Here are two reports of doubts re Iran’s nuclear program (thanks to Dan Sisken). First, in the Times online, Israeli general Brigadier-General Uzi Eilam says that Iran is not a nuclear threat:
A general who was once in charge of Israel’s nuclear weapons has claimed that Iran is a “very, very, very long way from building a nuclear capability”.
Brigadier-General Uzi Eilam, 75, a war hero and pillar of the defence establishment, believes it will probably take Iran seven years to make nuclear weapons.
And here is an American general and chief of Pentagon intelligence saying that "Iran [is] Not Committed to Building Nuclear Bomb", in an article that suggests that the Obama administration is getting ready to up the intelligence ante visavis Iran:
"The bottom line assessments of the [National Intelligence Estimate in 2007] still hold true," [Lt.General Ronald] Burgess [chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency] said. "We have not seen indication that the government has made the decision to move ahead with the program. But the fact still remains that we don’t know what we don’t know."
As there was with Iraq, there is a highly organized movement afoot to pretend that none of this matters, that “the mullahs” have always intended to get their hands on a nuke, and that we should therefore prepare to
bomb the hell out of Irando what is necessary. We’ve already seen the beginning of an effort by some neocons to resurrect a “Team B” approach to hype the threat of Islamic extremism, ignoring the fact that such an approach, in all of its previous incarnations, generated nothing but staggeringly wrong conclusions about enemy capabilities, resulting is disastrously counterproductive policies.
Iran is countering by demanding that Israel’s nukes be controlled.
Ten bucks says Obama capitulates to neocons in the end, too.
Somewhat depending on what you mean by “capitulate” I’d take that bet Chaos.
I.e., if you mean that he will order a U.S. attack on Iran, I think he won’t in the end. Too risk/conflict averse.
Trickier if you mean merely “standing by” while Israel attacks Iran, esp. since I suspect that Israel believes that it can only accomplish very limited things attacking itself, and yet will still have to pay a full price for doing so.
And then of course depends on what is meant by Obama “standing by”: It’s one thing to just truly stand by and do nothing, another to give Israel the Friend or Foe code to let ‘em transit Iraqi airspace, another to have U.S. planes refueling their jets, another to giving ‘em our latest bunker-busters and/or etc., etc.
Even then, in the end I’d be willing to put up $10 that Obama won’t even go very far in terms of helping an Israeli attack. No FOF code given—because it would be so big and obvious—no refueling…. Again, too risk/conflict averse methinks.
So, within those parameters, we got a bet? I’d even up it to $100 to make it interesting. We’d have to set a deadline on “by when” though….
The real question is what will the US military do after Israel attacks Iran and Iran retaliates? Will it take the side of the obviously aggressive party and pile on? If not, how much aid will it give Israel?
Chaos, if the neocons prevail, and we bomb Iran, that $10 you win on the wager won’t even buy you a gallon of gas.
The consequences would be catastrophic to the USA — our fragile economy would be destroyed as oil prices spike above $200 per gallon, our troops in Iraq will be attacked, and Israel can sit back right easy and laugh that the freiers in America were once again fooled by yellowcake rhetoric.
Oscar, this is exactly what will happen. A slight variant is Saudi Arabia allows Israeli
attack via its skies; both are likely. Americans will be duped as usual, same as during the build up to attacking Iraq second time around. The only wild factor is the USA economy, a double dip likely…
Remember, the average American to this day, even if they remember the gas lines in the early 1970′s, do not connect that memory to Israeli-USA approved actions and counters to them.
Well, after the murder of an Iranian professor last week, Iran today announced it was beefing up security to all scientists involved in the nuclear program.
Remarks in the Israeli press suggest it was indeed an Israeli assassination.
“If Obama was sincere about helping the people of Iran, he would leave the country in peace, instead of making threats and beating the war drum, a drum he is pounding in the exact same rhythm that Bush played in the march to war with Iraq,” Shamus Cooke, a trade unionist and writer for Workers Action, December 28, 2009.
However, Shamus Cooke doesn’t realize that Barack Obama administration is as much controlled by the Israel Lobby as were US administrations under Bushes, Clinton, Reagan and Lyndon Johnson. His foreign policies are dictated by Tel Aviv and not the poor masses in the US who voted for him for a change. And since the Zionist regime in Tel aviv perceives Islamic regime in Tehran headed by Dr. Ahmadinejad as a threat to Israel’s so-called “invincibility” in the Middle East – Iran automatically becomes a mortal threat to 300 million Americans.
Hands Off Islamic Iran!
link to rehmat1.wordpress.com
David Broad of the NYT, a leading anti Iranian propagandist, reported gleefully that the Obama administration’s new position was to reject the findigns of the 2007 NIE, based on the now debunked documents RE: nuclear triggerign devices and the false claim that the US uncovered the enrichment facility at QOM.
Clearly, Washington is not concerned with facts. This matter is 100% political.