Iran’s Manhattan Project

World • Views: 2,312

Here we go. The Obama administration is beginning to float their “Iran’s getting nukes and we can’t stop them” trial balloon: US may cede to Iran’s nuclear ambition.

US officials are considering whether to accept Iran’s pursuit of uranium enrichment, which has been outlawed by the United Nations and remains at the heart of fears that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons capability.

As part of a policy review commissioned by President Barack Obama, diplomats are discussing whether the US will eventually have to accept Iran’s insistence on carrying out the process, which can produce both nuclear fuel and weapons- grade material.

“There’s a fundamental impasse between the western demand for no enrichment and the Iranian demand to continue enrichment,” says Mark Fitzpatrick, a former state department expert now at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. “There’s no obvious compromise between those two positions.”

Jump to bottom

241 comments
1 Ward Cleaver  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:51:54pm

President Wuss.

2 MrSilverDragon  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:52:06pm

Do not accept. Ever.

3 [deleted]  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:52:47pm
4 [deleted]  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:53:06pm
5 Dreader1962  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:53:14pm

“There’s no obvious compromise between those two positions.”

For as we know, we must always search for compromise, even in the face of people who chant, "Death to America!"

/sarc

6 calvin coolidge  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:53:14pm

Welcome to the new world of Messiah and Mrs. Messiah

7 Sharmuta  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:53:15pm

We could, you know, try bombing their facilities, or is that too manly?

8 solomonpanting  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:53:47pm
“The US may still have zero as its opening position,

Zero is actually POTUS.

9 OldLineTexan  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:54:08pm

Look for Iranian nuclear material atop North Korean missiles soon.

10 Sharmuta  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:54:19pm

As predicted, this is going to be left for Israel to deal with. Thankfully, Israel has Bibi. He's not a pansy, like our president.

11 Ward Cleaver  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:54:20pm

re: #3 buzzsawmonkey

Obama doesn't care if Iran's Manhattan Project involves combining nukes with Manhattan.

They'd never do that - NYC voted Dem.

/

12 Athos  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:54:30pm

This approach was telegraphed when SecDef Gates answered that there was fundamentally nothing the US could regarding the DPRK launch of what for all practical purposes is an ICBM test.

And of course, by declaring the Iranian effort to build a bomb inevitable, then he can blame the bomb and any impact of its use on the previous Administration.

13 [deleted]  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:54:30pm
14 jcm  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:54:35pm

The Death Cult of the 12th Imam with Nucs....

Just F'in brilliant! World Pieces in our time!

15 Dianna  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:54:45pm

No compromise is possible! What kind of review are they talking about?

Who are these people, and what does it take to make them see reality?

16 rumcrook  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:54:52pm

sounds like zero is doing the diplamtic equivelant of a deep bow to the mullahs of iran now...

17 Ward Cleaver  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:55:11pm

re: #7 Sharmuta

We could, you know, try bombing their facilities, or is that too manly?

Not metrosexual enough. Try again.

18 [deleted]  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:55:23pm
19 sngnsgt  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:55:36pm
“Don’t develop a nuclear weapon”

Now that's a strongly worded statement. /

20 Ward Cleaver  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:55:46pm

re: #12 Athos

This approach was telegraphed when SecDef Gates answered that there was fundamentally nothing the US could regarding the DPRK launch of what for all practical purposes is an ICBM test.

And of course, by declaring the Iranian effort to build a bomb inevitable, then he can blame the bomb and any impact of its use on the previous Administration.

"I got nothin'."

21 godfrey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:55:52pm

We are led by a dressed-up troupe of brainless twits.

22 Killgore Trout  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:55:52pm

Well, at least there's no change from the Bush policy.

23 LGoPs  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:55:54pm

Obama may be a lair about many things but he certainly told the truth when he said he was going to Fundamentally Change America.
Even I didn't think he would move this fast.

24 Dianna  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:56:04pm

re: #7 Sharmuta

We could, you know, try bombing their facilities, or is that too manly?

Too aggressive. The Obama administration only does passive-aggressive.

25 jcm  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:56:08pm

Lewis: Ahmadinejad Believes His Apocalyptic Language
Fri, May 19, 2006 at 3:25:22 pm PDT

Charles; ahead of the curve as usual.

26 Jetpilot1101  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:56:19pm

Praying person or not, we all need to be praying for Israel if Obama lets Iran acquire a nuke.

27 nikis-knight  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:56:26pm
As part of a policy review commissioned by President Barack Obama, diplomats are discussing whether the US will eventually have to accept Iran’s insistence on carrying out the process, which can produce both nuclear fuel and weapons- grade material.

Ah, I see bipartisan Barak has managed to work out a compromise with Rush et al.
If he doesn't try, they can't hope he fails. Genius!
/
I like to see more support of Iranian democracy activists, less videos to the mullahs.

28 Ward Cleaver  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:56:54pm

"Don't make me write a strongly-worded letter."

29 Sharmuta  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:57:01pm

We can't stop it, but when Israel does they'll be condemned for it. *spit*

30 Dianna  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:57:12pm

re: #12 Athos

Not that the Bush administration doesn't deserve at least some blame, simply because he left the situation unresolved.

31 LGoPs  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:57:33pm

Hillary should present the Iranian leadership with one of those "Easy" buttons. Only modify it a little to say "We're Easy"
/

32 Ben Hur  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:57:34pm

Iran isn't building a nuclear bomb because there were no WMDs found in Iraq.

33 nikis-knight  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:57:37pm

re: #22 Killgore Trout

Well, at least there's no change from the Bush policy.


Bolton for president.

34 J.S.  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:57:48pm

"Europe's leading role in the world." "America has shown arrogance, even been dismissive." All said by the World's Bozo/Zero as he Sucks up to the Euro weenies. And, of course, while the Zero exclaims about how hard he's working on nuclear disarmament (of the States), he'll make sure Iran gets its nukes.

35 OldLineTexan  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:57:50pm

re: #22 Killgore Trout

Well, at least there's no change from the Bush policy.

Bush said "No enrichment" and did little.

Obama said "No weapons" and may do nothing.

/That's change you can believe in

36 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:57:54pm

Can we just formally surrender to China and get it over with?

/you know, to save some time and mass anxiety

37 Sharmuta  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:57:57pm

re: #26 Jetpilot1101

Praying person or not, we all need to be praying for Israel if Obama lets Iran acquire a nuke.

I honestly don't think Netenyahu will let this happen.

38 [deleted]  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:57:59pm
39 kansas  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:58:05pm

So the only thing we can do is bitch about it?

40 jcm  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:58:10pm

re: #12 Athos

This approach was telegraphed when SecDef Gates answered that there was fundamentally nothing the US could regarding the DPRK launch of what for all practical purposes is an ICBM test.

And of course, by declaring the Iranian effort to build a bomb inevitable, then he can blame the bomb and any impact of its use on the previous Administration.

Ability vs. Will.

The military has the ability.
This Admin does not have the will.

41 Ward Cleaver  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:58:20pm

re: #33 nikis-knight

Bolton for president.

"Kickin' ass and takin' names."

42 Ben Hur  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:58:25pm

re: #29 Sharmuta

We can't stop it, but when Israel does they'll be condemned for it. *spit*

There are setting up George W Netanyahu.

43 vapig  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:58:28pm

After bowing to the Saudi King, why would anybody be surprised that he's ok with Iran having nukes? Since they've made no secret of their intention of nuking Israel, he's probably of the opinion that that will save him the trouble of publically cutting US ties with Israel.

.....sigh, I really hate this man!

44 [deleted]  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:58:29pm
45 Jetpilot1101  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:58:42pm

re: #37 Sharmuta

I honestly don't think Netenyahu will let this happen.

I don't think he will but with their strongest ally running for cover, Israel is going to need all the help they can get.

46 WhiteRasta  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:58:53pm

re: #26 Jetpilot1101

I think he's hoping Iran will nuke Israel and keep their beady eyes off the USA....

47 Dianna  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:59:05pm

re: #22 Killgore Trout

Well, at least there's no change from the Bush policy.

Aside from bringing the hand-wringing out in the open, instead of letting it be known by default. That's the problem.

48 jcbunga  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:59:21pm

As Rush said today...Russia and China are looking at this guy and saying "Can we be this lucky?"

