Iran paper is nuclear red flag

By GottaLaff

Oh good, something else to add to the already toxic mix:

Western and U.N. nuclear officials are evaluating a secret Iranian technical document that appears to show the country's nuclear scientists testing a key component used in the detonation of a nuclear warhead, according to intelligence officials and weapons experts familiar with the document.

The document, if authenticated, could rank as one of the strongest pieces of evidence pointing to a clandestine Iranian effort to build nuclear weapons, said former intelligence officials and weapons experts. They were responding to a published report of alleged sophisticated research by Iran on one of the final stages in the construction of a nuclear device.

Excerpts from the technical paper, first reported on the Times of London Web site late Sunday, detail a four-year program by Iranian scientists to develop and test a neutron initiator, a device used to trigger a nuclear explosion.

Nothing says, "Trust us" like a neutron initiator.

Iran approves building 10 enrichment sites

By GottaLaff

Thumb your Iranian nose much?

The Iranian government approved a plan Sunday to build 10 new uranium enrichment facilities, a dramatic expansion in defiance of U.N. demands it halt the program.

The decision comes only two days after the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency censured Iran, demanding it immediately stop building a newly revealed enrichment facility near the holy city of Qom and freeze all uranium enrichment activities. [...]

[T]he announcement is likely to stoke already high tensions between Iran and the West over its controversial nuclear activities.

Nothing like escalating tensions to start our Sunday off right, huh?

White House says world moving toward new Iran sanctions

By GottaLaff

Let's just avoid those "pre-emptive strike" words, okay?

The United Nations nuclear agency Friday blasted Iran for obstructing investigations into its suspected nuclear weapons program and demanded that the Islamic Republic stop enriching uranium at a once-secret facility.

In response, the Obama administration suggested that world powers might be moving closer to imposing international sanctions on Iran. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs called a 25-3 vote by the International Atomic Energy Agency "overwhelming" and said it "demonstrates the resolve and unity of the international community with regard to Iran's nuclear program."

"Our patience and that of the international community is limited, and time is running out," Gibbs said. "If Iran refuses to meet its obligations, then it will be responsible for its own growing isolation and the consequences."[...]

Tehran's refusal to carry out a tentative deal in October to ship most of its nuclear fuel to Russia and France for reprocessing leaves other nations with two ways to try to ensure that Iran doesn't obtain nuclear weapons: tough sanctions and pre-emptive military action. [...]

One U.S. senior official said any sanctions that might be considered would look to hurt the Iranian regime, not everyday Iranians, but he didn't elaborate.

The administration said that Iran has until the end of the year to engage cooperatively; after that it may face a "package of consequences."

Is the U.S. Preparing to Bomb Iran?

By GottaLaff

(click to enlarge; one of 3 pages, the rest are here)

Um, yikes?

The Pentagon is always making plans, but based on a little-noticed funding request recently sent to Congress, the answer to that question [see blog title] appears to be yes.

First, some background: Back in October 2007 [...] the Pentagon cited an "urgent operational need" for the new weapon.

Now the Pentagon is shifting spending from other programs to fast forward the development and procurement of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator. The Pentagon comptroller sent a request to shift the funds to the House and Senate Appropriations and Armed Services Committees over the summer.[...]

Why now? The notification says simply, "The Department has an Urgent Operational Need (UON) for the capability to strike hard and deeply buried targets in high threat environments. The MOP is the weapon of choice to meet the requirements of the UON." It further states that the request is endorsed by Pacific Command (which has responsibility over North Korea) and Central Command (which has responsibility over Iran).

The request was quietly approved. On Friday, McDonnell Douglas was awarded a $51.9 million contract to provide "Massive Penetrator Ordnance Integration" on B-2 aircraft.

This is not the kind of weapon that would be particularly useful in Iraq or Afghanistan, but it is ideally suited to hit deeply buried nuclear facilities such as Natanz or Qom in Iran.

So how do we take this? As....Just a good headline for ABC? As... alarmist? Wait and see? Or with genuine concern?

