Nuclear weapons in Iran much less likely

[Black Dog]

I think it's funny that those who are all over the US security report saying that Iran has stopped it's nuclear weapons programme are some of the same ones who were szying that Iran wasn't pursuing nuclear weapons or that american intelligence was bad.

And for the last four years, they were right.

Indeed....or that the same American intelligence wonks were reporting WMD threats out of Iraq since the mid 90's. So I guess we get to pick and choose the reports to fit our political leanings.

Well, if it's a good enough trick for the Bush admin...

DoP

Again...Iran has ICBMs already...and a vigorous chemical/biological weapons program. Why aren't we scared?

Because some of us aren't a bunch of scaredy cats? To the point, chemical and bioweapons are highly overrated.

Dancer in the dark

During the Iran Iraq war, Iran attacked something in the vicinity of 500+ foreign flagged oil carriers, merchant and neutral shipping killing over 400 civilians.......something which would be considered an act war.....

Right: and who were the good guys in that one again? Ohnos!

It's kinda silly to evoke that particular war as an example of Iran's aggressive tendancies, given that Iraq actually started it.

[DogOnPorch]

Because some of us aren't a bunch of scaredy cats? To the point, chemical and bioweapons are highly overrated.

Dancer in the dark

First...I'm not afraid. That was in response to myata's comment. Strawman.... Second...chemical weapons are a real threat. VX nerve agent in particular due to its area denial capabilities. A VX nerve agent attack on Manhattan for example would render the island unlivable until some brave fellows cleaned the place up. Not an easy task if you're familiar with VX's unique effects. It isn't water soluable...nor soluable to much of anything else, either.

To further make a point re: chemical weapons effectiveness: at the first battle of Ypres in 1915...where simple chlorine gas was used on the Western Front for the first time.... 10,000 casualties inside 10 minutes. Pretty f**king effective. Now imagine had nerve gas been available.

Biological weapons are somewhat over-rated but that hasn't stopped Iran from pushing ahead with research into anthrax, botulinum toxins, mycotoxins and similar bio-weapons. Now why would they want to do that?

--------------------------------------------------------------

For a few seconds nothing happened; the sweet-smelling stuff merely tickled their nostrils; they failed to realize the danger. Then, with inconceivable rapidity, the gas worked, and blind panic spread.

Hundreds, after a dreadful fight for air, became unconscious and died where they lay - a death of hideous torture, with the frothing bubbles gurgling in their throats and the foul liquid welling up in their lungs. With blackened faces and twisted limbs one by one they drowned - only that which drowned them came from inside and not from out.

---Anonymous British War Diary

[DogOnPorch]

I oopsed the 1941...

A bit...but not as much as you might think. The Shah's father was consorting with Nazis in 1941 who were looking for Iran to join the Axis and aid in the war vs Russia. Stalin and Churchill invaded at this point and put his son...The Shah, into power. Nipped in the bud so-to-speak.

-----------------------------------------------------

My main mistake was to have made an ancient people advance by forced marches toward independence, health, culture, affluence, comfort.

---Mohammed Reza Pahlavi

[Higgly]

Mild, isn't it?

[DogOnPorch]

Mild, isn't it?

You're soaking in it now!

--------------------------------------

[Higgly]

Looks like you're gonna need an ambassador for this one.

[DogOnPorch]

Looks like you're gonna need an ambassador for this one.

Hardly...I can read your posts just fine.

-----------------------------------------------

Certainly in the next 50 years we shall see a woman president, perhaps sooner than you think. A woman can and should be able to do any political job that a man can do.

---President Richard M. Nixon

[Higgly]

Hmmm....

[DogOnPorch]

It's kinda silly to evoke that particular war as an example of Iran's aggressive tendancies, given that Iraq actually started it.

Iran had been doing some small border raids before Iraq attacked...but Iraq threw the first real punch.

"The frequent and blatant Iranian violations of Iraqi sovereignty...have rendered the 1975 Algiers Agreement null and void. This river...must have its Iraqi-Arab identity restored as it was throughout history in name and in reality with all the disposed rights emanating from full sovereignty over the river."

---Saddam Hussein

----------------------------------------------

In your name, brothers, and on behalf of the Iraqis and Arabs everywhere we tell those Persian cowards and dwarfs who try to avenge Al-Qadisiyah that the spirit of Al-Qadisiyah as well as the blood and honor of the people of Al-Qadisiyah who carried the message on their spearheads are greater than their attempts.

---Ibid

[Topaz]

Indeed....or that the same American intelligence wonks were reporting WMD threats out of Iraq since the mid 90's. So I guess we get to pick and choose the reports to fit our political leanings.

Finally BC, you just said what Bush/Cheney did on the intel of Iraq. They were told, they were retold is wasn't incredible and they went with it anyway to suit their plans of invasion. Just like Bush was warn an attack on the US was coming and he ignored them.