49 godfrey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:59:22pm
50 wrenchwench  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:59:26pm
Some analysts say priority should be given to winning greater access for UN inspectors, to acquire more information about Iran’s enrichment plant in Natanz and fill in gaps in knowledge on Iran’s nuclear-related activities across the country.

That could provide warning of any move to enrich uranium to weapons grade levels at Natanz and ease fears of clandestine facilities.

Don't forget under the country.

51 Scorch  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 1:59:28pm

This administration wants to compromise the US, the once greatest nation, into submission from these peace loving countries around the world. /

52 kansas  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:00:03pm

re: #48 jcbunga

As Rush said today...Russia and China are looking at this guy and saying "Can we be this lucky?"

Biden says he has a spine of steel. I feel better. /

53 vapig  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:00:05pm

re: #15 Dianna

No compromise is possible! What kind of review are they talking about?

Who are these people, and what does it take to make them see reality go away?

FTFY

54 Dianna  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:00:07pm

re: #29 Sharmuta

We can stop it. We just won't.

Why, I don't know.

55 turn  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:00:16pm

"Indicating possible space for negotiations, Dennis Blair, Mr Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, said last month that he believed Iran had not yet made the decision to produce enough highly enriched uranium for a wearhead for a bomb. He added: “Iran at a minimum, is keeping open the option to develop deliverable nuclear weapons.”

O, it's time for a new National Intelligence Director. stuck on stupid.

and this

"The US line that Iran is seeking the capability to develop nuclear weapons – but not necessarily such weapons themselves – contrasts with Mr Bush’s insistence while in office that it sought nuclear" weapons."

The only contrast I see is that o's administration has it totally wrong.

56 sngnsgt  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:00:22pm

Is this with or without pre-conditions?

57 Tumulus11  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:00:22pm

. Obama's opening move:

'I concede.'

58 Sharmuta  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:00:37pm

re: #45 Jetpilot1101

I don't think he will but with their strongest ally running for cover, Israel is going to need all the help they can get.

The other country that will NOT want to see this happen is, ironically, the Saudis. It makes me a bit sick to think that for once we kinda need the president to bow to saudi pressure. UGH!

59 nyc redneck  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:00:39pm

it is impossible to have respect for barack hussein obama.
he behaves like an enemy of the u.s. not the person sworn to protect this country.

60 solomonpanting  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:00:54pm

Obama's official statement:

"I came
I saw
Iran"

61 OldLineTexan  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:01:03pm

re: #58 Sharmuta

The other country that will NOT want to see this happen is, ironically, the Saudis. It makes me a bit sick to think that for once we kinda need the president to bow to saudi pressure. UGH!

Let the Saudis bomb it, then.

62 kansas  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:01:18pm

re: #59 nyc redneck

it is impossible to have respect for barack hussein obama.
he behaves like an enemy of the u.s. not the person sworn to protect this country.

You called him "Hussein", crazy right winger./

63 NYCHardhat  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:01:36pm

The Totus screwed up.

64 Russkilitlover  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:01:44pm
“There’s a fundamental impasse between the western demand for no enrichment and the Iranian dem and to continue enrichment,” says Mark Fitzpatrick,

Ya think?! What a moron. this passes for "expertise."

65 Dianna  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:02:06pm

re: #39 kansas

So the only thing we can do is bitch about it?

Short of hiring a fantasy squad of mercenaries, you mean? Private citizens are just a bit hampered, yes.

66 J.S.  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:02:15pm

re: #59 nyc redneck

I guess you must be hearing what The Zero is telling Europeans? (What an embarrassment is all I can say)...

67 OldLineTexan  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:02:33pm

re: #65 Dianna

Short of hiring a fantasy squad of mercenaries, you mean? Private citizens are just a bit hampered, yes.

My B1-B Lancer is in the shop.

68 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:02:34pm

U.S. offers olive branch to N. Korea

The United States is open to bilateral contacts with North Korea and urges the country to refrain from launching a long-range rocket, said the U.S. envoy to negotiations with the communist state. Stephen Bosworth said that six-nation nuclear negotiations with North Korea "must be at the center ... of our efforts.

Iran, Russia, Hamas, Hezzbolah, Taliban, and now North Korea. TOTUS must just really love being told to [expletive deleted] off.

/probably touched a hot stove more than once as a child too and still never made the connection

69 Athos  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:02:48pm

re: #30 Dianna

Not that the Bush administration doesn't deserve at least some blame, simply because he left the situation unresolved.

I agree - starting the with outsourcing of the diplomatic efforts to the European 3 and to the point where he refused to take a harder stand when it was apparent the EU-3 were being played by Iran.

But rather than continue or expand on the erroneous policies of the previous administration or seek to use them for the 'blame' after the fact, the current Administration was faced with the choice of appeasement / ignoring the threat or standing to eliminate the threat.

Despite the lessons of history around the use of appeasment or ignoring threat leading to larger problems - this Administration has chosen not to confront the enemy and only react to their actions.

70 opnion  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:02:56pm

Obama is projecting weakness. The Iranians probably can't believe their good luck to have this guy as the American President.
If the Iranians are ignoring UN resolutions , why isn't there a motion to expel them? These guys crave World acceptance & that would drive them crazy.

71 Dianna  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:03:49pm

re: #53 vapig

Four freakin' years.

It's going to be a long four freakin' years.

72 Dainn  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:04:08pm

This is a sign of the new politics.

- We have to bailout the financial industry: they are too big to fail
- (ditto) Auto Industry
- We can't afford the time to read the stimulus bill

and now...

- We can't stop Iran from having nukes so why try

Have you noticed that all the major policy decisions for the last year (both presidents) have been sold to us as if there just isn't anything that can be done about it?

Two words: Bull + shit.

73 midwestgak  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:04:09pm

re: #8 solomonpanting

Zero is actually POTUS.

Carter was bad. I was a stupid teenager back then. Now I am grown and realize how damaging this elected "leader" really is to all Americans.

74 nikis-knight  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:04:22pm

re: #61 OldLineTexan

Let the Saudis bomb it, then.

It's very uncertain what Iran would actually do once they get a bomb. Would Saudi Arabia count on Iran making a move against Isreal for the Islamic presitge that would get them? And then on Israel's counter attack being enough to keep Saudi Arabia safe from any future Iranian nuclear attacks?
Or would they believe that Iran is more likely to just wave it around while they openly use proxies and conventional arms to have their way in the region, content in the knowledge that Israel won't strke first with nukes?

75 formercorpsman  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:04:34pm

"We ask the West to remove what they created sixty years ago and if they do not listen to our recommendations, then the Palestinian nation and other nations will eventually do this for them."

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury."

"Remove Israel before it is too late and save yourself from the fury of regional nations."

"If the West does not support Israel, this regime will be toppled. As it has lost its raison d' tre, Israel will be annihilated."

"Israel is a tyrannical regime that will one day will be destroyed."

"Israel is a rotten, dried tree that will be annihilated in one storm."

“There’s a fundamental impasse between the western demand for no enrichment and the Iranian dem and to continue enrichment,” says Mark Fitzpatrick, a former state department expert now at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. “There’s no obvious compromise between those two positions.”

Mr. Prime Minister, I think this should remove any doubts you might have by now.

76 OldLineTexan  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:05:25pm

re: #74 nikis-knight

It's very uncertain what Iran would actually do once they get a bomb. Would Saudi Arabia count on Iran making a move against Isreal for the Islamic presitge that would get them? And then on Israel's counter attack being enough to keep Saudi Arabia safe from any future Iranian nuclear attacks?
Or would they believe that Iran is more likely to just wave it around while they openly use proxies and conventional arms to have their way in the region, content in the knowledge that Israel won't strke first with nukes?

One key thing to remember: The Saudi Wahabists only like the Iranian Shiites slightly more than Jews or Americans.

77 Mr. In get Mr. Out  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:05:38pm

This is insane.

78 Dianna  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:05:39pm

re: #67 OldLineTexan

My B1-B Lancer is in the shop.

Yeah, and my infiltration skills are a bit rusty (otherwise known as completely nonexistent).

79 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:05:40pm

Bibi has the cojones to handle this ... Obama should simply get out of the way.