Video- Obama's Remarks About Talks With Iran Concerning Nuclear Programs

Iran Watch: Bush the Underminer

By GottaLaff

(via)

Who has done more to harm our intel community and our ability to deal with Iran's nuclear ambitions, BushCo or President Obama? If you read this piece by Rep. Peter Hoekstra and Rep. John Shadegg (filled with inaccuracies), you'd think that President Obama was out to destroy our intelligence capabilities and cater to the terrorists.

Which, of course, they say, affects his options when it comes to Iran.

Apparently, Pete and John didn't read today's L.A. Times piece:

U.S. intelligence agencies developed deep suspicions about the site while President Bush was in office. But there are reasons that Bush may have been reluctant to launch a military strike, including the heavy demands of the war in Iraq and concern that his administration's prewar claims about that country would undermine its ability to make a new case against Iran. [...]

Iran's ability to construct such a complex underground facility -- apparently with little or no outside help -- also heightened questions about whether the country's nuclear program can any longer be crippled by a military strike. [...]

Even so, Gates said, "the reality is, there is no military option that does anything more than buy time."

Others were more skeptical. "We may be past the point where the military option is viable anymore," said John R. Bolton, who served as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations during the Bush administration. [...]

Wary of lingering embarrassment over the United States' erroneous pre-war assertions about Iraq, administration officials said they held back until they had complete confidence in the intelligence.

The ObamAdministration was wise to wait until they were sure they had their facts right, so in that regard BushCo's little antics provided us with a silver lining. By that I mean that the complete and utter lack of credibility from the previous administration is forcing the current one to earn international trust, avoid the recklessness of the past, and provide leadership instead of mindless, dangerous swagger.

But pointing fingers at Obama, implying that somehow he is the inept, untrustworthy one when it's obvious that he's forced to dig out from under all that rotten BushCo flotsam and jetsam, well that's just laughable.

Anyone who claims that the Bush thugs made us safer and that Obama is "resigning us to failure" needs to recover from their apparent amnesia and remember who The Underminer really was.

Live Streaming Video- President Obama To Make Statement On Iran Situation

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

WTF? Today I oversleep?

Cartoon of the Day

Click to enlarge, via.

Iran nuclear danger downplayed in reports

By GottaLaff

Iran's Big Hairy Scary Threats are greatly exaggerated, or so say two reports:

Reporting from Beirut — A pair of reports released Tuesday by prominent think tanks downplay the potential dangers presented by Iran, concluding that Tehran is at least six years away from building a deliverable nuclear weapon and that its ability to wreak havoc in the Middle East through surrogates is exaggerated.

A report by a group of Russian and American scientists and engineers at the EastWest Institute concludes that although Iran could build a nuclear device within one to three years of deciding to do so, it would not be able to deliver a long-range weapon for many more years. The scientists also say that a U.S. missile defense system being considered for Central Europe would be useless against an Iranian nuclear weapon.

Hear that, Georgie? Your enormously expensive, ineffective toy is "useless". Are any of us surprised? Hands?

A separate 230-page report by the Rand Corp., the result of political and military research for the U.S. Air Force begun in 2007, found Iran a less formidable adversary than some believe.

The report notes "significant barriers and buffers" to Iran's ambitions because of the reality of regional ethnic and religious politics and "its limited conventional military capacity, diplomatic isolation and past strategic missteps."

It argues for exploiting the gap between Iran's ambitions and abilities while engaging with Tehran on areas of mutual interest, such as Afghanistan. [...]

The Rand report argues that Iran "feeds off existing grievances with the status quo, particularly in the Arab world," rather than activating agents to stir up trouble. It suggests that the outside world ignore Iranian officials' sometimes aggressive, religiously tinged rhetoric and focus on its activities. [...]

Iran's foreign policy is driven more by old-fashioned nationalism and a desire to maintain territorial integrity and ensure the Islamic Republic's survival than by a desire to expand Iran's revolutionary ideology, the report says.

Rand also paints Iran as a military paper tiger, with poorly maintained and outdated equipment and shortages of personnel. Tehran exercises less control over militant groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas and its allies in Iraq than popularly believed, the report says.