[M.Dancer]

A good analysis of the recent report

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...id=opinionsbox1

Third, the risks of disinformation by Iran are real. We have lost many fruitful sources inside Iraq in recent years because of increased security and intelligence tradecraft by Iran. The sudden appearance of new sources should be taken with more than a little skepticism. In a background briefing, intelligence officials said they had concluded it was "possible" but not "likely" that the new information they were relying on was deception. These are hardly hard scientific conclusions. One contrary opinion came from -- of all places -- an unnamed International Atomic Energy Agency official, quoted in the New York Times, saying that "we are more skeptical. We don't buy the American analysis 100 percent. We are not that generous with Iran." When the IAEA is tougher than our analysts, you can bet the farm that someone is pursuing a policy agenda.

[AngusThermopyle]

To further make a point re: chemical weapons effectiveness: at the first battle of Ypres in 1915...where simple chlorine gas was used on the Western Front for the first time.... 10,000 casualties inside 10 minutes. Pretty f**king effective. Now imagine had nerve gas been available.

Good answer. As soon as I saw the comment about NBC weapons being over rated I thought "what an uninformed thing to say". They are actually very effective.

Give them a little time and you'll find Biological weapons may just become the biggest threat we have invented to this point. With Biological weapons you have so many possible vectors that can be utilized, it would be impossible to counter all of them.

[M.Dancer]

Good answer. As soon as I saw the comment about NBC weapons being over rated I thought "what an uninformed thing to say". They are actually very effective.

Only effective under ideal conditions and on troops not prepared for an attack. Subsequent attacks later in the war failed to produce thoise casualties or the tactical and strategic gains hoped for.

At that point on their use was considered as a terror weapon to be used on cities on rally points. And soon after the war the horror of the weapon made it apparent that they could not be used and their use was banned.

Their use in modern times by Iran and Iraq showed again how ineffective they were. In battle formations harkening back to the Somme, gas was thrown into the fray and did nothing to alter the stalemate on the battle. It is note worthy only for its use on civilians.

[AngusThermopyle]

It is note worthy only for its use on civilians.

I hate to break this to you but that is exactly what war has become for many present day antagonists. Even if troops are prepared the protective measures availlable are of use for a limited time only. That is not even touching upon the Biological weapons in development currently.

Every serving member of the Forces spends quite an extensive amount of time at NBC school, unless they are in third line units. We actually learn about this stuff, more than we'd comfortably like to know actually. It was always the consensus that these weapons are going to be the way of the future. Nuclear is far to messy, B/C weapons can be tailored for specific uses and many vectors can be used to deliver them.

The reason they are banned is because they are so horrific.

At that point on their use was considered as a terror weapon

Terror in itself is a great tactical advantage. If you can force your enemy to live in terror you've won half the battle right off the bat.

Edited December 6, 2007 by AngusThermopyle

[Rue]

Lol. I wanted to wait a bit to see if Buffy had any more insider knowledge of Israel before I responded with my Zionist-Mossad response to her speculations.

For some of us, the mysterious release of this intelligence report was quite deliberate not an accident and of course has political motives behind it. So we do not just assume what is now told to us is accurate or inaccurate, just what it is-an information release-and let’s remind Ms. Buffy one more time-just because a man tells you something, doesn’t make it true Buffy. We tend to exaggerate and lie. Yes I know that may be hard to believe but trust me, when it comes to talking about the size and velocity of our weapons we do tend to mislead.

That said, when the Israeli Foreign Minister makes comments as to Iran simply biding time until it builds up its nuclear arsenal, those comments, may not even be intended for Iran or Buffy but for China and Russia and North Vietnam or Syria.

Its pure showmanship deliberately designed to send a message to certain people to butt out. It is no different then when China sulks over Taiwan and refuses to allow US Navy ships to come in out of a storm and dock in Hong Kong or the way in whines when Western politicians meet with the Dalai Lama.

What is interesting is when someone asks an Israeli politician would Israel attack Iran if it had nuclear weapons and then the Israeli says we leave open our options, these same idiots who ask such idiot questions then report-imminent war is just around the corner. Its blither and blather and rhetoric and stupid questions which invite deliberately evasive answers which give these idiots something to write. Nothing more. If someone asked Buffy this question-would you slap a man across his face for spitting in yours-does the question not invite deliberately violent response speculation? But does anyone perceive Buffy as being evil and hostile or simply an innocent victim? In Israel's case we know they are preconceived as evil and beligerent and not as potential victims of a radiation blast.

Congress recently stated it was selling Israel 5,000 precision-guided "smart bombs," including 500 satellite-guided, one-ton JDAM "bunker busters" tested in Baghdad and capable of penetrating six feet of concrete. This happened right before the mysterious leak.