80 nyc redneck  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:05:47pm

re: #71 Dianna

Four freakin' years.

It's going to be a long four freakin' years.

at some point, o is going to get the 3 a.m. call.
it makes me sick to my stomach thinking abt. it.

81 NYCHardhat  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:05:58pm

re: #71 Dianna

Four freakin' years.

It's going to be a long four freakin' years.

Don't worry.

Mark Levin: Number one book in America
Obama: approval rating below 50%
Congress: still inept
America: starting to wake up.

I'm feeling good about the mess that was made. I think we will find our conservative values and lead.

82 Lincolntf  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:06:21pm

We're actually at the point where the very survival of our Nation (as we've known it since at least WWI) is at stake and all Obama can come up with as a response is "uhhh, that would be hard to fix, let's skip it..."?
Nuclear weapons know no Party, nor do raving lunatics like Mamoo care about "gestures".

83 OldLineTexan  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:06:41pm

re: #78 Dianna

Yeah, and my infiltration skills are a bit rusty (otherwise known as completely nonexistent).

Well, just loan me one of your cruise missiles, then.

/

84 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:06:56pm

re: #70 opnion

Obama is projecting weakness. The Iranians probably can't believe their good luck to have this guy as the American President.
If the Iranians are ignoring UN resolutions , why isn't there a motion to expel them? These guys crave World acceptance & that would drive them crazy.


most of the nations in the UN would never agree to expel them. they all have much in common.

85 Dianna  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:07:53pm

re: #83 OldLineTexan

Well, just loan me one of your cruise missiles, then.

/

Any time!

86 Ringo the Gringo  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:07:54pm

Remember all those NO NUKES celebrities and pop stars doing concerts and staging protests back in the 1980's?

...Have they all retired?

87 A.W.  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:08:21pm

sheesh. i was going to insert a "hope he fails" snark but instead i am just too depressed to come up with something clever.

Bibi, its all on you. Save us from our own suicidal stupidity.

Btw, i think the official motto of Iran is "there hasn't been any holocaust... yet."

Yeah, pretty dark humor, but that is my mood right now.

88 Dainn  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:08:37pm

I think it's time for a nuclear annihilation clock for the middle east. When Iran gets the bomb, we can put the time at 5 min to midnight.

89 ConservatismNow!  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:09:03pm

re: #86 Ringo the Gringo

Remember all those NO NUKES... for America! celebrities and pop stars doing concerts and staging protests back in the 1980's?

...Have they all retired?

FTFY

90 Athos  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:09:21pm

re: #70 opnion

Obama is projecting weakness. The Iranians probably can't believe their good luck to have this guy as the American President.
If the Iranians are ignoring UN resolutions , why isn't there a motion to expel them? These guys crave World acceptance & that would drive them crazy.

To the President, he is probably convinced that all he is doing is not projecting aggression - or providing the Iranian mullahs with a reason to develop and use these weapons. It fits within the naive worldview of many of the hard left where other countries do not have agenda's or interests that they are willing to pursue with any and all capabilities that they posses or can gain, but that they only react to the actions of the US.

The lessons from history are there - the only thing needed is the ignorance to think that they don't apply - and that evil doesn't exist.

91 Athos  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:09:53pm

re: #71 Dianna

Four freakin' years.

It's going to be a long four freakin' years.

It feels like it's been at least 2 of those 4 already.....

92 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:11:18pm

re: #79 _RememberTonyC

Bibi has the cojones to handle this ... Obama should simply get out of the way.

TOTUS is squarely on the other side, he'll deny Israel the necessary airspace and tankers.

/Israel will have to use ICBMs for the strike, for the first time in world history, just imagine the world reaction to that

93 Mr. In get Mr. Out  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:13:09pm

This is what happens when a cancer avoids eradication.

94 solomonpanting  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:13:12pm

re: #91 Athos

re: #71 Dianna

Four freakin' years.

It's going to be a long four freakin' years.

It feels like it's been at least 2 of those 4 already.....

Wasn't time in the Obama era to be framed in a new set of parameters?

95 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:13:58pm

re: #86 Ringo the Gringo

Remember all those NO NUKES celebrities and pop stars doing concerts and staging protests back in the 1980's?

...Have they all retired?

/um, no

96 Sounder  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:15:31pm

This goof ball in the white house is going to see to the extreme increase in danger to the whole of North America. Just one nuke at 500 miles over the nation. Just one.

97 jemima  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:16:51pm

re: #54 Dianna

We can stop it. We just won't.

Why, I don't know.

Either he is too stupid/naive to stop it or he wants it to happen. Have I overlooked any other possibilities?

98 a5minmajor  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:17:19pm

Neville Chamberlain anyone?

This is EXACTLY how wars start. I swear, we never learn.

(See also, 'Appeasement', 'Spineless', and 'Rise of Nazi Germany')

99 mich-again  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:17:27pm
“There’s no obvious compromise between those two positions.”

Why compromise our position?

100 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:17:38pm

re: #96 Sounder

Just one nuke at 500 miles over the nation. Just one.

/Russia is the only country currently capable of doing that

101 Sounder  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:18:08pm

re: #100 Killian Bundy

For now.

102 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:18:28pm

re: #31 LGoPs

Hillary should present the Iranian leadership with one of those "Easy" buttons. Only modify it a little to say "We're Easy"
/

No; she's going to give them a button to "Launch" a new relationship.

103 Athos  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:19:29pm

re: #99 mich-again

Why compromise our position?

Absolutely - the compromise we seek is the other party moving to our position.

Of course, for someone without an ounce of leadership experience and believes he needs to be perpetually in campaign mode in order to get everyone to like him, he feels its important that we move our position to accomodate our adversary.

104 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:20:11pm

re: #43 vapig

After bowing to the Saudi King, why would anybody be surprised that he's ok with Iran having nukes? Since they've made no secret of their intention of nuking Israel, he's probably of the opinion that that will save him the trouble of publically cutting US ties with Israel.

.....sigh, I really hate this man!

However, the Saudis do not want Iran to have nukes.
Thus, the criticism of Israel when it takes out Iran's nuclear program might be limited to some toothless resolutions and strongly-worded letters, which is about all the UN does anyway.

105 Ringo the Gringo  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:20:23pm

re: #95 Killian Bundy

/um, no

Well, they did succeed in preventing the US from building anymore nuclear power plants.

As for our enemies, apparently they couldn't care less.

106 Mad Mullah  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:20:46pm

I hope that Obama fails with his weak appeasement policies.

And since I don't wish to come across as petty or vindictive, since certain people say that it is wrong to wish that Obama fails, I will suggest a simple alternative. Stop being such an ignorant, naive wuss, grow some balls, quit sucking up and bowing to every fascist and terrorist on the planet and show some strength for a change. Is Obama even proud of his country? His actions, statements and policies lead me to believe otherwise. As I have said before, I simply do not trust the man or his intentions. And I can't say that I trust him to protect the USA either, quite the contrary. I would of course be delighted if I were 100% wrong, but my distrust in him grows with every passing day.

107 MJBrutus  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:21:43pm

And the North Koreans are launching ICBMs and there's nothing Obama can do about that either. Welcome to the new "national security."

108 redshirt  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:22:52pm

Whether Obambi chooses to do nothing is one thing, but if Israel decides to strike, he will have to actually make a decision!
Allow Israeli flight over Iraq. Yes or No. He will actually have to be the decider and stand by it.

109 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:23:04pm

re: #46 WhiteRasta

I think he's hoping Iran will nuke Israel and keep their beady eyes off the USA....

But Iran might be most likely to threaten to shut oil supplies from the Gulf, instead of nuking either the Great Satan or the Little Satan.

110 pingjockey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:23:10pm

This nonsense should've been stopped years ago. The Iranians should never have been allowed to get this far. Where is the spine in DC?

111 yochanan  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:24:14pm

THIS IS THE REASON I SUPPORTED JOHN MCCAIN

thanks alot any republican or cons. who stayed home

112 [deleted]  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:24:47pm
113 jcm  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:25:19pm

re: #110 pingjockey

This nonsense should've been stopped years ago. The Iranians should never have been allowed to get this far. Where is the spine in DC?

Spines are removed upon induction to the political class.

