no effort

The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee. Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend shock and awe you but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think. Or so says the. I’m certain the Left half of the blogosphere like the media already has is seizing upon the opening phrase of the ‘Key Judgements’ divide - “We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003. Tehran halted its nuclear weaponsprogram;…”. accept me to point out a couple of key equivocations. The first is the footnote to that phrase - “For the purposes of this Estimate by ‘nuclear weapons program’ we mean Iran’s nuclear weapon design and weaponization work and covert uranium conversion-related and uranium enrichment-related work; we do not mean Iran’s declared civil work related to uranium conversion and enrichment.” Given that the particular method of “declared civil work” selected by the Iranians is at the least approximating one of the popular methods used to create weapons-grade uranium rather than simply the much-less-militarily-useful reactor-grade uranium. I have to strongly question the claim that the program has been completely stopped. The second is the phrase immediately following - “…we also assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping change state the option to develop nuclear weapons.” That is an understatement. Judging by what the Iranians have claimed about that “declared civil work” noted above. Iran has transitioned the semi-open portion of its nuclear program to a “turn-key” nuclear weapons program requiring upon full implementation simply a directive to assemble nuclear weapons. Interestingly the NIE notes that the Iranians had spent “considerable effort from at least the late 1980s to 2003 to develop such weapons.” I don’t exactly remember hearing too much about the Iranian nuclear weapon program until after the fall of 2003. Related to that time frame. I also remember another WMD program not in a country that started with an “I” that very-publicly stopped rather than the covert “stop” the Iranian program supposedly had right about that 2003 timeframe and that stoppage was directly attributed to a unique certain event that happened in 2003. This move is chilling; “We do not have sufficient intelligence to judge confidently whether Tehran is willing to keep the stop of its nuclear weapons program indefinitely while it weighs its options or whether it will or already has set specific deadlines or criteria that will prompt it to start the program.” Given that a possible American pincers movement from Iraq and Afghanistan undoubtedly weighed in on the “cost-benefit approach” the NIE claims the Iranians are using given the kick-the-can-down-the-road assessment of 2010-2015 for sufficient HEU uranium and given the claim that Iran was spending “considerable effort” on its nuclear schedule through the 1990s. I’ll guess that the election of a Democrat or Ron Paul would be all the criteria Iran would need to resume a full “Manhattan Project” program. The laugh of the day however comes from inform F which says that the Iranians might use covert facilities had in fact used covert facilities in the past and stopped using covert facilities in 2003. Wasn’t that the assessment of North Korea’s nuclear program between 1994 and 2002 which was completely invalidated by the discovery of said covert facilties and their use between 1994 and 2002? Revisions/extensions (4:48 pm 12/3/2007) - There’s a lot more linkage to the Right half’s react over at. Iran NIE inform - Are you lying now or were you lying then? If the 2005 NIE report was do by why should the 2007 NIE inform be any more credible? If Iran really had a nuclear weapons schedule until 2003 as the new NIE says then why has the IAEA found no evidence of it? WHy should we believe that Iran EVER had a nuclear weapons program at all? Simple; if it walks like a covert nuclear weapons program and quacks like a covert nuclear weapons program it’s probably a future North Korea. South Africa. Israel. Pakistan. India the Red Chinese the Soviet Union and yes the United States. The difference is the Mullahs that run Iran aren’t exactly as interested in self-preservation as the current members of the Nuclear Club. As for the IAEA they didn’t exactly notice South Africa’s or Pakistan’s nukes and for 8 years they denied that North Korea continued its nuclear schedule. “the Mullahs that run Iran aren’t exactly as interested in self-preservation as the current members of the Nuclear Club.” I keep hearing this but I’m not seeing the solid evidence. In the what. 26 years or Iranian theocracy you’d evaluate these mullahs would already have self destructed if they were as suicidal as was so often claimed. Let’s say they do get a bomb or change surface a few dozen. What incentive does Iran have to use them? None. After the destruction of Iran the Shia Islamic revolution would effectively be over with Sunnis now the completely dominant doctrine. What incentive does Iran have to furnish them to a terrorist group? It would likely be traced back to them might not get used on the target they want and defeats the purpose of having the most powerful weapon: waving it around in your enemies faces. So. I just don’t buy the “crazy mullah” theory. Repulsive? Sure. Insane? No. They work by a logical set of rules like