25/w...an-to-build-a-bomb.html?_r=1&src=me&ref=world

 

Wow, what a surprise

I'm so (*)(*)(*)(*) sick of our country beating the war drums over and over again with no evidence of any wrong doing.

 

Since when has the ACTUAL ACTIONS of a country our military industrial and oil complex would LIKE to invade made any difference to the decision to attack?

We can be sure our military or secret services will tow a derelict ship and simulate and enemy attack (Vietnam Gulf of Tonkin), that our "intelligence services" will assert nuclear/Biological/WMD capability (Iraq and now Iran) or many other propaganda campaigns to ensure the US public's gullible and panicked support of another multi-trillion dollar transfer of tax money from the citizens to the war machine.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1v4ZLwevXAI"]Good ol Shoe![/ame]

 

If evidence and facts meant anything neo-cons, Ron Paul would have 100% support from the GOP.

 

Even the Israeli Spy chief felt that Iran was not a threat. Like Iraq, the push for war is to transfer money from Americans to private contractors and foreign powers who lobby our polititions and sometimes they are one and the same.

Mossad Boss: Iran Nuke No “Existential Threat"
http://www.therightperspective.org/2011/12/30/mossad-boss-iran-nuke-no-existential-threat/

 

So...if the CIA are saying there is no Iran nuclear program, then why are we and Israel playing war games with them?

I mean, I know the CIA has been largely discredited, or at least in my mind they have, but I don't understand this report. Is it some kind of mind-(*)(*)(*)(*) operation? The American public have been preached to by every mainstream media source about Iran's nuclear program. Something is very odd about this. It has never been a doubt of whether or not they had a program, not in my mind at least. Is it not true that in one form or another, Iran has been toying around in that field as long ago as the 70s? IIRC, Israel has bombed Iranian nuclear sites before.

But I digress. So, I guess the question now is whether or not Iran has nuclear weapons - or is actively pursuing the capabilities to construct said weapons.

If they're not, then why have we been told lies, then now told the truth?
Does this mean that hostilities will cease, since the supposed threat is now completely non-existent? Does it mean that War will be curtailed? Does it mean that this mess will be over with?

I dunno.


Me thinks, personally, that this revelation will not be the end of this mess. I'm not understanding the whole "They have it," and "Oh, no, they don't" routine. Was it faulty intelligence that lead them to believe they had a nuclear program in the first place? Was it faulty CIA intelligence? Their history of screw ups is extraordinary. If it is the case of faulty intelligence, which would make this whole process unnecessary, will America and England have to pay reparations for the sanctions they imposed upon Iran?

Interesting indeed is this development because what happens next is going to be the clear indicator of whether or not, in my opinion, the next World War begins or not. But surely since there is no threat, War will be avoided and wrongs will be remedied.

 

The CIA also said that Saddam had WMD's. Your actually assuming their intelligence is correct now?

 

That's the thing, it's become quite the Catch-22.

 

So we went to war in Iraq cause they said they had weapons, and we regret it. So now lets go to war cause they say Iran DOESN'T have weapons?

 

Does everyone here only read the subject heading. The article actually seems to make it clear that Iran is working towards the capability but hasnt actually yet built the device. Once they have the capability then it doesnt take relatively long to create one. If the world wants a non-nuclear Iran, then now is the time to try and convince them.

 

Interesting article...

Bloomberg Businessweek ~ IAEA/Iran

.

 

This is assuming that Iran isn't a rational actor..

Do you see that Iran is (*)(*)(*)(*)*d if they do and (*)(*)(*)(*)*ed if they don't?

 

No it doesn't, a enriching nuclear fuels isn't evidence of a nuclear weaponization program since you need to enrich fuel for commercial reactors as well.

 

Presuming yr country is US - governed by a bunch of clowns in Wash-DC , they're merely trying not to upset AIPAC/ both Christian + Zionists Jews.

May your Gawd save America from its masters.

 

I'm not saying one side is right on this, but what is true is that facts are always changing, what's true today may not be true tomorrow. Plus, the intel world is a fickle thing. So much counter-intelligence, disinformation, and misinformation out there. I do hope the analysts have it right because the leaders should be going off of that.

 

Its the level of enrichment isnt it? I read that Iran's nuclear power reactor needs enrichment at 4.5%, but Iran is working towards reaching 20% which is the technological tip off point which allows quick and easy increase to weapons grade enrichment of 95%.

 

Where did you read this? I don't trust unfalsified 'well I heard' statements.

 

This article writes that for nuclear weapons, Iran would have to reach 80% instead of 20%:

Allerdings müsste für einen Atomsprengsatz Uran 235 auf mindestens 80 Prozent angereichert werden.
http://derstandard.at/1329870354300/IAEA-Bericht-bestaetigt-Israels-Einschaetzung


20% is something that gullible American/European Guilt complex members can be fooled with, but it's not enough to prove that Israel's illegal settlement expansions are justified.

 

By way of WMD (fear mongering) they can reach a situation were they can do their next invasion and cause regime change and bring masses of people behind a next regime.
Iran does not need a nuclear powerplant, this world can get rid of nuclear, oil, gas powered power plants when it gets rid of all the inefficient power consumption things it runs one.
They have even used H1N1, which killed millions last century, in their fear mongering propaganda. WMD is just another term/abbriviation of fear they throw at the masses. They instil fear in the masses to get control over the masses. The UN/elites/politics should not push on Iran to cause regime change, but ask Iran to have energy change and get rid of all inefficient things (the power consuming industry, transportation)

 

The IAEA also says they may have built a hydrodynamic test chamber at Parchin, which is why the Iranians denied the IAEA access to it. If this is true, that's strong evidence that Iran is indeed working on nuclear weapons, as these have few applications other than explosive lens developement.

 

It's actually a lot higher than that, but I'm not privy to the specifics. However, the 20% limit is considered the boundary between civil nuclear technology and military nuclear technology.

 

It is when you enrich it to the 20% level when you know that commercial use is in the 3 to 5% level.

20% is weapon grade.

 

No it is not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium For a crude weapon 20% is useable, but isn't considered 'weapons grade'. 40-60% enrichment is more typical.

 

Sounds like a warnin' to Iran...

Israel won't warn US before Iran strike
February 28, 2012 - Israeli officials say they won't warn the US if they decide to launch a pre-emptive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities, according to one US intelligence official familiar with the discussions.

 

What does granny say?