114 Athos  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:26:14pm

re: #106 Mad Mullah

I hope that Obama fails with his weak appeasement policies.

No offense, and I don't intend to reopen the argument around 'fail' - but I think the better way to phrase that sentence would be to state you believe that his weak appeasement policies will fail. Hoping for that failure is going to be spun as hoping for the Iranian use of nuclear weapons on Israel and or the US just to be able to say that the President was wrong in his policies and approach. We can't hope for the carnage that would result or the war that would result. We have to hope that actions will be taken to prevent the war from taking place - even if those actions include pre-emptive uses of military force to remove the capability from the Iranians. It also includes every possible effort to support the interests of those people in Iran who do not support the government and their repressive regime.

115 pingjockey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:26:15pm

re: #111 yochanan
I really don't know if McCain would've done anything either. GWB didn't. Kept going to the UN for toothless resolutions. I understand diplomacy, however diplomacy ONLY works if the other side is willing to talk or listen. With the mad mullahs it ain't gonna happen.

116 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:27:01pm

re: #67 OldLineTexan

My B1-B Lancer is in the shop.

Too bad we can't get a surplus missile submarine. I think we lizards have enough to crew her. Too bad the missiles don't have penetrating warheads, though. Now if we just had the resources of the US, we probably could build them in a few months; the first penetrating weapons for the 1st Gulf War were built in something like 3 months by using old gun barrels (big guns) for the penetrators.

117 pingjockey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:27:32pm

re: #112 buzzsawmonkey

re: #113 jcm

Obviously. Remember the shit fit the left had when Reagan joked about outlawing the USSR?!

118 Tazzerman  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:27:37pm

re: #81 NYCHardhat

Don't worry.

Mark Levin: Number one book in America
Obama: approval rating below 50%
Congress: still inept
America: starting to wake up.

I'm feeling good about the mess that was made. I think we will find our conservative values and lead.

I'm glad you do because I don't. Four years is PLENTY of time for Comrade Obama and the Iranians to fundamentally change this nation and the world. By then, IF we finally wake up, we will have lost yet another four years on top of the eight years that Bush wasted allowing the Euro-weenies to 'negotiate' with Amascrewloose.

I fear that at worse, this administration will have blood on its hands before the four years are up and at best, will have put us at such a disadvantage on the world stage that we might not EVER get back to the point where we could militarily effect anything within the Persian Gulf region.

Next up, aside from a Nuke draw down will come a full blown military draw down ala Jimmah Carter and Bill Clinton.

The Russians, Chinese AND Norks ARE in fact smiling because of the gift that was handed to them by a totally naive and ignorant majority of Americans, spoon fed on propaganda by our own 5th column-ers, the media, who's cupabiltiy in all of this will go down in history as one of the greatest 'coups' ever accomplished.

I see NOTHING in the coming four years to be happy or optimistic about. Sorry.

119 Athos  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:27:48pm

re: #115 pingjockey

I really don't know if McCain would've done anything either. GWB didn't. Kept going to the UN for toothless resolutions. I understand diplomacy, however diplomacy ONLY works if the other side is willing to talk or listen. With the mad mullahs it ain't gonna happen.

Diplomacy also needs the credible threat of the use of force to move the intractable. At some point, the 'or else' comes up.

120 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:28:38pm

re: #88 Dainn

I think it's time for a nuclear annihilation clock for the middle east. When Iran gets the bomb, we can put the time at 5 min seconds to midnight.


FTFY

121 pingjockey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:28:55pm

re: #119 Athos
Yep. The Iranians have NO reason to believe we'll strike their facilities.

122 BingoBunny  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:29:38pm

All that money setting in banks.. and all those bank robbers.. Guess we have to let that law go away too, since in no obvious compromise.

123 ConservatismNow!  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:30:29pm

re: #119 Athos

Diplomacy also needs the credible threat of the use of force to move the intractable. At some point, the 'or else' comes up.

Agreed. The 'or else' does not have to be against the current target of diplomacy though. If you don't use the 'or else' at least once every ten years, the bullies start to forget.

124 jill e  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:30:44pm

This time, it's going to be a lot more serious than embassy hostages.

125 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:30:57pm

I really believe the Mossad has people in iran that have infiltrated their nuke program. The Israelis haven't survived this long by being stupid. And I also believe they have plans that will run counter to conventional wisdom. IMHO it is far more likely that Israel will strike quietly to disable PARTS of the iran program instead of going for wholesale 100% destruction.

126 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:32:53pm

re: #124 jill e

This time, it's going to be a lot more serious than embassy hostages.

Yes. If Iran gets nukes, it will hold Mideast oil hostage, if not the entire world.

127 Mad Mullah  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:33:49pm

re: #114 Athos

No offense, and I don't intend to reopen the argument around 'fail' - but I think the better way to phrase that sentence would be to state you believe that his weak appeasement policies will fail..

No offense taken at all. You are correct that your phrasing would have been a better way to present the argument.

128 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:35:45pm

re: #125 _RememberTonyC

I really believe the Mossad has people in iran that have infiltrated their nuke program. The Israelis haven't survived this long by being stupid. And I also believe they have plans that will run counter to conventional wisdom. IMHO it is far more likely that Israel will strike quietly to disable PARTS of the iran program instead of going for wholesale 100% destruction.

If I were the Israelis, I'd be trying to set it up so when they reconfigure to make highly enriched uranium, the centrifuges "fail", thus destroying the facility and making it so radioactive they'd have to rebuild from scratch.

Of course, I have absolutely no connection with the IDF or Mossad.
But if someone from Iran is reading this, can you take the chance? Maybe you should just shut down your entire enrichment process while you meticulously inspect all of it. Are you feeling lucky, punks?

129 baier  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:35:55pm

He really is Jimmy Carter the 2nd.

130 [deleted]  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:37:04pm
131 [deleted]  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:37:33pm
132 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:37:35pm

re: #128 Kosh's Shadow

If I were the Israelis, I'd be trying to set it up so when they reconfigure to make highly enriched uranium, the centrifuges "fail", thus destroying the facility and making it so radioactive they'd have to rebuild from scratch.

Of course, I have absolutely no connection with the IDF or Mossad.
But if someone from Iran is reading this, can you take the chance? Maybe you should just shut down your entire enrichment process while you meticulously inspect all of it. Are you feeling lucky, punks?


Something along those lines is far more likely IMHO. Everyone in the world expects the IAF to be involved ... I beg to differ.

133 RaiderDan  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:40:28pm

Well, the good news is that the Israeli refugees from the Tel Aviv Holocaust II of January 11, 2011 will probably speak English and will be a lot easier to assimilate...

Might even vote Republican.

134 Baier  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:40:49pm

Obama is sending a message to Israel that he supports a 2nd holocaust.

135 [deleted]  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:41:39pm
136 jorline  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:43:18pm
137 Athos  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:43:26pm

Claudia Rossett in PJ on 'Smart Diplomacy'

In President Obama’s global campaign of “smart” diplomacy, with its stress on reaching out, engaging and resetting, the main evidence of anything genuinely “smart” – in the most shallow, modern sense – is the love of electronic and digital gadgetry:

– A “Reset” button for Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov (admittedly, not a button actually wired to anything, but the metaphor, at least, is of the digital age).

– DVDs for British Prime Minister Gordon Brown (OK, not compatible with British players, but hey, it’s the idea that counts).

– An ipod for the Queen of England.

If this is to be the trend, America can do much better.

It all depends if we base our diplomatic efforts based on the way we see things instead of the way we want to see things.

Despite the focus of the election debate around inexperience towards Sarah Palin, I am wondering if the diplomatic effort of that ticket would have been as rinky-dink as the one demonstrated thusfar by this Administration with the corny gifts and approaches that are focused more on popularity than doing the right thing.

We are still paying a high price for the errors of the Democratic Congress of the mid to late 1970s and the Jimmy Carter presidency.......based on that what is the price we are going to have to pay for the mistakes being made by this Democratic Congress and Presidency?

138 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:43:31pm

re: #133 RaiderDan

Well, the good news is that the Israeli refugees from the Tel Aviv Holocaust II of January 11, 2011 will probably speak English and will be a lot easier to assimilate...