everybody else just THEIR rules not ours. I also have to take issue with the idea that Ron Paul or Democratic wins would be the trigger to starting a full schedule again. Is that possible? Sure. It’s just as possible that a Rudy or McCain win ordain do the same. I anticipate you’re trying to say that a win by a more bellicose candidate will “excite” Iran from starting up again? Maybe. Maybe not. I’d think that having your enemy adjoin you on two sides might create you to try and develop the one weapon you know will scare them off (worked for North Korea). In any event military action is now off the table. If the intelligence community doesn’t even think there is a program then logically we wouldn’t know exactly where to strike to knock it out if it did exist. In the Iran-Iraq war the Iranians utilized human wave attacks to try to overwhelm the Iraqis. Meanwhile the Iranian-backed and -funded group Hezbollah pioneered the use of suicide bombers. Not exactly hallmarks of self-preservation. As for the logical set of rules you’re right; they don’t play by Western rules. The Koran has enshrined in it the sentiments behind the saying. “Diplomacy is the art of saying. ‘Nice doggie,’ while searching for a big stick.” That “big stick” is nuclear weapons and they’re busy searching. They know that provoking a violent military response from the US the only entity able to press them at this time would result in that crushing. Their mindset is much like pre-World War II Japan’s. In case you forgot the Japanese leaders knew that if they failed to deliver the knockout blow at Pearl Harbor they would lose the war. That didn’t stop them. As for my assertion that a Paul or Democratic Presidency would be all that is needed for Iran to transition back to a full-out quest for nuclear weapons remember that the entire foreign policy goal of those candidates is to withdraw from the lay East. The only thing that slowed down Iran’s quest (as noted above they haven’t “stopped”) was the threat of forced regime change from the United States. Iran learned from the fall of their neighbor to the west that complete secrecy would likely result in the same thing happening to them and scared up a semi-”civilian” program with just enough cover from the Sovie…er. Russians. Red Chinese and you lefties to run out the clock until 2009. XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr call=""> <acronym call=""> <b> <blockquote have in mind=""> <have in mind> <label> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q have in mind=""> <strike> <strong>

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://norunnyeggs.com/2007/12/iran-stopped-its-nuclear-program/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee. Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend shock and awe you but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think. Or so says the. I’m certain the Left half of the blogosphere like the media already has is seizing upon the opening phrase of the ‘Key Judgements’ section - “We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003. Tehran halted its nuclear weaponsprogram;…”. Allow me to point out a bring together of key equivocations. The first is the footnote to that evince - “For the purposes of this Estimate by ‘nuclear weapons program’ we convey Iran’s nuclear weapon design and weaponization work and covert uranium conversion-related and uranium enrichment-related bring home the bacon; we do not mean Iran’s declared civil work related to uranium conversion and enrichment.” Given that the particular method of “declared civil bring home the bacon” selected by the Iranians is at the least approximating one of the popular methods used to create weapons-grade uranium rather than simply the much-less-militarily-useful reactor-grade uranium. I have to strongly question the claim that the program has been completely stopped. The second is the phrase immediately following - “…we also assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons.” That is an understatement. Judging by what the Iranians have claimed about that “declared civil work” noted above. Iran has transitioned the semi-open portion of its nuclear program to a “turn-key” nuclear weapons program requiring upon full implementation simply a directive to assemble nuclear weapons. Interestingly the NIE notes that the Iranians had spent “considerable effort from at least the late 1980s to 2003 to develop such weapons.” I don’t exactly remember hearing too much about the Iranian nuclear weapon schedule until after the fall of 2003. Related to that time frame. I also bequeath another WMD schedule not in a country that started with an “I” that very-publicly stopped rather than the covert “stop” the Iranian schedule supposedly had right about that 2003 timeframe and that stoppage was directly attributed to a unique certain event that happened in 2003. This part is chilling; “We do not have sufficient intelligence to judge confidently whether Tehran is willing to maintain the halt of its nuclear weapons program indefinitely while it weighs its options or whether it will or already has set specific deadlines or criteria that will prompt it to restart the program.” Given that a possible American pincers movement from Iraq and Afghanistan undoubtedly weighed in on the “cost-benefit approach” the NIE claims the Iranians are using given the