Walk with me Buffy. Do you think these penetrating six feet concrete bombs are really needed or is that for show? Could this all be a collosal marketing and sales publicity hook with the bait and real in exercise? I can hear it-hurry now-its NOT TOO LATE TO BUY THESE BOMBS DID WE SAY ITS TOO LATE OH HAHAHAHAHAH ITS NOT TOO LATE AT ALL REMEMBER THOSE N-BOMBS, NO THEY HAVE NOT BEEN BUILT YET SO YOU STILL HAVE TIME HURRY ON DOWN TODAY AND WE WILL SELL YOU TO BUNKER BUSTERS FOR THE PRICE OF ONE.

Now mind you the above my penis is bigger then your penis message was also in response to previous Iranian messages as to their penis size claim , or to be more specific, the fact its Shahab-3 ballistic missiles of which there are estimated from 25 to 100 are now operational. Those missiles or what Freudians like myself insist are references to penis size can oopsy "penetrate" Israel and go kablam only the orgasm might be a painful one. After all we know how small Israel is.

Is their precedent for Israel engaging in pre-emptive strikes? Some allege one recently happened in Syria while others think that was a deliberately leaked false story. What we do know is back in 1981, Israeli jets did manage to engage in allegedly below the radar cover story since we all know Saudi Arabia had AWACS) 700-mile, daytime air mission that took them across Saudi Arabian and Jordanian air space (with full consent of both nations) into Iraq where it is documented that it took the jets about 90 seconds to obliterate the French(vive le France) Osiraq nuclear reactor which was at that time the centerpiece of Iraq's burgeoning nuclear-weapons program.

So sure such a thing could happen again but only with tacit support of Egypt, Jordan, Russia, Turkey and the U.S. for starters. What Ms. Buffy does not appreciate is that China depends heavily on Iran for natural gas and would have to be assured any such strike has full support of the Arab world’s major energy suppliers and would nto disrupt Chinese energy flow. That is how it works in the real world, particularly one where China says out loud it hates Israel and then in private engages in all kinds of military deals with them while at the same time sucking the natural gas out of Iran for cheap.

Some of us believe Iran is looking for away out of its contracts with China even as we speak and its heavy military reliance on Russia now is also sucking its finances. Interestingly China does not engage in major military supplies to Iran. Gee could there be something to that? Could that be Buffy because that is how they keep Israel calm and indirectly tell them to stand down as long as they are there?

Any Israeli attack on Iran has what is called back-draft. Of course it would create an ant-Jewish frenzy endangering the Jews of Iran and threatening instability in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, all enemies of Iran but who would find themselves reluctant to endorse an open attack on Iran which could turn their citizens against them accusing them of being Zionist lackies.

So no, someone assure Buffy her simplistic Israel bad and wants to attack Iran speculation may not be as sure fire as she thinks it is not to mention if Israel really thought Iran could nuke it, it already has tacit approval from China, Russia, the US and Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt to take it out with as little damage as possible.

So kaboom to everyone.

[DogOnPorch]

Only effective under ideal conditions and on troops not prepared for an attack. Subsequent attacks later in the war failed to produce thoise casualties or the tactical and strategic gains hoped for.

This is true in most cases...but you still need to get into heavy, confining CBW suits to avoid the majority of nerve gases. Effectiveness cut to the bone. Mustard 'gas' and VX 'gas' are of course different. As neither are actually gases.

VX gas is actually a sticky, oily liquid that clings to surfaces and then vaporizes into the surroundings with a bit of heat/sunlight. As temperatures cool, it tends to condense back onto various surfaces. An incredibly small amount (10 micrograms...smaller than a mote of dust) is almost instantly effective (it spreds through the body like a drop of dish soap cutting through the grease) with death following in about a minute...a minute of agony. Your only real hope when encountering VX nerve agent is to auto-inject one's self immediately w/ atropine and then pray. Trouble with using atropine in amounts that will effectively counter VX is that it is toxic in itself...just not AS toxic...lol. So you're out either way.

VX...like the still popular mustard 'gas'...doesn't go away. It's non-soluable with all but a few known special chemicals which merely reduce it in strength. As mentioned, it takes special facilities to totally break it down. It remains in the environment and is perhaps impossible to clean up 100%. Seeing how little it takes to kill you...this would indeed be a HUGE problem in an urban area.

You can see why both the Russians and Americans now feel this stuff to be a bigger white elephant than the H-Bomb. Both are in the process of destroying their stocks of the stuff. Meanwhile...certain dubious 3rd world nations produce it. This implys one might actually wish to USE it as well.

Works great in shells, bombs...SCUD warheads...etc. VX is often stored in two different solutions (slightly safer) which is then spun together via g-forces to produce the lethal final product.

To be taken VERY seriously. THe British traded this stuff to the Americans for the A-Bomb...and then promptly got out of the VX business altogether. Terrorists MUST NOT get a hold of such a weapon. Say good bye _______________(enter city of choice) if they do.

Which is...blah, blah, blah...why we all should be worried (not frightened) as to where Saddam's wee 4500 ton stockpile of VX precursors ended up. Buried in the desert? Over in Syria?...who already is suspected of producing the stuff...or working on producing the stuff. We simply don't know. But it certainly is in our best interests to know.

Sorry to ramble...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not all chemicals are bad. Without chemicals such as hydrogen and oxygen, for example, there would be no way to make water, a vital ingredient in beer.

---Dave Barry

Edited December 6, 2007 by DogOnPorch

[AngusThermopyle]

You forgot to mention that it breaks down the protective elements in NBC suits pretty effectively. It'll reduce the effectiveness of your suit by about 75% in a relatively short time. Prolonged exposure will render both suit and mask useless.

[DogOnPorch]

You forgot to mention that it breaks down the protective elements in NBC suits pretty effectively. It'll reduce the effectiveness of your suit by about 75% in a relatively short time. Prolonged exposure will render both suit and mask useless.

Good point. Mustard gas is the same way...gets into the cracks...next thing you'd know...it's burning your armpit...or groin...etc. During WW1, mustard gas would sit ontop of the water in shellholes etc...or get right into the dirt. Soldiers digging trenches or a shell explosion might stir up an old pocket of the blistering agent causing casualties well after the initial use.

I think the whole VX chemical weapon thing was played down from the very start. Everyone seemed more keen on finding a nuclear weapon in Iraq...or tell-tale signs of construction, etc. No nuclear weapons were 'found'...of course. Now any talk of WMD (of which VX is, of course) in Iraq is greated with resounding chimes of "There Were Never Ever WMD In Iraq!" followed by some chatter about Bush and Cheney being liars.

We were more worried about VX gas attacks in Gulf War I when SCUDs rained down on Israel...seems Saddam had WMD then...lol.

I can see buffycat's eyes glazing over now...heheh.

-------------------------------------------------------

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.

---President Abraham Lincoln

Edited December 7, 2007 by DogOnPorch

[bush_cheney2004]

Finally BC, you just said what Bush/Cheney did on the intel of Iraq. They were told, they were retold is wasn't incredible and they went with it anyway to suit their plans of invasion. Just like Bush was warn an attack on the US was coming and he ignored them.

Nonsense....The US and UK were attacking and strangling Iraq for 12 years..and Canada helped them do it. 9/11 fairy tales are discussed on another thread.

"wasn't incredible".....????

It was stated US foreign policy and public law to change the regime in Iraq (as of 1998). So it is written...so it shall be done. Next case...

Edited December 7, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[buffycat]

What is with this bloody reply feature??? I hit the darn space bar and it automatically posts!!

What rubbish.

Grrrrrr

Anyway, here are a few headlines we won't see in NA:

srael considering strike on Iran despite US intelligence report

excerpt:

Senior Israeli officials warned today they were still considering the option of a military strike against Iran, despite a fresh US intelligence report that concluded Tehran was no longer developing nuclear weapons.

Although Israel argues that it wants to see strong diplomatic pressure put on Iran, it is reluctant to rule out the threat of a unilateral military attack. Matan Vilnai, Israel's deputy defence minister, told Army Radio today: "No option needs to be off the table."

****

Israel warns Iran to co-operate or pay price

excerpt:

ISRAEL has warned Iran to either co-operate with the West over its uranium enrichment program or face military action.

Ron Prosor, Israel's newly appointed ambassador to Britain and one of his country's leading experts on Iran's nuclear program, said that Tehran could enrich enough uranium to make an atomic bomb by 2009.

"At the current rate of progress, Iran will reach the technical threshold for producing fissile material by 2009," he said.

"This is a global threat and it requires a global response.

"It should be made clear that if Iran does not co-operate, then military confrontation is inevitable. It is either co-operation or confrontation."

****

The above two pieces echo the sentiment already mentioned in this thread. I think it important to realize the loudest war drums are played by the extreme right in Israel and the Amen corner (and Lobby) in the US.

Israel must be really ticked about this NIE report!! Israeli Firsters and Amen Corner in the US are claiming a conspiracy rooted in - wait for it - yep!! Anti-semitism!!

Still, though it sure shows WHO is really calling for the destruction of another state - HINT - it is NOT Iran who is wanting to 'wipe' a certain group off the map, as the above articles, among countless others clearly demonstrates.

Edited December 8, 2007 by buffycat

[buffycat]

Rue, I am not going to bother responding to your novels. You make false statements inferring I said things which I NEVER did (Israel bad - I never, ever have said that). So, sorry darling - I'm not playing with you on this one.

If you would like to address what I have actually said, then quote it and respond. Quit making crap up.

Cheers