Might even vote Republican.


this made me wince

139 [deleted]  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:44:36pm
140 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:45:48pm

If Obama lets this happen, it will be one of the worst things that can happen.

To be fully fair, the U.S. is spread awful thin right now, however, the Iranis sent kids to clear minefields by stomping on them. A nuclear Iran is one of the few countries that might actually like the idea of using them. Further, a nuclear Iran in an oil Alliance with Russia could choke out the EU.

That is the chess game. It is plain as day. Of course, Israel would suffer too terribly from this.

There is no amount of unclenching that is going to help. I pray to G-d that someone has the courage in DC to get this through to Obama.

And on that happy note, I am off to Shabbos.

141 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:46:34pm

I'm sure the iranians love this story:

CLEVELAND (AP) - John Demjanjuk (dem-YAHN'-yuk), facing charges
he was a Nazi death camp guard, has marked his 89th birthday by
winning a reprieve of his ordered deportation to Germany to face
possible trial.
His son says an immigration judge on Friday issued a stay of a
deportation expected during the weekend. Germany says Demjanjuk had
been expected by Monday.
Demjanjuk had argued that his deportation would amount to
torture, given his frail health.

142 pingjockey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:48:00pm

re: #141 _RememberTonyC
Tough shit. Deport his nazi ass.

143 [deleted]  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:48:53pm
144 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:49:10pm

re: #141 _RememberTonyC

I'm sure the iranians love this story:

CLEVELAND (AP) - John Demjanjuk (dem-YAHN'-yuk), facing charges
he was a Nazi death camp guard, has marked his 89th birthday by
winning a reprieve of his ordered deportation to Germany to face
possible trial.
His son says an immigration judge on Friday issued a stay of a
deportation expected during the weekend. Germany says Demjanjuk had
been expected by Monday.
Demjanjuk had argued that his deportation would amount to
torture, given his frail health.

And I, for one, would not feel so bad that a former concentration camp guard was being tortured.

145 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:50:05pm

Actually, I will just say it. Forgive the yelling.

ENOUGH ALREADY! HOW MUCH MORE EVIDENCE DO WE NEED THAT THE PSYCHOTIC MULLAHS IN IRAN REPRESENT A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO THE US AND HER ALLIES!

BOMB THE SHIT OUT OF THEIR NUCLEAR CAPACITY AND GET IT OVER WITH!

146 pingjockey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:50:20pm

re: #143 taxfreekiller
Heh.

147 charles_martel  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:51:08pm

This will, of course, force Israel to take out the nuke facilities. This will start a major war, and the big question will be: will Obama let Israel go to the wolves, or will he help defend Israel? I'm not going to hold my breath on that one.....

148 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:51:44pm

re: #147 charles_martel

This will, of course, force Israel to take out the nuke facilities. This will start a major war, and the big question will be: will Obama let Israel go to the wolves, or will he help defend Israel? I'm not going to hold my breath on that one.....

Good question and great nic.

149 jcm  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:52:14pm

re: #145 LudwigVanQuixote

Actually, I will just say it. Forgive the yelling.

ENOUGH ALREADY! HOW MUCH MORE EVIDENCE DO WE NEED THAT THE PSYCHOTIC MULLAHS IN IRAN REPRESENT A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO THE US AND HER ALLIES!

BOMB THE SHIT OUT OF THEIR NUCLEAR CAPACITY AND GET IT OVER WITH!

The era of warmongering is over, welcome to the new era of an open hand offering hope and change to our new friends.

////////

150 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:52:18pm

re: #145 LudwigVanQuixote

Actually, I will just say it. Forgive the yelling.

ENOUGH ALREADY! HOW MUCH MORE EVIDENCE DO WE NEED THAT THE PSYCHOTIC MULLAHS IN IRAN REPRESENT A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO THE US AND HER ALLIES!

BOMB THE SHIT OUT OF THEIR NUCLEAR CAPACITY AND GET IT OVER WITH!

Or sabotage it in a way they think there is something wrong with their design, but it gets contaminated too much to be analyzed carefully.
Sets their enrichment program back years.

If they could time it for a mullah's visit, so much the better.

151 Mirage  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:52:39pm

re: #137 Athos

Claudia Rossett in PJ on 'Smart Diplomacy'

It all depends if we base our diplomatic efforts based on the way we see things instead of the way we want to see things.

Despite the focus of the election debate around inexperience towards Sarah Palin, I am wondering if the diplomatic effort of that ticket would have been as rinky-dink as the one demonstrated thusfar by this Administration with the corny gifts and approaches that are focused more on popularity than doing the right thing.

We are still paying a high price for the errors of the Democratic Congress of the mid to late 1970s and the Jimmy Carter presidency.......based on that what is the price we are going to have to pay for the mistakes being made by this Democratic Congress and Presidency?

I shudder to think of what kind of costs the idiotic and classless diplomacy will entail.

152 charles_martel  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:52:41pm

re: #148 LudwigVanQuixote

Thanks. I try to celebrate a little history.....

153 SixDegrees  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:52:41pm

How does this fit in, even a little bit, with the President's statement earlier today that he was going to pursue "a world without nuclear weapons"?

We stand at a critical moment in history. Right now, very few nations are capable of producing their own nuclear weapons - for the most part, America, China and Russia control the technology needed to produce these weapons, and anyone else wishing to make them has to go through one of the Big Three in order to obtain crucial components. If the US were serious about at least capping proliferation, it would be actively seeking a partnership with these other two nations in order to lock down distribution of key technologies.*

That's where things are right now. In an alarmingly short time, that situation will change, and a half-dozen countries ruled by insane religious despots will rapidly develop their own domestic arms manufacturing capabilities. At that point, the spread of such weapons to the rest of the world is all but assured.

Where is Obama? Why isn't he angrily denouncing his own State Department for making such statements, and setting them right on US policy?

Or - is it all just another campaign-style sound byte to him?

-----------

* I haven't forgotten about Europe, India or Pakistan. They are small-time in comparison, and mostly still need to import technologies that make bombs possible from one or another of the Big Three. Even if they are added to the list, it's is - for this one, brief moment - still a manageable, addressable problem. Soon, that will change, and the problem of proliferation will grow exponentially thereafter, beyond all possibility of containment.

154 RadicalRon  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:53:31pm

Iran's partner in this is Russia, but don't expect the founder, CEO, COO, CFO and chairman of the board of Messiah Motorworks LLC™ to attach any significance to it.

Milquetoast Diplomacy, brought to you by The Man In The Empty Suit.

155 Jimash  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:53:36pm

This is why O's other push to reduce OUR nuclear weapons is not smart.
If these crazies are going to be hanging Nukes out over everybody's head, then OUR quantity and ability to deliver are key .

156 Mr. In get Mr. Out  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:54:35pm

re: #145 LudwigVanQuixote

Actually, I will just say it. Forgive the yelling.

ENOUGH ALREADY! HOW MUCH MORE EVIDENCE DO WE NEED THAT THE PSYCHOTIC MULLAHS IN IRAN REPRESENT A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO THE US AND HER ALLIES!

BOMB THE SHIT OUT OF THEIR NUCLEAR CAPACITY AND GET IT OVER WITH!

Unclench your fists.///

157 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:55:25pm

re: #150 Kosh's Shadow

Or sabotage it in a way they think there is something wrong with their design, but it gets contaminated too much to be analyzed carefully.
Sets their enrichment program back years.

If they could time it for a mullah's visit, so much the better.

Beautiful idea, but way too hollywood and not really physically feasible - sorry to be the bummer physicist.

Nope, honestly, bombing the shit out of the facilities, particularly by timing the strike to insure the most kills amongst their scientific and technical personnel is the best bet. Make certain you kill the Russian physicists and techs who "aren't there" (so the Ruskies can't really complain).

158 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:56:26pm

re: #156 Mr. In get Mr. Out

Unclench your fists.///

I got your fist right here...

//////

159 charles_martel  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:56:37pm

Well, we can always hope for a big earthquake. Iran is in a seismically active area.

160 [deleted]  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:57:02pm
161 pingjockey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:57:21pm

re: #159 charles_martel
But they always seem to hit the towns made out of mud bricks!

