I mentioned this in my State of the Union post, but, um… yikes:
North Korea is helping Iran to prepare an underground nuclear test similar to the one Pyongyang carried out last year.
Under the terms of a new understanding between the two countries, the North Koreans have agreed to share all the data and information they received from their successful test last October with Teheran’s nuclear scientists. …
A senior European defence official told The Daily Telegraph that North Korea had invited a team of Iranian nuclear scientists to study the results of last October’s underground test to assist Teheran’s preparations to conduct its own — possibly by the end of this year.
The test will be for “peaceful purposes,” I’m sure.
Pop quiz, everyone: what highly-regarded Republican thinker is actually in favour of Iran getting nuclear weapons, or at least isn’t necessarily against the idea?
Here’s a hint: he coined a term that has become extremely popular with just about everyone post 9-11.
Flynn Leverett (sp?), a former Bush admin. Middle East policy expert who resigned just prior to the start of the war, was on C-SPAN. He made it clear that according to the best intel, Iran doesn’t have enough centrifuges to produce fissionable nuclear material in large enough quatities to make a nuke. It can produce a tiny, tiny amount. But it isn’t even close.
But then, even if they CAN produce enough of the material, and if by some stretch of the imagination they produce a single nuclear bomb, they have no delivery system. They don’t have the sophisticated technology for missile delivery systems that would allow them to put a nuke on top of a missile and have it work. Part of the point is that missile tests have to be conducted above ground in very obvious ways. that makes them an easy target for strategical strikes by the US and Israel.
It’s these kinds of posts that feed the imagination and encourage support for war. It’s exactly what happened in Iraq. I’m not tryin to lay all the blame on this blog obviously, but it’s irresponsible to not put all of this in context.
I don’t know what anyone expects the U.S. or the West to do about this, anyway.
Remember, America and Iran already fought a proxy war last summer when Israel attacked Hezbollah territory in Lebanon. And for all intents and purposes, Iran won handily…Hezbollah is stronger than ever, and Israel gained absolutely nothing strategically…they didn’t even get those 2 soldiers back.
Didn’t anyone notice that Bush et al didn’t say a peep about Iran for months after that? It’s only now that they’re desperate that they’re desperately trying to beat the war drums again.
Still nobody willing to take a shot at my question, I see.
January 23rd, 2007 at 10:49:06 pm
Peaceful purposes…
Absolutely.
January 23rd, 2007 at 11:07:39 pm
[…] ossibly by the end of this year. Yea, this is all going to end well. H/T: Brendan Loy Bookmark to: […]
January 23rd, 2007 at 11:54:04 pm
Pop quiz, everyone: what highly-regarded Republican thinker is actually in favour of Iran getting nuclear weapons, or at least isn’t necessarily against the idea?
Here’s a hint: he coined a term that has become extremely popular with just about everyone post 9-11.
January 23rd, 2007 at 11:55:02 pm
By Republican I don’t mean that he is a politican, btw. I guess that’s another hint.
January 24th, 2007 at 6:21:24 am
Iran isn’t even close to having nukes.
Flynn Leverett (sp?), a former Bush admin. Middle East policy expert who resigned just prior to the start of the war, was on C-SPAN. He made it clear that according to the best intel, Iran doesn’t have enough centrifuges to produce fissionable nuclear material in large enough quatities to make a nuke. It can produce a tiny, tiny amount. But it isn’t even close.
But then, even if they CAN produce enough of the material, and if by some stretch of the imagination they produce a single nuclear bomb, they have no delivery system. They don’t have the sophisticated technology for missile delivery systems that would allow them to put a nuke on top of a missile and have it work. Part of the point is that missile tests have to be conducted above ground in very obvious ways. that makes them an easy target for strategical strikes by the US and Israel.
It’s these kinds of posts that feed the imagination and encourage support for war. It’s exactly what happened in Iraq. I’m not tryin to lay all the blame on this blog obviously, but it’s irresponsible to not put all of this in context.
January 24th, 2007 at 8:15:31 am
Didn’t the first N. Korean test fail?
January 24th, 2007 at 11:55:17 am
Anonymous assumes that any Iranian nukes would only be a threat if delivered via missile. Way to think outside the box . . .
January 24th, 2007 at 1:19:06 pm
I don’t know what anyone expects the U.S. or the West to do about this, anyway.
Remember, America and Iran already fought a proxy war last summer when Israel attacked Hezbollah territory in Lebanon. And for all intents and purposes, Iran won handily…Hezbollah is stronger than ever, and Israel gained absolutely nothing strategically…they didn’t even get those 2 soldiers back.
Didn’t anyone notice that Bush et al didn’t say a peep about Iran for months after that? It’s only now that they’re desperate that they’re desperately trying to beat the war drums again.
Still nobody willing to take a shot at my question, I see.
January 25th, 2007 at 8:53:20 am
Hmmm. Could it be David Frum, author of “Axis of Evil?”
January 25th, 2007 at 8:29:42 pm
DFens - by whom is he “highly-regarded” ? Other than himself, of course ?