An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
NIE Report on Iran: An Additional Analysis
Matt Dupuis has an interesting follow-up post on the how of the recent NIE report. He also starts to consider the important question of why exactly Iran decided to halt its nuclear weapons program back in 2003.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
11 Responses to “NIE Report on Iran: An Additional Analysis”
Once again, Dupuis is echoing my thinking.
We have to outsmart Iran, not outhreaten them. The access given to inspectors will be a key indicator on what tone to take, IMO. The more they hide from the inspecors, the more we can push the uranium enchment dangers.
NORK is the only country to do all this. Iran hasn’t even illegally imported materials and electronics like Pakistan. Then there’s the “cold tests” that Sy Hersch doesn’t have a clue about what is and what isn’t. Iran still has a long way to go, like having our friends the Chinese help in cold tests.
Rudi,
To be fair, the chief inspector (can’t remember his name) was complaining after his last trip about the limitations put on him by Iran.
Whether they are actually hiding something, or creating Saddam-like suspicions, no one knows.
Limiting access, without expelling inspectors, would actually be a smart move. And Iran is smart.
The West has just got to learn to be samrter.
I like the ‘out of the bex’ phrase in the post when referring to what kind of thinking this requires.
I’ve seen this before. What does this mean? Does it mean try more diplomacy and appeasement, which smart people already know will not succeed and is likely to be exploited by the Iranians?
With Iran, “smart” or “deft” or “elegant” would mean, for example, not bombing the next terrorist convention that Iran holds, but instead having Mossad or someone hired by Mossad get a job handling food at the convention and poisoning everybody. This would also work well against the people working on Iran’s atomic weapons and even related work such as uranium enrichment. Once an Iraqi weapons-program manager went abroad, and suddenly fell ill. He was poisoned by thallium. (We know the Russians murdered Livitnenko using an even more exotic or “smart” weapon.)
Does “smart” mean secretly replacing Iran’s enriched uranium with natural or even depleted uranium? It’s worth a good laugh, but even if it could be done, the Iranians would determine the difference quickly.
Does “smart” mean an economic embargo, especially on Iranian oil and gas? The Chinese will have none of it and even if they agreed they would cheat.
Limiting isn’t expelling.
Where’s the evidence of super high speed switches, beryllium or super high speed DAQ? Look into the import violations of Pakistan or India’s mentor the USSR. All we have is the NORK’s visiting Iran. How long before the Kurds tell us they have a Q-bomb on an Iranian Gameboy.
Rudi,
It doesn’t have to be all or nothing.
I agree with you about Pakistan and other countries.
When we’re talking about nuclear capabilites, however, we can’t go on aliding scale of threat assessment. Each case has to be evaluated on its own.
As I;ve tried to argue, to no avail, we need a global policy, not a friends vs enemies policy, if we, and the world, are to come to grips with the dangers of nuclear arms.
Tosay’s topic, however, is Iran.
The intelligence says there is no immediate crisis.
That doesn’t mean we should forget about Iran, though – or Pakistan, or India or anyone.
LOL – We can’t even get into Pakistan to find out where their ACTUAL bombs are located. How do we find grams of LEU? Will Reuel Marc Gerecht give up his day job at Weakly Standard to play Rambo?
So you censor and redact my posts here? Is that the principles upheld? I was told by your contributor I went to the Wingnut University. I laid out reasonable arguements which were not answered with reasonable answers. At no point did the editors feel it appropiate to post a comment in response to any post of mine. So what was the moderate thing for editors to do? Lift my posts.
Instead of allowing a debate on what could be the most damaging IC document to come out in decades increasing Israel’s red-line while rolling back the very sanctions the NIE held supreme, you redact my posts. You didn’t refute my claims or offer alternative explanations. Ahmadinejad is dancing in the street while AP warns about a new Israeli red-line. Other bolgs are not a afraid to debate.
So very enlightening. I was very honest in saying I had never voted Republican. Keep it up.
“We have to outsmart Iran, not outhreaten them.
The West has just got to learn to be samrter.” – domajot
“I’ve seen this before. What does this mean?” – DLS
Maybe we’ll find out after regime change. . . here at home.
Maxtrue — The other editors and I traded notes and apparently no one removed any of your comments, though we have previously encountered certain technical glitches that have impacted other comments, and those glitches (gremlins?) may be at work here, too. I believe Joe G. was going to email you personally on the matter.
Thanks for clarifying about that, Pete. I wasn’t exactly sure what was being referenced.
I should mention, Maxtrue, that I read all of the comments. I don’t, I’m afraid, have time to respond to them here but I always consider them carefully. In this case, Matt Dupuis, who wrote the blog piece, was sent the link to this post and he has also read all of what’s being written here. So, even though I rarely weigh in on these discussions, I am always interested in what’s being written and the opinions and expertise that are presented in this forum. If you ever want to be assured of a direct response from me, or from anyone who blogs at my homebase (Foreign Policy Watch), please feel free to email me: foreignpolicywatch@hotmail.com