Panetta: Iran is Not Developing Nuclear

[ExpandMyMind]

For and then, with love:

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Thursday that Iran is enriching uranium in a peaceful nuclear program but that Tehran has not decided to develop an atomic bomb.

Top U.S. military and intelligence officials gave separate testimonies in congressional hearings on Thursday regarding Iran, and while they all reiterated the consensus that Iran's nuclear program is purely civilian in nature, they also kept up the tough talk, hoping to satisfy hawks eager to preemptively strike Iran.

http://news.antiwar....uclear-weapons/

So the defence seceratary has now admitted that Iran is not pursuing a nuclear weapons program. The intelligence community in the P5 have been collectively stating this for years now, but for some strange (corporate induced) reason, the media has not picked up on this. Maybe now, with such a high profile player opening their mouth, they will. I doubt it though.

Edited February 19, 2012 by libstaK

[ExpandMyMind]

Related: http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-16/iran-unlikely-to-strike-first-in-conflict-u-s-intelligence-official-says.html

Summarised: Iran will not start a war.

And I fail to see why WE should do so. Simply to appease Israel.

Edited February 19, 2012 by expandmymind

[A rather obscure Bassoon]

Related: http://mobile.bloomb...icial-says.html

Summarised: Iran will not start a war.

And I fail to see why WE should do so. Simply to appease Israel.

Couldn't agree more...

[Mr.United_Nations]

We know they are not developing Nuclear weapons, the West wants to know if they are going to sometime in the future.

[ExpandMyMind]

The thread was for an then's benefit, primarily, who seems to believe they are building a bomb as we speak.

Most are aware that Israel is concerned about its ability to attack the forlow mountain if iran decide to engage in a nuclear arms program. This being said, the vast majority of American politicians portray the situation as 'Iran are definitely building the bomb'.

Here is an extremely informative article (which, and then, puts experts' assessments at 2-3 years between Iran deciding to build a nuke and being able to use it, to answer your question in another thread): http://original.antiwar.com/lobe/2012/02/18/amid-escalating-israel-iran-tensions-a-glimmer-of-hope/

[ExpandMyMind]

Related to the post above:

The idea that Iran is currently in pursuit of -- or even already has -- a nuclear bomb has become accepted wisdom in much of Washington and amplified by the media. But the reality is much more opaque. When James Clapper, the U.S. Director of National Intelligence, appeared before the Senate last month, he told lawmakers that "we don't believe they've actually made the decision to go ahead with a nuclear weapon." Clapper's statement reflected the conclusions of some in the intelligence community that Iran suspended its nuclear warhead program in 2003.

...

The November IAEA report itself, initially touted as offering the first "credible" evidence of a nuclear weapons project, later turned out to be a far weaker document, offering allegations that The New York Times described as "not substantially new, and [which] have been discussed by experts for years." Arthur Brisbane, the Times' public editor, later took the paper to task for overstating the conclusiveness of the IAEA's findings.

Perhaps as a consequence of the murkiness of these assessments, public misinformation about Iran's nuclear project remains exceedingly high: in a 2010 poll, 7 in 10 Americans said they believe Iran already has the weapons. (In the Iraq War's early days, 81 percent of Americans said they believed the country likely possessed WMD's, an understandable conclusion given Bush administration statements and the media's coverage).

That's why Iran-watchers took note when the Washington Post published an explosive claim online last month by an anonymous "senior U.S. official" that the goal of Iranian sanctions is regime collapse. But the Post soon scrubbed the claim about regime change for the next day's print edition. (Reporter Karen DeYoung told The Huffington Post that the initial story was based off handwritten notes, which she found to have misquoted the source when later listening to a recording of the interview.)

That is all I can quote but the entire article is worth the read. It helps to expose the relentless propaganda campaign waged by corporate media and elites.

Edited February 19, 2012 by expandmymind

[ExpandMyMind]

More relevant material for anyone looking for perspective: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/history-could-be-a-deterrent-to-iranian-aggression/2012/02/15/gIQA6UVcGR_story.html

[+and-then]

For and then, with love:

http://news.antiwar....uclear-weapons/

So the defence seceratary has now admitted that Iran is not pursuing a nuclear weapons program. The intelligence community in the P5 have been collectively stating this for years now, but for some strange (corporate induced) reason, the media has not picked up on this. Maybe now, with such a high profile player opening their mouth, they will. I doubt it though.

How kind of you. Panetta is a politician serving at the pleasure of Obama. Obama will not do anything to advance a war in Iran during an election year or EVER if he can avoid it. The standard he has applied to this situation is that the US will act when Iran is assembling a bomb. How we are supposed to get that piece of intel I don't know. Israel, being much more pragmatic, has said that the zone of immunity comes when Iran has hardened their centrifuges to an extent that they can't be successfully attacked.(Fordow) I don't recall ever intimating that Iran currently has or is in process of building a bomb. Either situation would mean that they are untouchable. My arguments have always been about the need to stop them from having the bomb to keep proliferation from occurring in the region. And to keep the possibility of a Theocratic regime from having hegemony in the most critical region on earth. Both are valid points for people not blinded by hatred towards the US and Israel.(oops,guess that leaves you out Ex) The Saudis are already making plans to purchase a bomb until they can build their own. The Egyptians have a history of working in the field of enrichment and could restart with little effort. You continually cast the situation as an American/Israeli aggression pact against an innocent government in the region. It doesn't meet the sniff test.

[ExpandMyMind]

Ah, so she lied then? Truly laughable response. Read all of the material provided. It was posted so someone as misinformed as yourself could educate yourself. If you had have done so, you would have read and learned that while Israel does not have the caPability to bust that Forlow bunker, the U.S. Does (and that I had already brought this fact up before addressing it).

I suppose intelligence communities and leaders from around the world have lied also? Not least of all your own.

What you have shown in your reply here is that, regardless of evidence (or rather lack of it as the case would have it) you are intent on believing what you have been spoon fed. This is often defined as anti-intellectualism and it is so prominent that you should actually be quite a bit embarrassed with yourself right now.

Seriously, read ALL of the material presented. After doing so you still believe they are building a bomb, one could only surmise that you have some sort of mental deficiency.

Edited February 19, 2012 by expandmymind

[+and-then]

Ah, so she lied then? Truly laughable response. Read all of the material provided. It was posted so someone as misinformed as yourself could educate yourself. If you had have done so, you would have read and learned that while Israel does not have the caPability to bust that Forlow bunker, the U.S. Does (and that I had already brought this fact up before addressing it).

I suppose intelligence communities and leaders from around the world have lied also? Not least of all your own.

What you have shown in your reply here is that, regardless of evidence (or rather lack of it as the case would have it) you are intent on believing what you have been spoon fed. This is often defined as anti-intellectualism and it is so prominent that you should actually be quite a bit embarrassed with yourself right now.

Seriously, read ALL of the material presented. After doing so you still believe they are building a bomb, one could only surmise that you have some sort of mental deficiency.

EX you seem intent on making this personal. You repeatedly imply that I am simple minded and cannot think for myself. I owe you no duty to prove my opinions. You seem almost angry that I have contrary opinions on the issue. Insulting me and implying that I'm a crazy man living in a bunker is ridiculous. You and I simply disagree on whether Iran is a serious danger to the world today. A good portion of the world's governments disagree with you on that point. I think your hatred of America and Israel makes you blind to anything else.

[ExpandMyMind]

You believe in something that your own defence seceratary says is untrue - when she has every reason to jump on the same bandwagon. Your own intelligence leaders also say it is untrue and literally no evididence exists to support your conspiracy theory. You have been provided with ample evidence to show how silly and irrational your doomsday fears are, yet you continue to be adamant with your warPed and indoctrinated convictions.

How could I not become frustrated? That is the question. It's like debating with a creationist.

[+and-then]

You believe in something that your own defence seceratary says is untrue - when she has every reason to jump on the same bandwagon. Your own intelligence leaders also say it is untrue and literally no evididence exists to support your conspiracy theory. You have been provided with ample evidence to show how silly and irrational your doomsday fears are, yet you continue to be adamant with your warPed and indoctrinated convictions.

How could I not become frustrated? That is the question. It's like debating with a creationist.

So it's okay because you got frustrated. Your behavior is rude and puzzling to me.

The US government is controlled by politicians who gasp! have agendas that sometimes are not in the best interest of the country at large. Obama is an arrogant tool who pushes what he wants onto people then makes them fight to overturn his actions. Between AIPAC and congress he found that he couldn't pull that on Netanyahu last year. In fact he was humiliated by Netanyahu and he hasn't forgotten or forgiven it. Were it not for his need of Jewish support to be reelected he wouldn't spit on Israel to put it out if it was on fire. So since Mr. Panetta has to please Obama with his statements and actions, his proclamations about Iran are just political. Not gospel.

And since I am a Christian Zionist and a creationist and thus unworthy of a person of your intellect might I suggest that we just agree to disagree? In the end all I have done is express my opinions. I will continue to do so unless the mods decide to boot me. So fill the quaich and bid me a good journey

[ExpandMyMind]

Fair enough. But just so you know, this thread has completely detroyed just about any credibility your claim of Iranian nuclear weapons either existing or being pursued. The claim is dead to anyone with the least bit of an open mind.

Sorry, but I just had to do something about the baseless claims.

Cheers.

[+and-then]

Fair enough. But just so you know, this thread has completely detroyed just about any credibility your claim of Iranian nuclear weapons either existing or being pursued. The claim is dead to anyone with the least bit of an open mind.

Sorry, but I just had to do something about the baseless claims.

Cheers.

And of course I concede nothing.

Even the slow and stupid have a right to their opinions.

[acidhead]

And since I am a Christian Zionist and a creationist...

And of course I concede nothing.

Even the slow and stupid have a right to their opinions.

[+and-then]

Yes Head....it's called "self deprecating" humor.