if you'll read those threads, i think you'll see i'm not defending the NIE, but rather pointing out that others have attempted to use it as a tool for political ends. the administration is not immune in this regard.
Jesus! Josh is all over this story today. -- I Just Work Here If you look closely at what President Bush said this morning about the Iran intelligence, his dodge about what he knew and when is actually worse than the charge he was trying to deny. The essence of what President Bush was saying was that whatever chatter he may have heard last summer, he didn't hear the key details until this week. If you take at face value what the president is saying, his spy chief, Mike McConnell, comes in to the president and says, "Mr. President, we've got some important new information on the Iran nuclear front." And the president apparently says, okay. And then he doesn't ask him what the information was. "He didn't tell me what the information was." Perhaps McConnell is being set up as the 'slam dunker', a la Tenet. But is this really the president's answer? He didn't think to ask what the new information was? <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/boGw3VciDig&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/boGw3VciDig&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> In the president's defense, I don't think this happened. I think he's lying. Of course, McConnell told him. Joe Biden's response!
Nope, sorry. You don't get to play that card when it is clear that the administration (Bush, Cheney and appointees) manipulated and intimidated the intelligence agencies into giving them what they wanted on Iraq. They were, of course, wrong and referencing that utter and complete failure by Bush, Cheney, and their ilk does not tarnish the work of the intelligence agencies except in some right-wing never-never land, particularly when it's clear that they tried to do it again on Iran, but this time weren't able to intimidate the intelligence folks. Via TPM... here's Hersh in November of 2006... I really can't believe you're defending these guys.
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/z3BLVyeUGiA&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/z3BLVyeUGiA&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
If its true. If the previous intelligence was wrong, why should we trust this intelligence? Impossible to know for sure.
Because the previous intelligence wasn't wrong, just ignored. And yes it is possibe to know for sure.
I have a hard time believing anything that comes out of the government nowadays. I wouldn't be surprised either if this is disinformation produced from Iran. Wouldn't now be the perfect time for them to start making bombs again now that the government believes they aren't? If this was true wouldn't that also mean this is a victory for Bush? lol, what a mess this whole thing is. Somebody believed the other intelligence making them wrong. Somebody is wrong one way or the other. Hard to trust any of it.
What's credible intelligence then? WSJ op-ed pieces? The NIE is the consensus of all the different intelligence agencies. Honestly, track record aside, its a reflection of what our intelligence shows on Iran and that intelligence shows that they aren't building weapons right now. Seriously, what type of evidence are you looking for.
Sorry, the President answers to "a higher source". God told him to invade Iraq and likely tell him to invade Iran. Who needs fallible "intelligence" reports, when you have direct access to the infallible?
Israel begs to differ. [rquoter]Israel challenges report on nukes December 5, 2007 By Joshua Mitnick - TEL AVIV — Israeli officials yesterday disputed the conclusions of Monday's surprise U.S. assessment of Iran's nuclear program, citing "clear and solid intelligence" that Iran is continuing to develop nuclear weapons to threaten Israel and Europe. "We have no doubt," said one Israeli official, who requested to remain anonymous. "If one looks at the investment, if one looks at the nature of the project, if you look at the cost to the Iranian economy, there is no logical explanation other than that the Iranian program is not benign." The intelligence assessment revealed a rare open rift between the intelligence communities of two allies, which have cooperated closely and share almost all their information about Iran's nuclear program. The U.S. National Intelligence Estimate said that Iran froze its program to develop a nuclear weapon four years ago, while it continues to engage in uranium-enrichment activity. In addition to virtually eliminating the possibility that the U.S. will attack Iran before the end of the Bush presidency, the estimate widens the gap between Israeli and U.S. estimates on the time remaining before Iran could achieve a nuclear weapon. Israel still insists that there is as little as two years to stop Iran from going nuclear, while the new U.S. assessment finds that unlikely to happen before 2010 to 2015. "Until now, there were no sharp differences in interpretation," said Yuval Steinitz, a Likud Party legislator who sits on the parliament's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. "I don't know of any piece of intelligence that supports this conclusion. It seems to me that this report repeats the mistake of Iraq, but taking it to the opposite conclusion. "We have a lot of very clear and solid intelligence, that to my best understanding, clearly shows that the Iranians are developing nuclear weapons today, as they did two years ago. This is not a matter of speculation, but this is about solid intelligence." Defense Minister Ehud Barak was only slightly less definite in published interviews yesterday. "It looks like Iran stopped its program to create an atom bomb in 2003 for a certain time, but as far as we know, it has since probably renewed it," he was quoted as saying. "There are differences in the assessments of different organizations in the world about this, and only time will tell who is right." Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told reporters that Israel "will make every effort — first and foremost with our friends in the U.S. — to prevent the production" of nuclear weapons by Iran. Although Israeli and U.S. intelligence agencies share most of their data regarding the Iranian threat, it is possible that Israel has some exclusive information. "Just because we are friends doesn't mean we are going to share everything," said Meir Javedanfar, a Tel Aviv-based analyst who co-authored a book on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the nuclear program titled "The Nuclear Sphinx of Tehran." Israelis were uncertain whether to be relieved at the distancing of an existential threat or to be concerned that readiness to confront that threat has been dissipated, perhaps for good. A leading Israeli analyst, Ehud Ya'ari, said on Channel 2 television that the American finding showed that the Iranian program "is further behind than we assumed." Washington, he said, had rejected Israel's belief that the Iranians are pursuing one or two secret nuclear programs that are not monitored by the West. "The Americans apparently came to their conclusions on the basis of human intelligence," he said, mentioning Gen. Ali Reza Asghari, a former Iranian deputy defense minister who defected to the West in February. Oded Granot, a commentator on Channel 1, who, like Mr. Ya'ari, has good connections with Israel's security establishment, said American intelligence had intercepted a transmission from a senior Iranian military official several months ago, in which he expressed disappointment that Iran's nuclear weapons program had been halted. Although this might have been deliberate misinformation, Mr. Granot said that in recent weeks a flood of other evidence pointed to the program's being frozen. Mr. Granot said Israel has learned that many of the 3,000 centrifuges that the Iranians had begun to activate in order to enrich uranium — whether for civilian or military purposes — have broken down. [/rquoter]
Israelis love to speculate and talk...I'll give them that much. They have no proof whatsoever...one way or another. Even when US intelligence says no, the Israelis are over there going "no...but for all we know it has since restarted". Give me a break. The fact is that Iran will always be a few steps away from producing a bomb now that they have the capacity to enrich. Sure, they could do it covertly. They may be doing it already but noone can prove it. I guess that's the benefit of digging out tunnels and doing your work underground while reigning in the IAEA as far as where they can go and what they can inspect. Short of blasting Iran all to hell...I think we are past the point of being able to stop them from enriching. Sanctions are not going to work and now the US intelligence reports have shot ourselves in the foot. I seriously doubt any new round of sanctions sees the light of day. Iran could certainly go back to building a nuke any time. I think we all agree the IAEA can be snowed quite easily if Iran wanted to build a nuke.
Surfguy, I understand the danger of continued enrichment, but putting aside whether I share your opinion of the IAEA, do you seriously believe the NIE estimate, the summation of all our intelligence from all our sources, would screw the pooch yet again after being the scapegoat of Iraq by the Administration, and having been humiliated and vilified because of it? I don't buy it. I think this estimate, which Bush knew about in August and ignored, in my opinion, based on his own public statements, came out after vetting on steroids simply to insure there wouldn't be a repeat of the Iraq debacle. And I have to add that as of now, I'm leaning towards Biden in the Democratic primary. The man has show intelligence, passion, and leadership on this issue, and I can think of few more important to our country than the issue of war and peace, and the rape of the Constitution by a sitting President. Kudos to Joe Biden for telling it like it is. Bush deserves to be impeached. Trim Bush... Impeachment Yesterday!
No, I don't believe they would "screw the pooch" yet again. However, if they had any firm intelligence, then I wouldn't expect them to withhold it unless it was discredited. The problem with the Iraq intelligence is some of that intelligence was still in the portfolio even after it had been discredited. Worse yet...a lot of that intelligence came from a single, uncorroborated source who had his own agenda. Does this mean Iran is doing the right thing? No. It just means we can't prove a damn thing and starting wars over intelligence should be a thing of the past...unless it is irrefutable (try Cuban missile crisis irrefutable). We all know the Iraq war was just what Iran needed to proceed with whatever they want to do. It was a miscalculation by Bush...bigtime. I seriously doubt they would be enriching right now had it not been for that war. The threat of war is more deterrent than actual war...is what has been proven. The threat of war against Iran is not there now...regardless of if all options are on the table. They know it...and are acting on it.
Bush keeps embarassing himself..... -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bush calls on Iran to 'come clean' By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer OMAHA, Neb. - President Bush, trying to keep pressure on Iran, called on Tehran Wednesday to "come clean" about the scope of its nuclear activities or else face diplomatic isolation. Two days after a new intelligence report said that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program four years ago, Bush demanded that Tehran detail its previous program to develop nuclear weapons "which the Iranian regime has yet to acknowledge." "The Iranians have a strategic choice to make," he said. "They can come clean with the international community about the scope of their nuclear activities, and fully accept the long-standing offer to suspend their enrichment program and come to the table and negotiate, or they can continue on a path of isolation." The administration is worried that the new National Intelligence Estimate — representing a consensus of all U.S. spy agencies — weakens its leverage over Iran and its ability to build global pressure on Tehran to stop its uranium enrichment program. Bush, arriving here on a campaign fundraising trip, said he had consulted with members of his national security team, who gave him a report about what Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley have learned in talks during the past several days with their counterparts in Britain, Germany, France and Russia. "These countries understand that the Iranian nuclear issue is a problem, and continues to be a problem and must be addressed," Bush said. Backing the U.S. intelligence community, Bush said he appreciated its work in helping people to understand past and present activities in Iran and helping the administration develop a sound policy. "It is clear from the latest NIE that the Iranian government has more to explain about its nuclear intentions and past actions," Bush said. His statement Wednesday came a day after a news conference called in part to react to the new information on Iran's nuclear activities. Bush's public remarks, coupled with frenzied contacts with world leaders by Bush, Rice and Hadley, show a White House trying to keep the world on board with its hard line against Tehran — an uphill effort now, according to most analysts. Also Wednesday, the White House said the United States will continue "actively pushing" for a third, tougher round of United Nations sanctions against Iran. Deputy press secretary Tony Fratto said Iran continues to hide information, remains in violation of two U.N. Security Council resolutions, tests ballistic missiles and is enriching uranium. "Anyone who thinks that the threat from Iran has receded or diminished is naive and is not paying attention to the facts," Fratto told reporters flying aboard Air Force One with Bush en route to Nebraska. Fratto disputed Iran's claim that the intelligence estimate was a vindication for Tehran. "I think that's absolutely absurd, and Iran should take no comfort or vindication from the NIE," he said. He rejected calls, since the new report, for the administration to enter into unconditional talks with Iran, something the White House has said it would only do once Tehran stops enriching uranium. Tehran says its nuclear program is only for civilian energy purposes. It says it is allowed to enrich uranium for that reason. Rice, traveling in Africa Wednesday, questioned the openness of the Iranian government after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the new U.S. intelligence review amounted to "a final shot" against Tehran's critics. Rice declined to respond to Ahmadinejad's remark, but told reporters in the Ethiopian capital of Addis Ababa that the public release of the NIE showed the administration was committed to transparent democracy, while Iran was not. "I am not going to comment on that comment except to say that what the National Intelligence Estimate shows, and the transparency with which the administration released it, is what it means to live in a democracy and I hope one day that the people of Iran will live in a democracy too," she said. Rice said that the latest U.S. intelligence estimate did not mean that Washington no longer considered Tehran a threat and urged the international community not to back down at the U.N. Security Council on pressuring Iran to halt its activities that could produce the ingredients for an atomic weapon. "It is the very strong view of the administration that the Iranian regime remains a problematic and dangerous regime and that the international community must continue to unite around the Security Council resolutions that have passed," she said. "Iran needs to stop enrichment and reprocessing activities because those enriching and reprocessing activities permit, if they are perfected, a state to acquire fissile material for a nuclear weapon," Rice said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071205/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush
How could anyone satisfy the transparency that Bush and Condi require on an enrichment program? The answer...they cannot. There in lies the conundrum. Under the Bush doctrine, you either satisfy the transparency requirement or you stop enriching...which it is clear the latter is really the only solution in our administration's eyes. However, without the real threat of a pending war over the issue, what can Bush and his cronies do about it? More sanctions won't work...if they can even get backing from China and Russia (which the new intelligence likely doomed that third set of sanctions). There's only two outcomes I can see...you either press the issue until there is a war or you work on bettering relations with Iran. Iran doesn't believe the former will happen because of Iraq...and the latter won't happen because Iran thumbs their noses at us any chance they get and love doing so. They don't need us and their acting like it.
To borrow a page from basso's book, the fact that basso is pushing so hard for Iran's nuclear program really makes you wonder who's side he's on. I accuse him of thoughtcrime, in subversively wanting our enemies to be nuclear armed. He might need to be blacklisted.