"Iran has limited leverage over so-called proxy groups," it says. "In the event of conflict between the United States and Iran, the willingness of these groups to retaliate purely in the service of Tehran should not be assumed as automatic."

The EastWest Institute report, a year in the making, says it could take as long as 15 years for Iran to acquire long-range missile technology that would pose a threat to Europe or North America. Only the U.S., Europe, Russia and China have the technology that could help it achieve a breakthrough sooner, the report says.

The reports call on the U.S. to work with Russia and China in addressing Iran's ambitions.

So I guess all those panicky duck-and-cover warnings by BushCo can be replaced with a little calm and reason now? Yeah, I thought so.

U.S. Rejected Aid for Israeli Raid on Iranian Nuclear Site

By GottaLaff

If this is true, and it sounds like it is, it's the only time little Georgie bubbled up to the surface of the Sea of Normal in 8 years:

President Bush deflected a secret request by Israel last year for specialized bunker-busting bombs it wanted for an attack on Iran’s main nuclear complex and told the Israelis that he had authorized new covert action intended to sabotage Iran’s suspected effort to develop nuclear weapons, according to senior American and foreign officials.

White House officials never conclusively determined whether Israel had decided to go ahead with the strike before the United States protested, or whether Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel was trying to goad the White House into more decisive action before Mr. Bush left office. But the Bush administration was particularly alarmed by an Israeli request to fly over Iraq to reach Iran’s major nuclear complex at Natanz, where the country’s only known uranium enrichment plant is located.

The White House denied that request outright, American officials said, and the Israelis backed off their plans, at least temporarily. But the tense exchanges also prompted the White House to step up intelligence-sharing with Israel and brief Israeli officials on new American efforts to subtly sabotage Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, a major covert program that Mr. Bush is about to hand off to President-elect Barack Obama. [...]

The interviews also suggest that while Mr. Bush was extensively briefed on options for an overt American attack on Iran’s facilities, he never instructed the Pentagon to move beyond contingency planning, even during the final year of his presidency, contrary to what some critics have suggested.

This critic suggested that, based on news reports (not opinion pieces)... and based on Georgie's penchant for, you know, bombing countries who haven't bombed us first.

The interviews also indicate that Mr. Bush was convinced by top administration officials, led by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, that any overt attack on Iran would probably prove ineffective, lead to the expulsion of international inspectors and drive Iran’s nuclear effort further out of view. Mr. Bush and his aides also discussed the possibility that an airstrike could ignite a broad Middle East war in which America’s 140,000 troops in Iraq would inevitably become involved.

There is a whole lot more here.

Bombed Syrian Site Appears to Have Been Nuclear Reactor

By GottaLaff

One more as I run out the door:

The Syrian facility bombed by Israeli planes last year bore multiple hallmarks of a nuclear reactor, and the ruined site was contaminated with uranium, U.N. nuclear inspectors confirmed today in a report that largely backed Bush administration accounts of a secret atomic program in the Syrian desert.

The report stopped short of declaring the Syrian facility to be a nuclear reactor, noting that Damascus had taken extensive steps to sanitize the site before officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency were allowed to visit. But agency officials said Syria had failed to provide blueprints or other documents to support its claim that the destroyed building had a non-nuclear purpose. [...]

But more provocative was the IAEA's discovery, during a visit to the site in May, of traces of uranium in soil recovered from the site. A senior U.N. official, describing the finding, said the soil samples contained "significant" amounts of uranium in a form that clearly suggested human manipulation. The uranium was not enriched but had been "chemically processed," official said.

Yikes.

Study: Bomb, bomb, bombing Iran wouldn't help, would backfire

By GottaLaff

And thank you for playing "Unprovoked Attacks Are Unwise":

A military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities would probably only delay the country's progress toward nuclear-weapons capability, according to a study that concludes that such an attack could backfire by strengthening Tehran's resolve to acquire the bomb.

The analysis by the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security found that Iran's uranium facilities are too widely dispersed and protected -- and, in some cases, concealed too well -- to be effectively destroyed by warplanes. And any damage to the country's nuclear program could be quickly repaired.

Well now, that was a great big sack of "duh".

According to [David Albright, ISIS president and a former U.N. weapons inspector], an Israeli or U.S. attack would result in broader popular support for Iran's ruling clerics and could lead Tehran to sever ties with the U.N. nuclear watchdog.

"Iran would likely launch a 'crash' program to quickly obtain nuclear weapons," Albright said in an interview. "An attack would likely leave Iran angry, more nationalistic, fed up with international inspectors and nonproliferation treaties, and more determined than ever to obtain nuclear weapons."

But... but... what about all the anthrax and nukes and terrorists!? We gotta start a big, awesome, Republican-candidate-would-benefit war somehow! We just gotta!

Ex-Agent Says CIA Ignored Iran Facts

By GottaLaff

This is the kind of report that makes me want to shout obscenities for so many reasons, not the least of which: Why don't we hear about this instead of that inane corporate media Swiftboating of Wes Clark? Please read, then weep, then scream, then comment:

A former CIA operative who says he tried to warn the agency about faulty intelligence on Iraqi weapons programs now contends that CIA officials also ignored evidence that Iran had suspended work on a nuclear bomb. [...]

The former operative alleged in a 2004 lawsuit that the CIA fired him after he repeatedly clashed with senior managers over his attempts to file reports that challenged the conventional wisdom about weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. Key details of his claim have not been made public because they describe events the CIA deems secret.

The consensus view on Iran's nuclear program shifted dramatically last December with the release of a landmark intelligence report that concluded that Iran halted work on nuclear weapons design in 2003. The publication of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran undermined the CIA's rationale for censoring the former officer's lawsuit, said his attorney, Roy Krieger.

"On five occasions he was ordered to either falsify his reporting on WMD in the Near East, or not to file his reports at all," Krieger said in an interview.

In court documents and in statements by his attorney, the former officer contends that his 22-year CIA career collapsed after he questioned CIA doctrine about the nuclear programs of Iraq and Iran. [...]

The informant provided secret evidence that Tehran had halted its research into designing and building a nuclear weapon. Yet, when the operative sought to file reports on the findings, his attempts were "thwarted by CIA employees," according to court papers. Later he was told to "remove himself from any further handling" of the informant, the documents say. [...]

Krieger maintains that his client is being further punished by the agency's decision prohibiting him from fully regaining his identity. "He is not even allowed to attend court hearings about his own case," Krieger said.

They also tried to nail him on an improper sexual relationship charge that didn't stick.

This, after Sy Hersh's piece in the New Yorker. Back to weeping and screaming.

Dick Cheney "tried to block North Korea nuclear deal"

By GottaLaff

Sometimes being your own country doesn't translate into getting your own way. The Nation of Dick is off pouting somewhere in an undisclosed playpen:

Vice President Dick Cheney fought furiously to block efforts by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to strike a controversial US compromise deal with North Korea over the communist state's nuclear programme, the Telegraph has learned.

Wait... so he knows the word "compromise"?

"The exchanges between Cheney's office and Rice's people at State got very testy. But ultimately Condi had the President's ear and persuaded him that his legacy would be stronger if they reached a deal with Pyongyang," said a Pentagon adviser who was briefed on the battle.

I bet she has more than his ear... Oh, but that's just a silly rumor perpetuated by Stephanie Miller and Co. You know the rumor, about the two of them having their own "secret meetings" while Pickles was sulking at the Mayflower Hotel... that one. I'd never repeat it here. That would be wrong.

Mr Cheney's office is believed to have played a key role in the release two months ago of documents and photographs linking North Korea to a suspected nuclear site in Syria that was bombed by Israeli jets last year.

And by key role they mean he manufactured them. Oh, but I kid the Big Fat Nation of Dick.

Mr Cheney was so angry about the decision to remove North Korea from the terrorism blacklist and lift some sanctions that he abruptly curtailed a meeting with visiting US foreign experts when asked about it in the White House last week, according to the New York Times "I'm not going to be the one to announce this decision. You need to address your interest in this to the State Department," he reportedly said before leaving the room.

And then he took his plans to nuke Iran and stomped off.