162 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:58:37pm

re: #142 pingjockey

Tough shit. Deport his nazi ass.

ditto .... i can't believe ivan the terrible is still wasting oxygen

163 so.cal.swede  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:58:45pm

US: We have a difference of opinion, whereas we believe that nuclear weapons should not be prolif...
Akbar-001: *PTOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM*

164 solomonpanting  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:59:01pm

re: #129 baier

He really is Jimmy Carter the 2nd.

Carter turned his back on the Shah. Obama turns his on the US.

165 pingjockey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 2:59:47pm

re: #162 _RememberTonyC
I actually thought he'd been deported/executed years ago.

166 Querent  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:00:07pm

re: #52 kansas

Biden says he has a spine of steel. I feel better. /

spine of steel?

You mean Soros was actually installing some re-bar in that photo?

/

167 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:00:39pm

re: #160 taxfreekiller

Once more on Regan:

He would call up the PanTex plant in Amarillo Tx. order up say 24 nukes, have them loaded on the nuke trucks, order them delivered day time via the interstates to Houston to the port and have them loaded on Navy ships.

At the same time he would call the Air Force and have them start practice low level F-111 terrain following radar fighter bombers ect
runs over power plants of the nuke type here in the U.S.

All this to make the Russians understand he would pull the trigger and
was prepared to do so.

Obama, not so much.

Tax, on this, we completely agree. Nuclear Iran is part of the Russian game plan. It astonishes me that O does not clearly see that Putin is not our friend and that he plays for keeps.

168 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:00:56pm

re: #159 charles_martel

Well, we can always hope for a big earthquake. Iran is in a seismically active area.

That really would be a message from G-d.

169 SixDegrees  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:01:36pm

re: #145 LudwigVanQuixote

Actually, I will just say it. Forgive the yelling.

ENOUGH ALREADY! HOW MUCH MORE EVIDENCE DO WE NEED THAT THE PSYCHOTIC MULLAHS IN IRAN REPRESENT A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO THE US AND HER ALLIES!

BOMB THE SHIT OUT OF THEIR NUCLEAR CAPACITY AND GET IT OVER WITH!

Where are they getting their uranium from? Their high-precision machining equipment? Their precision electronic triggers? I don't think they have domestic capabilities for all of this - at least not yet. They're buying it from someone. That source might present a a less dramatic pressure point than an action that would be a formal declaration of war.

Bombing the shit out of their nuclear capacity has one other enormous drawback - we don't have any clear idea of where it is located. Enrichment facilities are easy to disperse and to hide. So are machining facilities. Reactors are huge, obvious targets - but they aren't required for bomb manufacture; you don't need the trans-uranium elements reactors provide in order to make an atomic bomb. All you need is a source of raw uranium, and the aforementioned enrichment facilities. In other words, this isn't a problem that's soluble through bombing.

170 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:01:39pm

re: #165 pingjockey

I actually thought he'd been deported/executed years ago.


he's like a cockroach ... hard to kill

171 [deleted]  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:03:37pm
172 Rancher  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:03:42pm

Once we accept this then we can really slam Israel if they put a monkey wrench in Iran's ambitions.

173 Querent  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:04:08pm

re: #99 mich-again

Why compromise our position?

because we're about to be in a compromising position?

174 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:04:12pm

re: #169 SixDegrees

Where are they getting their uranium from? Their high-precision machining equipment? Their precision electronic triggers? I don't think they have domestic capabilities for all of this - at least not yet. They're buying it from someone. That source might present a a less dramatic pressure point than an action that would be a formal declaration of war.

Bombing the shit out of their nuclear capacity has one other enormous drawback - we don't have any clear idea of where it is located. Enrichment facilities are easy to disperse and to hide. So are machining facilities. Reactors are huge, obvious targets - but they aren't required for bomb manufacture; you don't need the trans-uranium elements reactors provide in order to make an atomic bomb. All you need is a source of raw uranium, and the aforementioned enrichment facilities. In other words, this isn't a problem that's soluble through bombing.

They have a lot of Uranium that they mine themselves. Bombing the facilities in of itself will only slow them down. Bombing the facilities in a way that eliminates physicists who are ok with bringing nukes to this psychotic regime will set them back a lot. The mullas themselves are not so good at math.

175 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:04:15pm

re: #169 SixDegrees

Where are they getting their uranium from?

/they mine it

176 mich-again  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:04:19pm

Whats a more dangerous occupation: Being an Alaskan crab fisherman or being an Iranian nuclear physicist? These days I'd rather try my luck on the fishing boat. Is Israel assassinating Iran nuclear scientists?

Israel is assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists as part of a covert war against the Islamic Republic's illicit weapons program, the Daily Telegraph on Tuesday quoted Western intelligence analysts as saying.

The British daily said Israel's Mossad espionage agency was rumored to be behind the death of Ardeshire Hassanpour, a top nuclear scientist at Iran's Isfahan uranium plant, who died in mysterious circumstances from reported "gas poisoning" in 2007.

Other recent deaths of important figures in the procurement and enrichment process in Iran and Europe have been the result of Israeli "hits", intended to deprive Tehran of key technical skills at the head of the program, according to the analysts.

The Telegraph also quoted United States intelligence sources as saying Israel is using sabotage, front companies and double agents to disrupt the regime's illicit weapons project as an alternative to direct military strikes.

Terrorize the terrorists. Its all they understand.

177 pingjockey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:05:07pm

re: #176 mich-again
Yaaay! Mossad!

178 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:06:07pm

re: #169 SixDegrees

Also, enrichment facilities are not easy to disperse. Thousands of centrifuges are not so easy to hide. Think of the facilities needed to spin things the size of a hot water heater. They are in the desert. It is not so easy to hide such a massive industrial operation.

179 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:06:21pm

re: #176 mich-again

The Israelis know what they're doing. Certainly on this topic anyway.

180 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:07:53pm

re: #178 LudwigVanQuixote

Also, enrichment facilities are not easy to disperse. Thousands of centrifuges are not so easy to hide. Think of the facilities needed to spin things the size of a hot water heater. They are in the desert. It is not so easy to hide such a massive industrial operation.

/aim here

181 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:08:43pm

Ok now I really do mean it. Be well. See you after sundown tomorrow!

Eat, drink and be merry!

182 SixDegrees  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:10:29pm

re: #174 LudwigVanQuixote

They have a lot of Uranium that they mine themselves. Bombing the facilities in of itself will only slow them down. Bombing the facilities in a way that eliminates physicists who are ok with bringing nukes to this psychotic regime will set them back a lot. The mullas themselves are not so good at math.

I see problems with this approach. For one, as already noted we don't have a clear idea of where their facilities are. They are probably widely dispersed as a deterrent to such targeting. So any setback would likely be minor. For another, the populace - at the moment - isn't exactly thrilled with this nuclear brinkmanship. A strike of the kind mentioned could well pull them together behind the crazy mullah contingent and unite them in determination.

I'd like more subtle approaches to be tried first. Reaching for bombs right off the bat seems awfully risky when there are avenues that haven't been explored yet.

183 Slyvester  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:12:02pm

Once again, an ally finds that the US is not a reliable partner. Israel will have to do it alone.

184 SixDegrees  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:14:16pm

re: #175 Killian Bundy

/they mine it

From this report, it doesn't sound as though they have much of a supply, although their actual resources seem to be poorly understood.

That still leaves various technological resources they need to acquire elsewhere. We need to apply pressure on that elsewhere.

185 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:15:03pm

re: #182 SixDegrees

I see problems with this approach. For one, as already noted we don't have a clear idea of where their facilities are. They are probably widely dispersed as a deterrent to such targeting.

/Coordinates 33° 43′ 0″ N, 51° 43′ 0″ E

186 SixDegrees  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:16:31pm

re: #180 Killian Bundy

/aim here

The caption indicates that Natanz is all but shut down, and that large-scale enrichment has been dispersed and hidden, as I suspected. This makes dismantling enrichment capabilities nearly impossible through bombardment.

187 jcm  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:17:51pm

re: #185 Killian Bundy

/Coordinates 33° 43′ 0″ N, 51° 43′ 0″ E

Kill the facilities sets them back a few years.
Kill the brain trust sets them back a generation.

Thugocracies have a tendencies to keep brain trusts were they can keep an eye on them. It's hard and cold, but needs to be thought about.