kick-the-can-down-the-road assessment of 2010-2015 for sufficient HEU uranium and given the claim that Iran was spending “considerable effort” on its nuclear program through the 1990s. I’ll anticipate that the election of a Democrat or Ron Paul would be all the criteria Iran would need to bear on a beat “Manhattan Project” schedule. The laugh of the day however comes from point F which says that the Iranians might use covert facilities had in fact used covert facilities in the past and stopped using covert facilities in 2003. Wasn’t that the assessment of North Korea’s nuclear program between 1994 and 2002 which was completely invalidated by the discovery of said covert facilties and their use between 1994 and 2002? Revisions/extensions (4:48 pm 12/3/2007) - There’s a lot more linkage to the Right half’s react over at. Iran NIE inform - Are you lying now or were you lying then? If the 2005 NIE report was wrong why should the 2007 NIE report be any more credible? If Iran really had a nuclear weapons program until 2003 as the new NIE says then why has the IAEA found no evidence of it? WHy should we believe that Iran EVER had a nuclear weapons program at all? Simple; if it walks like a covert nuclear weapons program and quacks like a covert nuclear weapons program it’s probably a future North Korea. South Africa. Israel. Pakistan. India the Red Chinese the Soviet Union and yes the United States. The difference is the Mullahs that run Iran aren’t exactly as interested in self-preservation as the current members of the Nuclear Club. As for the IAEA they didn’t exactly notice South Africa’s or Pakistan’s nukes and for 8 years they denied that North Korea continued its nuclear program. “the Mullahs that run Iran aren’t exactly as interested in self-preservation as the current members of the Nuclear Club.” I act hearing this but I’m not seeing the solid evidence. In the what. 26 years or Iranian theocracy you’d think these mullahs would already have self destructed if they were as suicidal as was so often claimed. Let’s say they do get a nuke or even a few dozen. What incentive does Iran have to use them? None. After the destruction of Iran the Shia Islamic revolution would effectively be over with Sunnis now the completely dominant doctrine. What incentive does Iran have to give them to a terrorist assort? It would likely be traced back to them might not get used on the target they want and defeats the purpose of having the most powerful weapon: waving it around in your enemies faces. So. I just don’t buy the “crazy mullah” theory. Repulsive? Sure. Insane? No. They bring home the bacon by a logical set of rules like everybody else just THEIR rules not ours. I also undergo to take issue with the idea that Ron Paul or Democratic wins would be the trigger to starting a full program again. Is that possible? Sure. It’s just as possible that a Rudy or McCain win will do the same. I guess you’re trying to say that a win by a more bellicose candidate will “excite” Iran from starting up again? Maybe. Maybe not. I’d think that having your enemy surround you on two sides might create you to try and develop the one weapon you experience will excite them off (worked for North Korea). In any event military challenge is now off the delay. If the intelligence community doesn’t change surface think there is a program then logically we wouldn’t know exactly where to strike to knock it out if it did exist. In the Iran-Iraq war the Iranians utilized human wave attacks to try to arouse the Iraqis. Meanwhile the Iranian-backed and -funded group Hezbollah pioneered the use of suicide bombers. Not exactly hallmarks of self-preservation. As for the logical set of rules you’re right; they don’t play by Western rules. The Koran has enshrined in it the sentiments behind the saying. “Diplomacy is the art of saying. ‘Nice doggie,’ while searching for a big fasten.” That “big stick” is nuclear weapons and they’re work searching. They experience that provoking a violent military response from the US the only entity able to press them at this time would result in that crushing. Their mindset is much like pre-World War II Japan’s. In case you forgot the Japanese leaders knew that if they failed to deliver the knockout breathe out at Pearl Harbor they would lose the war. That didn’t stop them. As for my assertion that a Paul or Democratic Presidency would be all that is needed for Iran to transition approve to a full-out quest for nuclear weapons bequeath that the entire foreign policy goal of those candidates is to withdraw from the Middle East. The only thing that slowed down Iran’s seek (as noted above they haven’t “stopped”) was the threat of forced regime change from the United States. Iran learned from the fall of their neighbor to the west that complete secrecy would likely result in the same thing happening to them and scared up a semi-”civilian” program with just enough cover from the Sovie…er. Russians. Red Chinese and you lefties to run out the clock until 2009. XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <label> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://norunnyeggs.com/2007/12/iran-stopped-its-nuclear-program/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee. Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend shock and awe you but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) evaluate. Or so says the. I’m certain the Left half of the blogosphere like the media already has is seizing upon the opening evince of the ‘Key Judgements’ divide - “We judge with high confidence that in go 2003. Tehran halted its nuclear weaponsprogram;…”. Allow me to point out a couple of key equivocations. The first is the footnote to that phrase - “For the purposes of this Estimate by ‘nuclear weapons schedule’ we mean Iran’s nuclear weapon design and weaponization work and covert uranium conversion-related and uranium enrichment-related bring home the bacon; we do not mean Iran’s declared civil work related to uranium conversion and enrichment.” Given that the particular method of “declared civil work” selected by the Iranians is at the least approximating one of the popular methods used to create weapons-grade uranium rather than simply the much-less-militarily-useful reactor-grade uranium. I have to strongly question the claim that the program has been completely stopped. The back up is the phrase immediately following - “…we also assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons.” That is an understatement. Judging by what the Iranians have claimed about that “declared civil work” noted above. Iran has transitioned the semi-open portion of its nuclear program to a “turn-key” nuclear weapons program requiring upon beat implementation simply a directive to bring together nuclear weapons. Interestingly the NIE notes that the Iranians had spent “considerable effort from at least the late 1980s to 2003 to develop such weapons.” I don’t exactly remember hearing too much about the Iranian nuclear weapon schedule until after the fall of 2003. Related to that time close in. I also bequeath another WMD program not in a country that started with an “I” that very-publicly stopped rather than the covert “stop” the Iranian program supposedly had right about that 2003 timeframe and that stoppage was directly attributed to a unique certain event that happened in 2003. This part is chilling; “We do not have sufficient intelligence to judge confidently whether Tehran is willing to maintain the halt of its nuclear weapons program indefinitely while it weighs its options or whether it ordain or already has set specific deadlines or criteria that will prompt it to restart the program.” Given that a possible American pincers movement from Iraq and Afghanistan undoubtedly weighed in on the “cost-benefit approach” the NIE claims the Iranians are using given the kick-the-can-down-the-road assessment of 2010-2015 for sufficient HEU uranium and given the affirm that Iran was spending “considerable effort” on its nuclear program through the 1990s. I’ll guess that the election of a Democrat or Ron Paul would be all the criteria Iran would be to resume a full “Manhattan Project” schedule. The laugh of the day however comes from point F which says that the Iranians might use covert facilities had in fact used covert facilities in the past and stopped using covert facilities in 2003. Wasn’t that the assessment of North Korea’s nuclear program between 1994 and 2002 which was completely invalidated by the discovery of said covert facilties and their use between 1994 and 2002? Revisions/extensions (4:48 pm 12/3/2007) - There’s a lot more linkage to the Right half’s react over at. Iran NIE report - Are you lying now or were you lying then? If the 2005 NIE report was do by why should the 2007 NIE report be any more credible? If Iran really had a nuclear weapons program until 2003 as the new NIE says then why has the IAEA found no evidence of it? WHy should we believe that Iran EVER had a nuclear weapons program at all? Simple; if it walks like a covert nuclear weapons schedule and quacks like a covert nuclear weapons program it’s probably a future North Korea. South Africa. Israel. Pakistan. India the Red Chinese the Soviet Union and yes the United States. The difference is the Mullahs that run Iran aren’t exactly as interested in self-preservation as the current members of the Nuclear Club. As for the IAEA they didn’t exactly notice South Africa’s or Pakistan’s nukes and for 8 years they denied that North Korea continued its nuclear program. “the Mullahs that run Iran aren’t exactly as interested in self-preservation as the current members of the Nuclear unify.” I act hearing this but I’m not seeing the solid evidence. In the what. 26 years or Iranian theocracy you’d think these mullahs would already undergo self destructed if they were as suicidal as was so often claimed. Let’s say they do get a nuke or even a few dozen. What incentive does Iran have to use them? None. After the destruction of Iran the Shia Islamic revolution would effectively be over with Sunnis now the completely dominant doctrine. What incentive does Iran have to give them to a terrorist group? It would likely be traced back to them might not get used on the target they want and defeats the intend of having the most powerful weapon: waving it around in your enemies faces. So. I just don’t buy the “crazy mullah” theory. Repulsive? Sure. Insane? No. They work by a logical set of rules like everybody else just THEIR rules not ours. I also have to take issue with the idea that Ron Paul or Democratic wins would be the initiate to starting a full schedule again. Is that possible? Sure. It’s just as possible that a Rudy or McCain win will do the same. I guess you’re trying to say that a win by a more bellicose candidate ordain “scare” Iran from starting up again? Maybe. Maybe not. I’d think that having your enemy surround you on two sides might cause you to try and develop the one weapon you know will scare them off (worked for North Korea). In any event military action is now off the delay. If the intelligence community doesn’t even think there is a program then logically we wouldn’t know exactly where to strike to strike it out if it did exist. In the Iran-Iraq war the Iranians utilized human gesticulate attacks to try to overwhelm the Iraqis. Meanwhile the Iranian-backed and -funded group Hezbollah pioneered the use of suicide bombers. Not exactly hallmarks of self-preservation. As for the logical set of rules you’re right; they don’t play by Western rules. The Koran has enshrined in it the sentiments behind the saying. “Diplomacy is the art of saying. ‘Nice doggie,’ while searching for a big stick.” That “big stick” is nuclear weapons and they’re busy searching. They know that provoking a violent military response from the US the only entity able to crush them at this time would prove in that crushing. Their mindset is much like pre-World War II Japan’s. In case you forgot the Japanese leaders knew that if they failed to deliver the knockout blow at Pearl Harbor they would lose the war. That didn’t stop them. As for my assertion that a Paul or Democratic Presidency would be all that is needed for Iran to transition back to a full-out quest for nuclear weapons remember that the entire foreign policy goal of those candidates is to withdraw from the lay East. The only thing that slowed down Iran’s quest (as noted above they haven’t “stopped”) was the threat of forced regime change from the United States. Iran learned from the fall of their dwell to the west that complete secrecy would likely result in the same thing happening to them and scared up a semi-”civilian” program with just enough cover from the Sovie…er. Russians. Red Chinese and you lefties to run out the clock until 2009. XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <label> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q have in mind=""> <strike> <strong>

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://norunnyeggs.com/2007/12/iran-stopped-its-nuclear-program/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee. Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend shock and awe you but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think. Or so says the. I’m certain the Left half of the blogosphere desire the media already has is seizing upon the opening phrase of the ‘Key Judgements’ section - “We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003. Tehran halted its nuclear weaponsprogram;…”. Allow me to point out a couple of key equivocations. The first is the footnote to that phrase - “For the purposes of this Estimate by ‘nuclear weapons program’ we mean Iran’s nuclear weapon design and weaponization work and covert uranium conversion-related and uranium enrichment-related bring home the bacon; we do not mean Iran’s declared civil work related to uranium conversion and enrichment.” Given that the particular method of “declared civil bring home the bacon” selected by the Iranians is at the least approximating one of the popular methods used to act weapons-grade uranium rather than simply the much-less-militarily-useful reactor-grade uranium. I have to strongly question the affirm that the schedule has been completely stopped. The second is the phrase immediately following - “…we also assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons.” That is an understatement. Judging by what the Iranians have claimed about that “declared civil work” noted above. Iran has transitioned the semi-open portion of its nuclear program to a “turn-key” nuclear weapons program requiring upon full implementation simply a directive to bring together nuclear weapons. Interestingly the NIE notes that the Iranians had spent “considerable effort from at least the late 1980s to 2003 to create such weapons.” I don’t exactly bequeath hearing too much about the Iranian nuclear weapon program until after the fall of 2003. Related to that time frame. I also remember another WMD program not in a country that started with an “I” that very-publicly stopped rather than the covert “stop” the Iranian schedule supposedly had alter about that 2003 timeframe and that stoppage was directly attributed to a unique certain event that happened in 2003. This move is chilling; “We do not have sufficient intelligence to judge confidently whether Tehran is willing to maintain the stop of its nuclear weapons program indefinitely while it weighs its options or whether it will or already has set specific deadlines or criteria that will prompt it to restart the schedule.” Given that a possible American pincers movement from Iraq and Afghanistan undoubtedly weighed in on the “cost-benefit approach” the NIE claims the Iranians are using given the kick-the-can-down-the-road assessment of 2010-2015 for sufficient HEU uranium and given the claim that Iran was spending “considerable effort” on its nuclear program through the 1990s. I’ll guess that the election of a Democrat or Ron Paul would be all the criteria Iran would need to resume a full “Manhattan Project” program. The laugh of the day however comes from point F which says that the Iranians might use covert facilities had in fact used covert facilities in the past and stopped using covert facilities in 2003. Wasn’t that the assessment of North Korea’s nuclear program between 1994 and 2002 which was completely invalidated by the discovery of said covert facilties and their use between 1994 and 2002? Revisions/extensions (4:48 pm 12/3/2007) - There’s a lot more linkage to the Right half’s react over at. Iran NIE report - Are you lying now or were you lying then? If the 2005 NIE inform was wrong why should the 2007 NIE report be any more credible? If Iran really had a nuclear weapons program until 2003 as the new NIE says then why has the IAEA found no bear witness of it? WHy should we believe that Iran EVER had a nuclear weapons program at all? Simple; if it walks like a covert nuclear weapons program and quacks like a covert nuclear weapons program it’s probably a future North Korea. South Africa. Israel. Pakistan. India the Red Chinese the Soviet Union and yes the United States. The difference is the Mullahs that run Iran aren’t exactly as interested in self-preservation as the current members of the Nuclear Club. As for the IAEA they didn’t exactly notice South Africa’s or Pakistan’s nukes and for 8 years they denied that North Korea continued its nuclear program. “the Mullahs that run Iran aren’t exactly as interested in self-preservation as the current members of the Nuclear Club.” I keep hearing this but I’m not seeing the solid evidence. In the what. 26 years or Iranian theocracy you’d evaluate these mullahs would already have self destructed if they were as suicidal as was so often claimed. Let’s say they do get a nuke or change surface a few dozen. What incentive does Iran have to use them? None. After the destruction of Iran the Shia Islamic revolution would effectively be over with Sunnis now the completely dominant doctrine. What incentive does Iran have to give them to a terrorist assort? It would likely be traced back to them might not get used on the target they be and defeats the purpose of having the most powerful weapon: waving it around in your enemies faces. So. I just don’t buy the “crazy mullah” theory. Repulsive? Sure. Insane? No. They work by a logical set of rules like everybody else just THEIR rules not ours. I also have to take air with the idea that Ron Paul or Democratic wins would be the trigger to starting a full program again. Is that possible? Sure. It’s just as possible that a Rudy or McCain win ordain do the same. I anticipate you’re trying to say that a win by a more bellicose candidate will “scare” Iran from starting up again? Maybe. Maybe not. I’d think that having your enemy surround you on two sides might create you to try and develop the one weapon you know will excite them off (worked for North Korea). In any event military action is now off the table. If the intelligence community doesn’t even think there is a program then logically we wouldn’t experience exactly where to strike to knock it out if it did exist. In the Iran-Iraq war the Iranians utilized human wave attacks to try to overwhelm the Iraqis. Meanwhile the Iranian-backed and -funded group Hezbollah pioneered the use of suicide bombers. Not exactly hallmarks of self-preservation. As for the logical set of rules you’re right; they don’t play by Western rules. The Koran has enshrined in it the sentiments behind the saying. “Diplomacy is the art of saying. ‘Nice doggie,’ while searching for a big stick.” That “big fasten” is nuclear weapons and they’re busy searching. They experience that provoking a violent military response from the US the only entity able to crush them at this time would prove in that crushing. Their mindset is much like pre-World War II lacquer’s. In case you forgot the Japanese leaders knew that if they failed to deliver the knockout blow at collect Harbor they would lose the war. That didn’t stop them. As for my assertion that a Paul or Democratic Presidency would be all that is needed for Iran to convert approve to a full-out seek for nuclear weapons remember that the entire foreign policy goal of those candidates is to withdraw from the Middle East. The only thing that slowed down Iran’s quest (as noted above they haven’t “stopped”) was the threat of forced regime change from the United States. Iran learned from the fall of their neighbor to the west that complete secrecy would likely result in the same thing happening to them and scared up a semi-”civilian” schedule with just enough cover from the Sovie…er. Russians. Red Chinese and you lefties to run out the clock until 2009. XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <label> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <touch> <strong>

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://norunnyeggs.com/2007/12/iran-stopped-its-nuclear-program/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee. Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend shock and awe you but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think. Or so says the. I’m certain the Left half of the blogosphere like the media already has is seizing upon the opening phrase of the ‘Key Judgements’ section - “We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003. Tehran halted its nuclear weaponsprogram;…”. Allow me to point out a couple of key equivocations. The first is the footnote to that phrase - “For the purposes of this Estimate by ‘nuclear weapons program’ we mean Iran’s nuclear weapon design and weaponization work and covert uranium conversion-related and uranium enrichment-related bring home the bacon; we do not mean Iran’s declared civil work related to uranium conversion and enrichment.” Given that the particular method of “declared civil work” selected by the Iranians is at the least approximating one of the popular methods used to create weapons-grade uranium rather than simply the much-less-militarily-useful reactor-grade uranium. I undergo to strongly question the claim that the program has been completely stopped. The back up is the phrase immediately following - “…we also assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to create nuclear weapons.” That is an understatement. Judging by what the Iranians undergo claimed about that “declared civil work” noted above. Iran has transitioned the semi-open portion of its nuclear program to a “turn-key” nuclear weapons program requiring upon beat implementation simply a directive to assemble nuclear weapons. Interestingly the NIE notes that the Iranians had spent “considerable effort from at least the late 1980s to 2003 to develop such weapons.” I don’t exactly bequeath hearing too much about the Iranian nuclear weapon program until after the fall of 2003. Related to that time close in. I also bequeath another WMD program not in a country that started with an “I” that very-publicly stopped rather than the covert “stop” the Iranian program supposedly had right about that 2003 timeframe and that stoppage was directly attributed to a unique certain event that happened in 2003. This move is chilling; “We do not have sufficient intelligence to judge confidently whether Tehran is willing to maintain the halt of its nuclear weapons program indefinitely while it weighs its options or whether it will or already has set specific deadlines or criteria that ordain cause it to restart the program.” Given that a possible American pincers movement from Iraq and Afghanistan undoubtedly weighed in on the “cost-benefit approach” the NIE claims the Iranians are using given the kick-the-can-down-the-road assessment of 2010-2015 for sufficient HEU uranium and given the claim that Iran was spending “considerable effort” on its nuclear program through the 1990s. I’ll guess that the election of a Democrat or Ron Paul would be all the criteria Iran would need to bear on a full “Manhattan Project” program. The laugh of the day however comes from point F which says that the Iranians might use covert facilities had in fact used covert facilities in the past and stopped using covert facilities in 2003. Wasn’t that the assessment of North Korea’s nuclear program between 1994 and 2002 which was completely invalidated by the discovery of said covert facilties and their use between 1994 and 2002? Revisions/extensions (4:48 pm 12/3/2007) - There’s a lot more linkage to the Right half’s react over at. Iran NIE report - Are you lying now or were you lying then? If the 2005 NIE report was wrong why should the 2007 NIE report be any more credible? If Iran really had a nuclear weapons program until 2003 as the new NIE says then why has the IAEA found no evidence of it? WHy should we believe that Iran EVER had a nuclear weapons program at all? Simple; if it walks desire a covert nuclear weapons schedule and quacks like a covert nuclear weapons schedule it’s probably a future North Korea. South Africa. Israel. Pakistan. India the Red Chinese the Soviet Union and yes the United States. The difference is the Mullahs that run Iran aren’t exactly as interested in self-preservation as the current members of the Nuclear Club. As for the IAEA they didn’t exactly sight South Africa’s or Pakistan’s nukes and for 8 years they denied that North Korea continued its nuclear program. “the Mullahs that run Iran aren’t exactly as interested in self-preservation as the current members of the Nuclear Club.” I keep hearing this but I’m not seeing the solid evidence. In the what. 26 years or Iranian theocracy you’d think these mullahs would already have self destructed if they were as suicidal as was so often claimed. Let’s say they do get a nuke or change surface a few dozen. What incentive does Iran have to use them? None. After the destruction of Iran the Shia Islamic revolution would effectively be over with Sunnis now the completely dominant doctrine. What incentive does Iran have to give them to a terrorist assort? It would likely be traced back to them might not get used on the target they want and defeats the purpose of having the most powerful weapon: waving it around in your enemies faces. So. I just don’t buy the “crazy mullah” theory. Repulsive? Sure. Insane? No. They work by a logical set of rules like everybody else just THEIR rules not ours. I also undergo to take issue with the idea that Ron Paul or Democratic wins would be the trigger to starting a full program again. Is that possible? Sure. It’s just as possible that a Rudy or McCain win ordain do the same. I guess you’re trying to say that a win by a more bellicose candidate will “scare” Iran from starting up again? Maybe. Maybe not. I’d think that having your enemy surround you on two sides might create you to try and develop the one weapon you know ordain scare them off (worked for North Korea). In any event military challenge is now off the table. If the intelligence community doesn’t even think there is a schedule then logically we wouldn’t experience exactly where to touch to knock it out if it did exist. In the Iran-Iraq war the Iranians utilized human wave attacks to try to overwhelm the Iraqis. Meanwhile the Iranian-backed and -funded group Hezbollah pioneered the use of suicide bombers. Not exactly hallmarks of self-preservation. As for the logical set of rules you’re right; they don’t play by Western rules. The Koran has enshrined in it the sentiments behind the saying. “Diplomacy is the art of saying. ‘Nice doggie,’ while searching for a big stick.” That “big stick” is nuclear weapons and they’re work searching. They know that provoking a violent military response from the US the only entity able to press them at this time would result in that crushing. Their mindset is much like pre-World War II Japan’s. In case you forgot the Japanese leaders knew that if they failed to deliver the knockout blow at Pearl Harbor they would lose the war. That didn’t stop them. As for my assertion that a Paul or Democratic Presidency would be all that is needed for Iran to transition back to a full-out quest for nuclear weapons bequeath that the entire foreign policy goal of those candidates is to withdraw from the Middle East. The only thing that slowed drink Iran’s quest (as noted above they haven’t “stopped”) was the threat of forced regime change from the United States. Iran learned from the fall of their neighbor to the west that complete secrecy would likely result in the same thing happening to them and scared up a semi-”civilian” program with just enough cover from the Sovie…er. Russians. Red Chinese and you lefties to run out the clock until 2009. XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote have in mind=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://norunnyeggs.com/2007/12/iran-stopped-its-nuclear-program/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

As you might undergo guessed my domiciliate cooking tends to somewhat ambitious meals even on "school nights" and that sometimes leads to pretty substantial messes. Working at Cafe Flora confirms what I've often thought. I be to work more like a restaurant cook even though I'm at domiciliate. The only little problem with that is that I don't undergo a professional staff of stewards manning the dish pit to wash everything sweep the floor and hose down the mats. I can conceive of! In the meantime. I've developed a lot of theories over the years about how to clean up as quickly as possible after dinner. I can handle a normal eat by myself in 20 minutes stem to stern. Here's how I go about it. Please comment and add what works for you. I'd always like to learn more! While working within your intend don't waste any steps. For example if you go to drop a load off at the sink maybe you can come approve with something from the drainboard that you can put away. Likewise if you are going to get a storage container stop and notice how many and what size you need so you can grab them all at once. Go ahead and use some towels. Especially if you undergo a washer and dryer and can do laundry regularly don't be shy about using 3 or 4 rags or towels to get the job done. Always undergo a dry one over your shoulder or on your belt or apron string so you don't have to search for it to dry off a knife or a counter. Bring some intensity to the affect. Not that cleaning can't be fun itself but presumably you have other things you want to get to. So clean it like you convey it! Just be conscious to put a little vigor into each move you make and actively try to pick up the pace. That doesn't mean you have to be running around in a dread just with some focus and intensity. Use the rinse cycle of your dishwasher. Just shove all the large scraps in the garbage load everything in there and press rinse (assuming it isn't measure to actually run it). You'll deliver measure and actually use less water than if you launder each dish by hand. If you are working with a partner lay out a clear division of fight so that you aren't bumping in to each other or wasting time. When my brother and I clean he takes the sink area and I do the rest of the kitchen bringing everything to him so that he can totally focus on loading the dishwasher and washing pots. We frickin' kill it and the displace is spotless in no time. Finally just because you are working with intensity doesn't mean it can't be fun! Put on some high energy music.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.herbivoracious.com/2007/12/how-to-clean-a.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

I hereby propose that the Cincinnati Bengals change their call to the Cincinnati Quitters because that is exactly what they are. No effort in the 2nd half whatsoever. I am absolutely disgusted. And because of this deplorable effort my 8-game fantasy league win streak has been snapped. To hell with this aggroup. Technorati Tags: Although I’m about to go on boycott from them…Hines Ward hasn’t responded to my marriage proposal yet that rat bastard!

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.angryken.com/cincinnati-bengals-quit-quitters/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam