This brings up a point about the history of Irans nuclear program. It was discovered that Iran was not reporting the acquisition of certain materials relating to its desire to pursue nuclear technology. It's said that because Iran did not report these actviities to the IAEA, that it's clear proof of a secret intention to pursue the bomb. If they weren't doing anything wrong why would they need to conceal it?

I don't claim to know whether they want the bomb or not. The point I wanted to make was that this history of concealment does not prove that they do. Iran, as a member of the NPT, was legally permitted to acquire the materials and equipment needed to complete the nuclear fuel cycle. These materials were only obtainable by Iran on the black market. Iran was unable to purchase centrifuges because the manufacturers of them and other equipment you need would not sell to Iran.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Suppliers_Group

Iran purchased their centrufuges from the AQ Kahn network and they also purchased uranium from china. I think it should be pretty clear that if you do business on the black market for whatever reason, it's incidental that it's not going to be reported.

See guys, we have graphical evidence that Iran is about to strike!

****cough****yellowcake****cough****

so, to the original poster.... were you ever planning on providing a link as to where the IAEA said this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNWc3...p_fresh+div-HM

I found this interview today and was suprised at the level of respect shown to a guy thats usually villified in the MSM. You dont hear this perspecive much in the MSM with regards to Iran. His names Scott Ritter and hes the main "I told you so" guy with regards to the invasion of Iraq. He served as cheif weapons inspector for UNSCOM in Iraq.

This new enrichment facility under construction has been used by the U.S admin. and eurpoean allies as proof of a secret weapons program, but that perception ignores the fact that it's being built as a result of serious threats of a military strike on existing nuclear installations.

other good stuff if you want to understand the big picture.

http://www.tcf.org/publications/inte...diplomatic.pdf

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=36609

Gareth Porter is one of the most informative people on understanding the Iranian side and specifically their strong desire to normalize relations with the U.S by way of a grand bargain.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFNPZ5vOv4s

Trita Parsi is also very informative on getting a realist understanding of Iranian motivations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPFgk...eature=channel

1. Iran can't make a nuclear weapon right now.
2. OP, please give a link to the article on drudgereport as I couldn't find anything.

Iran has enriched enough uranium to make bomb, IAEA says

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...nuclear-weapon

AP NewsBreak: Nuke agency says Iran can make bomb

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1


Iran Can Make Nuclear Bomb: Atomic Watchdog

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_290430.html

This ones less than an hour old.

Report says Iran has data to make atom bomb

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNe...59228E20091003

Yeah there are actually articles out there saying that. I mean Iraq wasnt that long ago was it?

IAEA Chief ElBaradei addresses the topic of "politicized reporting" at the end of ths 2 min. video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29T8cxLbLIQ

FOX News Poll: 61% Say Use Force To Stop Iran - Political News - FOXNews.com

http://www.1913intel.com/2009/10/01/...ws-foxnewscom/

Yeah almost 90% of republicans.

I've been searching "Iran" in google news close to every day for years. The vast majority of articles (95% easy) repeat the same 5-6 points. You have have thousands of articles all saying the same thing. The only differences you will find is "comments" by politicians named and unamed.


Iran is..................................... Iran has ignored UNSC council demands to stop enriching. This unnamed source says that.............................................. .............. Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the map. It's not clear if .................................................. . Iran claims its program is only for energy. These new revelations....................................... ....................... Obama is reaching out to Iran but they are in turmoil and cant effectivley respond. It will be interesting to see...................... blahhhhhhhhhhhaahhhhh
the end

We all remember how confident president Bush was that Iraq had stockpiles of WMD. That turned out to be completely bogus. Hard to take the US serious when they make these type of claims.

I don't think Drudge or most of the talking heads really understand how complicated building a nuclear weapon really is. First, you have to mine the uranium, enrich it to make it into fuel, and then enrich it again to make it weapons-grade. Then, you have to implant it in a warhead and build a reliable delivery system. These steps are insanely expensive, require massive technical expertise, and are very difficult to keep secret. Right now, Iran is sending its uranium gas to Russia, Russia is enriching it, sending it to France, and the French are making it into fuel rods. But fuel rods are a far cry from actually refining it down to weapons-grade uranium capable of being put into a warhead. Then, once it's built, you have to let everyone know you have it, or you have no deterrent. Even if you wanted to sell it to terrorists, you'd have to know it would be relatively easy to trace back to you, and most countries simply don't have that big a death wish.

I think most analysts aren't afraid of Iran actually using a delivery system capable nuclear missile. Its more the wide birth it gives them in the Middle East. There are multiple advantages it would give them in maneuvering in the ME.

But saying " We don't want Iran to have the bomb because it will limit our options in the Middle East." doesn't sound as good as " Iran is crazy!! If they get the bomb they will use it on Israel!!!"

See Also: Iraq War

Thats certainly understandable if you dont live in the states. If you're the typical american though your most likely to have concluded by now that Iraq was simply an honest mistake by the intelligence community. The only difference now with regards to Iran is that dissenting voices carry more weight. Those dissenting voices are heard with the same rarity as they were pre Iraq invasion though. Which is essentially why most americans ,once again, condone another preemptive military strike.

I wonder how many Americans believe it was an HONEST mistake?

I dont think "concluded" was the right word to use in my post. It's "accepted" which is to say that its a reflection of the mainstream consenus. This addresses nothing about whether it was even justified had the assumptions of the intelligence community proven accurate. Thats something that didnt enter the mainstream at all.

Why does nobody seem to care about the middle eastern nation with the brutal human rights record that has made war on it's neighbors in just the past few years, refuses to sign the NNPT and has a "secret" nuclear weapons program that everyone knows about and stockpiles hundreds of nuclear weapons?

I would reply with "THIS" but don't want to risk offending the powers that be at this site.

(so, I'll just say "this" softly)

Good thing Christianity has no martyrs what so ever.

What colour are they?

Obligatory one has nukes that are only for defense from hostile brown people countries post to follow up tom's IMO.

You're talking about Israel, right?
Edit: uh, oops, 'stockpiles hundreds of nuclear weapons' is a dead giveaway.

Anyway I think Iran is moving towards the center especially with a President willing to talk instead of saber-rattle.

I think you'll find that a great many do care. Most of the citizens of Iran are just one example.

Because hypocrisy is the quick and easy out?

Wait, is this a trick question?

On the nuclear part of your post the answer is people do care outside of the U.S.

In the states it's completely ignored as a topic. I can remember an Obama Q&A some months back in which that old lady reporter (Helen) asked if there are any countries in the middle east with nukes. Obama didnt even touch it. He pointed to the next reporter.

One of the extremely rare times the topic came up in the MSM was when Jimmy Carter said in an interview that Israel had hundreds of nukes. The stories that resulted covered it only from this perspective. "wow Jimmy carter leaked classified defense intel". The whole fucin universe (outside of the US mainsream) knows about it yet they manged to keep the discussion limited to "crazy old jimmy carter leaking classidied stuff."