188 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:18:41pm

re: #186 SixDegrees

The caption indicates that Natanz is all but shut down

/that's not at all what it says

189 SixDegrees  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:18:48pm

re: #185 Killian Bundy

/Coordinates 33° 43′ 0″ N, 51° 43′ 0″ E

Again: the caption on that photo is quite clear. They've all but shut that site down, and have hidden large-scale production and widely dispersed it.

Bombing Natanz would simply be a provocation. Follow-on inspections - which Iran would certainly demand - would show that the site posed no threat, and we'd be wiping egg off our faces for years while Iranian development accelerated.

190 pingjockey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:18:49pm

re: #187 jcm
Not as hard as trying to rebuild Tel Aviv or New York.

191 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:19:16pm

re: #186 SixDegrees

The caption indicates that Natanz is all but shut down, and that large-scale enrichment has been dispersed and hidden, as I suspected. This makes dismantling enrichment capabilities nearly impossible through bombardment.

Centrifuge facilities tend to be large, though; dispersing them makes them less efficient.
Although I did hear that they might be moving to laser enrichment. Those facilities, IIRC, are much smaller, and I believe that is what Israel uses.

192 SixDegrees  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:20:31pm

re: #178 LudwigVanQuixote

Also, enrichment facilities are not easy to disperse. Thousands of centrifuges are not so easy to hide. Think of the facilities needed to spin things the size of a hot water heater. They are in the desert. It is not so easy to hide such a massive industrial operation.

Actually, they are extremely easy to disperse. They aren't as efficient when you do that, but each individual centrifuge is only about the size of a refrigerator. There are certainly advantages to having them all in one place, but there isn't any necessity for it.

193 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:21:09pm

re: #189 SixDegrees

Again: the caption on that photo is quite clear. They've all but shut that site down, and have hidden large-scale production and widely dispersed it..

/no, it says they've removed the IAEA seals and have started new underground construction, what you readin' Willis?

194 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:21:12pm

re: #187 jcm

Kill the facilities sets them back a few years.
Kill the brain trust sets them back a generation.

Thugocracies have a tendencies to keep brain trusts were they can keep an eye on them. It's hard and cold, but needs to be thought about.

Good point. I wonder if they can get a dinner for the scientists catered by Putin's KGB caterer. Poloney sandwiches anyone?

195 Canoe Train  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:21:30pm

The US now has its Neville Chamberlin. Who would be our Winston Churchill?

196 pingjockey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:22:05pm

re: #195 Canoe Train
Nowhere in sight right now.

197 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:22:38pm

I better head home, lizards. The big thunderstorm has a gap in it now.

198 Rancher  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:23:50pm

re: #169 SixDegrees

Where are they getting their uranium from? Their high-precision machining equipment? Their precision electronic triggers?


They make their own gas centrifuges also. They are not dependent on foreigners like Syria was when we bombed their facility and like Iraq was when the Israelis bombed Saddam's facility.

...a less dramatic pressure point than an action that would be a formal declaration of war.


We are already at war with Iran, we just refuse to admit it. A high-energy electromagnetic pulse (EMP) over the East coast might change this attitude, till then lets all just stick our head in the sand.

199 Wilderstad  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:28:36pm

This is how a stateman protects his interests?
Obama has managed to insult every male with a pair of testicles. He so clearly has none. He's also managed a goodly contingent of women with a pair of ovaries. I could not be more disgusted at this grovelling, craven and cowardly, Chicago politician.

200 SixDegrees  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:30:04pm

re: #198 Rancher

We are already at war with Iran, we just refuse to admit it. A high-energy electromagnetic pulse (EMP) over the East coast might change this attitude, till then lets all just stick our head in the sand.

They assemble their centrifuges; it is my understanding that they are not capable of producing many of the parts required on their own, and import them from China. Mostly. I'm sure the Russians would be happy to sell to them, as well.

And we are not at war with Iran in the formal sense, which carries with a host of problems that the present situation does not have. A unilateral strike on our part would inflame the entire region, and in terms of reducing Iran's nuclear capabilities would probably do very little in the way of slowing things down. In the end, it would probably accelerate them.

Note that I am not advocating doing nothing.

201 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:35:16pm

re: #189 SixDegrees

Again: the caption on that photo is quite clear. They've all but shut that site down, and have hidden large-scale production and widely dispersed it..

It says nothing like that at all.

After a two year "moratorium" on nuclear research, Iran has removed the IAEA seals at its Natanz uranium enrichment site. While the seals were on the old buildings, construction continued on much larger facilities now buried and linked to the surface by disguised tunnels.

That's the caption and that was three years ago.

/click "next" to see the new, underground 96,000 sq. ft. Natanz facilities

202 SixDegrees  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:37:06pm

re: #201 Killian Bundy

That's the caption and that was three years ago.

/click "next" to see the new, underground 96,000 sq. ft. Natanz facilities

Sorry, but I'm not buying.

203 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:39:16pm

re: #202 SixDegrees

Sorry, but I'm not buying.

/right, they built and then buried 96,000 sq, ft. worth of buildings just for fun

204 pingjockey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:40:32pm

re: #203 Killian Bundy
Those mad mullahs are such kidders. I'm sure they really don't mean to see Israel wiped from the map...wink, nudge.

205 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:41:36pm

re: #203 Killian Bundy

/right, they built and then buried 96,000 sq, ft. worth of buildings just for fun

Oops, did I say 96,000 sq, ft. worth of buildings?

/it's actually 741,000 sq. ft. worth of underground buildings, my bad

206 jcm  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:42:25pm

re: #190 pingjockey

Not as hard as trying to rebuild Tel Aviv or New York.

Yep.
Gotta think about the Command & Control too.

207 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:42:57pm

re: #205 Killian Bundy

Oops, did I say 96,000 sq, ft. worth of buildings?

/it's actually 741,000 sq. ft. worth of underground buildings, my bad

/Natanz

208 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:43:41pm

re: #207 Killian Bundy

/Natanz

/click "next"

209 pingjockey  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:44:08pm

re: #206 jcm
The whole 3CI infrastructure needs to be taken out.

210 Canoe Train  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:45:01pm

re: #90 Athos

I am inclined to agree, here. It has be one of the most naive responses to the situation, though, and it invites Iran ( and others would would wish to profit or benefit from the US' limp-wrist, flaccid response ) to become all the more provocative. I'm sorry that I even have to type this sort of thing. If we were to hope for anything it is that the resulting mess will not be too gigantic.

211 Spare O'Lake  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:45:24pm

Superpower impotence is a bitch.

212 Jimash  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:46:14pm

So can we dispose of the notion that we don't kw where they are ?
Esfahan / Isfahan
Nuclear Technology Center
N32°40' E51°40'

213 Rancher  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:46:34pm
A unilateral strike on our part...


Given the number of Americans they have killed in Iraq I would hardly call it unilateral.

...would inflame the entire region


I'm not so sure, these are Shiites we're talking about and the Egyptians and Saudis are deeply worried about Iran.

and in terms of reducing Iran's nuclear capabilities would probably do very little in the way of slowing things down

I agree, but a blockade sure would. Still an act of war but far more effective, especially since they would run out of gas and cash.

214 Canoe Train  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:47:38pm

re: #167 LudwigVanQuixote

re: #155 Jimash

re: #9 OldLineTexan

GMTA

215 Orangutan  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:49:03pm

We have elected a spineless relativist.

216 Seattle Rep  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 3:56:44pm

#45 jetpilot
re: #37 Sharmuta

I honestly don't think Netenyahu will let this happen.

I don't think he will but with their strongest ally running for cover, Israel is going to need all the help they can get.

Israel's got the muscle to handle Dinnerjacket and anything his minions could muster to throw at the Jewish State.

217 FurryOldGuyJeans  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 4:01:07pm

re: #29 Sharmuta

We can't stop it, but when Israel does they'll be condemned for it. *spit*

While secretly most of the world leaders, including the Arab states, collectively breath a sigh of relief that they won't be required to deal with an Iran backed up with weapons of mass destruction.

218 rhythman  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 4:01:10pm

I figure it's been said here before, but I just hope Israel still has the balls to do something about this, because the pres. of our great country certainly does not. Folks, we are just so totally screwed.

219 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 4:01:54pm

re: #216 Seattle Rep

I don't think he will but with their strongest ally running for cover, Israel is going to need all the help they can get.

People really need get used to the fact that we're no longer Israel's ally, despite the lip service, we've switched sides.

/among the many other obvious clues, we're now officially backing the Saudi (1967 borders) peace plan, 'nuff said

220 FurryOldGuyJeans  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 4:02:38pm

re: #198 Rancher

We are already at war with Iran, we just refuse to admit it. A high-energy electromagnetic pulse (EMP) over the East coast might change this attitude, till then lets all just stick our head in the sand.

We never signed a peace treaty after their invasion of our embassy, which is considered an act of war and aggression.

221 Colonel Panik  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 4:02:58pm

re: #176 mich-again

Whats a more dangerous occupation: Being an Alaskan crab fisherman or being an Iranian nuclear physicist? These days I'd rather try my luck on the fishing boat. Is Israel assassinating Iran nuclear scientists?

Terrorize the terrorists. Its all they understand.

thwip, thwip!

222 acwgusa  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 4:20:03pm

When I dubbed him President Lacks-A-Sack, I didn't know how right I was.

223 jcm  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 4:22:20pm

re: #220 FurryOldGuyJeans

We never signed a peace treaty after their invasion of our embassy, which is considered an act of war and aggression.

Khomeini had not yet consolidated power when the Embassy was taken.
A strong response by Rabbit Bait would likely have toppled Khomeini by internal factions who didn't think antagonizing the US was a good idea.

Khomeini knew Rabbit Bait was a coward and would cave.

224 Seattle Rep  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 4:26:43pm

re: #219 Killian Bundy

I don't care what stance this administration takes, I stand with Israel.

For years the left and terrorist sympathizers have whined about the 'disproportionate' response Israel gives when they defend their State. If Iran makes a move, and Israel lets 'em have it...I'm okay with that.

225 Killian Bundy  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 4:49:01pm

re: #224 Seattle Rep

I don't care what stance this administration takes, I stand with Israel.

For years the left and terrorist sympathizers have whined about the 'disproportionate' response Israel gives when they defend their State. If Iran makes a move, and Israel lets 'em have it...I'm okay with that.

All I'm saying is don't expect TOTUS to lift a finger in support of Israel.

/if anything, expect him to work against Israel

226 Seattle Rep  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 4:49:55pm

re: #225 Killian Bundy

Understood. It's really sad.

227 Irish Rose  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 4:53:12pm

re: #7 Sharmuta

We could, you know, try bombing their facilities, or is that too manly?

Doesn't fit the meme.

228 Irish Rose  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 5:02:35pm

Meanwhile, the conservative right has officially gone off the rails.... this bit of ugly was posted 3:30 this afternoon, over at Michelle Malkins' (and it's still there four and a half hours later):

I really think that the only way to change the way the country is working and going right now is to start killing some of the people that are directing that working and going. They are beyond convincing with rational arguments. And we have put them in charge of our government.

/no words

229 capitalist piglet  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 5:11:46pm

re: #228 Irish Rose

Meanwhile, the conservative right has officially gone off the rails.... this bit of ugly was posted 3:30 this afternoon, over at Michelle Malkins' (and it's still there four and a half hours later):


/no words

Nutty, no doubt - but I think we need to be careful not to broad brush the conservative right, based on what some nameless poster on Malkin's site said. She needs to pull it, but maybe she's unaware of it.

230 Trialdog  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 5:30:46pm

If the State Dept. and Obama accept Iran's development of nuclear weapons, and Iran does develop nuclear weapons, the consequences will prove disastrous for the U.S., Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, and other countries in the region. If Obama thinks he can appease the Iranians on this issue or imagines the Iranian mullahs will be peaceful with those weapons if the U.S. acquiesces, he is wrong. If this happens, be prepared for horrible war and the very difficult economic times that result from widespread war. This "issue" is not, in the real world, an issue at all. Iranian development of nuclear weapons cannot happen under any circumstances. Anyone, be they an international relations "expert" or average armchair analyst, who believes otherwise is either naive or engaged in wishful thinking. More than any other foreign policy dilemma, this is the most dangerous for the world. I will hope the Obama administration does the right thing, behaves responsibly, and unequivocally tells Iran and the American people that Iran will not acquire or develop nuclear weapons but if it does, the U.S. will stop them by any means necessary. Obama must do this very publicly; and now. I do not have much confidence in Obama however. The tragedy of acquiescence will be that we are dragged into a war after the horrible consequences of acquiescence occur.

231 Irish Rose  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 5:47:28pm

re: #229 capitalist piglet

Nutty, no doubt - but I think we need to be careful not to broad brush the conservative right, based on what some nameless poster on Malkin's site said. She needs to pull it, but maybe she's unaware of it.

Unfortunately, you don't have to look very far to see similarly deranged comments.

232 Shay4l  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 6:45:49pm

re: #228 Irish Rose

Meanwhile, the conservative right has officially gone off the rails.... this bit of ugly was posted 3:30 this afternoon, over at Michelle Malkins' (and it's still there four and a half hours later):

/no words

Moby, obviously

233 Ziggy Standard  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 7:09:56pm

I hope Obama's administration isn't really this dumb. If Iran is allowed to build nukes, that's the end of nuclear non-proliferation.

234 CLLRusso  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 7:11:07pm

re: #230 Trialdog

re: #185 Killian Bundy

/Coordinates 33° 43′ 0″ N, 51° 43′ 0″ E

Are these google earth coordinates for a target in Iran?

235 Macker  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 8:52:27pm

Оба́ма votes "Present" at the destruction of Tel Aviv....

236 Macker  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 9:34:38pm

re: #230 Trialdog

I believe that if this happens, and Iran nukes a Western City, doesn't matter which one...he will not remain TOTUS for long.

237 NukeAtomrod  Fri, Apr 3, 2009 9:45:20pm

This is a disaster.

238 Cognito  Sat, Apr 4, 2009 12:15:24am

re: #143 taxfreekiller

Now if we just had avanti and cognito to tell us how secure this all is we would feel so much better.

I'd challenge you to show me a single off-base quote about nuclear security by me, anywhere, anytime, but I know it's a waste of time.

You're sad.

239 Pupdawg  Sat, Apr 4, 2009 5:54:05am

...which further translates into, 'Iran wants to nuke Israel and possibly America and we kind of don't want them to, but we really cannot convince them to stop and they actually will not do so if we ask them nicely, so, there is absolutely nothing we can really do but wait, and maybe watch, since we are at a total impass with Iran because they really, really want to wipe Israel and possibly America off the face of the Earth but what are we to do becuase they really want this and we cannot do a danged thing to stop it which is why we say, 'go right ahead Iran and develop all the nukes you want, test all the missles you wish to, destroy Israel and maybe America eventually but please, pretty please with sugar on it keep telling us that all the world's fuss is about little old nuclear power for Iran since we, here in the wonderful world of Obama, will suddenly believe anything from our used-to-be enemies and by the way please, pretty please with sprinkles on it say how cool our leader Barack is and please, please say, 'love you, babe' as much as possible while your nuking our ex-friends, probably America and extended family of infidels in the west since we all here at least deserve it for that evil George Bush who had the audacity, the mendacity to try as best he could to keep America safe with his horrible, totally enemy-oppressive policies that were so 'protect America' viscious to the world of our post-Obama enemies and by the way may we suggest that you hit New York, Washington DC and California first...our secondary targets list will be coming to you shortly and by the way II, how's the energy thingy going...love you, babe!

This president and his entire administration absolutely blows!

240 paplagr  Sat, Apr 4, 2009 7:42:02am

Obummer Blows the Big One!

Just think only 3 years and 10 months of this dick wad!

241 maximus kreyzlkil  Sat, Apr 4, 2009 11:25:55am

Does anyone doubt what is going to happen to Manhattan? It wont be like it was unforseen or even unexpected. I learned that nearly eight years ago.
Manhattan has a bright future. So bright it'll give you a sunburn..through your clothes all the way over in statin island. Then, the massive toxic plume from the ground blast will spread over new jersey and long Island. The living will envy the dead. Is this not our destiny?


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh