New simulations carried out by European Union experts come to an alarming conclusion: Iran could have enough highly enriched uranium to build an atomic bomb by the end of this year.
Could Iran be building an atomic bomb? When the US released a new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) late last year, it seemed as though the danger of a mullah-bomb had passed. The report claimed to have information indicating that Tehran mothballed its nuclear weapons program as early as autumn 2003. The paper also said that it was “very unlikely” that Iran would have enough highly enriched uranium — the primary ingredient in atomic bombs — by 2009 to produce such a weapon. Rather, the NIE indicated “Iran probably would be technically capable of producing enough (highly enriched uranium) for a weapon sometime during the 2010-2015 timeframe.”
It didn’t take long for experts to question the report’s conclusion that Tehran was no longer interested in building the bomb. And now, a new computer simulation undertaken by European Union experts indicates that the NIE’s time estimates might be dangerously inaccurate as well — and that Iran might have enough fuel for a bomb much earlier than was previously thought.
As part of a project to improve control of nuclear materials, the European Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC) in Ispra, Italy set up a detailed simulation of the centrifuges currently used by Iran in the Natanz nuclear facility to enrich uranium. The results look nothing like those reached by the US intelligence community.
For one scenario, the JRC scientists assumed the centrifuges in Natanz were operating at 100 percent efficiency. Were that the case, Iran could already have the 25 kilograms of highly enriched uranium necessary for an atomic device by the end of this year. Another scenario assumed a much lower efficiency — just 25 percent. But even then, Iran would have produced enough uranium by the end of 2010.
If this doesn’t highlight the fact that some in our intelligence service thinks it’s their job to make, rather than inform, policy, I don’t know what will. It is clear now that the recent NIE was not an honest attempt at intelligence assessment, but was cooked up by anti-Administration forces and conveniently leaked to the press in attempt to hijack American foreign policy from where it has been Constitutionally placed, in the hands of a democratically elected leader.
So it sounds like our buddy Mahmoud wants a tour of ground zero in New York. Personally I think he should be allowed to. It isn’t against the law, there’s really no serious security concerns. Sure some might view it as being in bad taste, but since when was that against the law? Heck, it might even break some people out of the anti-war doldrums.
In fact, I would like to be the first to suggest that Mahmoud be able to give a speech overlooking the pits where the WTC once stood, complete with holocaust denying, gloating, baiting, and admonishing of the USA. As soon as he’s done, give him the grand tour of american locales associated with terrorism and arrest him for questioning for his part in hostage taking in Iran in 1979.
The Washington Post is reporting that the Bush administration is preparing to designate Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization under Executive Order 13224. The move comes as significant evidence continues to build indicating significant Iranian involvement in ongoing terrorist activity in Iraq, Lebanon and Afghanistan.
. . .The main goal of the new designation is to clamp down on the Revolutionary Guard’s vast business network, as well as on foreign companies conducting business linked to the military unit and its personnel. The administration plans to list many of the Revolutionary Guard’s financial operations.
“Anyone doing business with these people will have to reevaluate their actions immediately,” said a U.S. official familiar with the plan who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the decision has not been announced. “It increases the risks of people who have until now ignored the growing list of sanctions against the Iranians. It makes clear to everyone who the IRGC and their related businesses really are. It removes the excuses for doing business with these people.”
. . .Although administration discussions continue, the initial decision is to target the entire Guard Corps, U.S. officials said. The administration has not yet decided when to announce the new measure, but officials said they would prefer to do so before the meeting of the U.N. General Assembly next month, when the United States intends to increase international pressure against Iran.
Designating a military body as a terrorist group is a bold move by the administration, but it accurately reflects the nations tendency to use terrorist groups, such as Hezbollah, as proxy fighters.
Tehran’s jailing of Haleh Esfandiari, a 67-year old grandmother who holds dual Iranian-American citizenship, as well as the interrogation of others with similar papers, is evidence that Washington’s latest attempt to foist change on Iran is backfiring ? as Iranian democracy advocates had warned. The Bush administration had trumpeted its $61.1 million democracy program, including Farsi-language broadcasts into Iran, education and cultural exchanges and $20 million worth of support for “civil society, human rights, democratic reform and related outreach” as an important effort. However, sources tell TIME that several key Iranian reformers had repeatedly warned U.S. officials through back channels that the pro-democracy program was bound to expose them as vulnerable targets for a government crackdown whether they took Washington’s funds or not.
What a joke. Does the author really think that change can happen without resistance? Did he expect the Iranian regime to just roll over and accept democracy? Resistance is not the same as a “backfire”. Crack downs are, if anything, a sign of success. When authoritarian governments crack down on their citizens, they also alienate them. The tighter the Iranian regime is forced to control its populace, the greater demands for democratic change will grow. But TIME is too busy trying to blame every little thing on Bush to see the big picture.
On April 9, 2007 there was a United Nations believe-it-or-not moment extraordinaire. At the same time that Iran?s President Ahmadinejad declared his country was now capable of industrial-scale uranium enrichment, the U.N. reelected Iran as a vice chairman of the U.N. Disarmament Commission.
Yes Ripley, the very U.N. body charged with promoting nuclear nonproliferation installed in a senior position the state that the Security Council recently declared violated its nonproliferation resolutions.
So in Iran at the Natanz nuclear facility Ahmadinejad gloated: ?With great pride, I announce as of today our dear country is among the countries of the world that produces nuclear fuel on an industrial scale.? And in New York, courtesy of his U.N. platform, Iranian Disarmament Vice-Chairman Seyed Mohammad Ali Robatjazi railed against ?noncompliance with the NPT [nuclear nonproliferation treaty] by the United States? and ?the Zionist lobby.?
. . .
And it only gets worse, as the article goes on to highlight the Human Rights Council cover-up of its own investigation into Iran. Once again, we have an ideology on display that is utterly incapable of discriminating against clearly different groups. Their relativism prohibits them from recognizing any behavior as over the line. Ever wonder why liberals are this way? This video is the best answer:
It is somewhat long - though definitely worth it - but I’ll summarize here. At their core, liberals believe the fundamental cause of war is not that evil exists, but that some people (often referred to disparagingly as warmongers) actually believe they are right. In other words, if no one thought they were right, no one would have anything to fight for. So it becomes an imperative for liberals to elevate what is wrong and tear down what is right. This is why they side with Palestineans over Israelis. This is why they must believe that Islamists weren’t behind 9/11, but that Bush was responsible. This is why Sudan was made a member of the Human Right Commission while they were busy committing genocide. If you just think about it this way you can see examples everywhere. Here’s an example in the news today, as we learn a Canadian green party candidate cheered on the 9/11 attacks. Modern liberalism in action.
So when we learn that Iran is being rewarded for seeking nuclear weapons, it should come as no surprise. For they believe that in order to prevent conflict, that which is bad must be made equivalent with that which is good, and reality be damned.
Fred Thompson has an excellent post over at RedState, where he takes on the notion that we have much to applaud in the reoslution of the Iranian hostage situation.
Oil prices fell. The stock market rose. Video images of smiling British soldiers with Iranian President Ahmadinejad were everywhere. So were pictures of the 15 freed hostages embracing family members back home. The relief over the return of the Brits was so tremendous; you could almost hear birds singing.
Maybe it’s because military action won’t be needed or maybe it’s just because the ordeal won’t drag on and on, but the world is breathing easier now. A lot of folks are happy. The problem, as I see it, is that Ahmadinejad seems to be the happiest.
And why shouldn’t he be? He has shown the world that his forces can kidnap British citizens, subject them to brutal psychological tactics to coerce phony confessions, finagle the release of a high-ranking Iranian terror coordinator in Iraq, utterly trash the Geneva conventions and suffer absolutely no consequences.
The UN Security Council summoned its vaunted multilateral greatness to issue a swift statement of sincere uneasiness. The EU, which has pressured Britain to rely on Europeans for mutual defense instead of the US, wouldn’t even discuss economic sanctions that might disrupt their holidays. Even NATO was AWOL.
In further evidence of the luke warm response conservatives have given to the current crop of Republican candidates, the comment section for this post was full of pleas for Fred Thompson to run.
Iranian dictator-in-chief Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has bestowed a “gift” upon the British people by “pardoning” the 15 British soldiers his guard kidnapped and paraded on television.
Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran would free the 15 detained British sailors and marines Wednesday.
Ahmadinejad said this would be an Easter holiday “gift” to the British people.
“On the occasion of the birthday of the great prophet (Muhammad) … and for the occasion of the passing of Christ, I say the Islamic Republic government and the Iranian people ? with all powers and legal right to put the soldiers on trial ? forgave those 15,” Ahmadinejad said.
“This pardon is a gift to the British people,” he said.
Does he really expect gratitude? Are we supposed to bubble with admiration for this grand gesture? You never know with the useful idiots in the western media, maybe they really have bought “the soldiers were in our territory” fib. Certainly the Iranian people bought it, which is what Ahmadinejad apparently wanted. Anyway, I’m glad this is over for the soldiers and their families, but I fear the days of reckless Iranian aggression have only begun.
I bet you thought Iran was itching to start something. I mean, they’ve been supplying weapons to Iraq and now they’ve kidnapped 15 British soldiers. But silly you, TIME is here to inform us that clearly it’s all Bush’s fault. Robert Baur’s article oozes with sympathy for the poor, persecuted Iranians and attributes nothing but sinister motives to the scheming Bush, who is apparently just looking for any old excuse for war.
You wouldn’t be wrong to wonder if Iran hasn’t lost its mind seizing the fifteen British marines and sailors, and in so doing, handing Bush a causus belli even he couldn’t have imagined.
I guess that whole threatening to destroy us thing just isn’t enough, so Bush has to try and imagine things!
ranian grievances, real and perceived, don’t stop there. Tehran is convinced the U.S. or one of its allies was behind the March 2006 separatist violence in Iranian Baluchistan, which ended up with twenty people killed, including an IRGC member executed. And the Iranians believe there is more to come, accusing the U.S. of training and arming Iranian Kurds and Azeris to go back home and cause problems. Needless to say the Iranians are not happy there are American soldiers on two of its borders, as well as two carriers and a dozen warships in the Gulf. You call this paranoia, they ask.
The Bush Administration is doing nothing to allay Tehran’s paranoia. With the largest build up in the Gulf since the start of this Iraq war, it’s actually fanning it. You have to wonder if Bush is counting on the Iranians over-reacting like they did when they seized our embassy in 1979. And lest we forget, this was driven by paranoia that we were plotting to destroy the revolution.
Well golly gee, I’m so sorry we’ve offended the Iranians so, what with our existing and all. Let’s give Robert Baer what he seems to so desire and just kill ourselves and get it over with.
Iran, the official “republic” of the Religion of Peace has peacefully kidnapped fifteen British sailors from Iraqi National Waters, where they operate at the permission of the Iraqi government, and is holding them in Tehran.
Meanwhile, the Iranian leadership is furious at the United States for supposedly not being enthusiastic enough about issuing Iranian President Ahmedinajad an entry visa to spew inflammatory rhetoric at the U.N. Security Council this weekend. A’jad has scrapped his planned visit, blaming the U.S.
Iran is proving itself to be the spoiled child who refuses to eat supper and then throws a tantrum when he is denied dessert.
Sometimes the only way to straighten out that child is to take off your belt and show him who’s boss.
