NY Times: "In dispute with Iran, path to Iraq is in spotlight" - Compares Iran and Iraq WMD Claims

[TomCADem]

Article in the NY Times quotes Glenn Greenwald and compares Iran and Iraq WMDs claims, as well as differences in approach between the Bush and Obama administrations:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33082200/ns/world_news-the_new_york_times/

The question is inevitable: Is the uproar over the secret plant near Qum another rush to judgment, based on ambiguous evidence, spurred on by a desire to appear tough toward a loathed regime? In other words, is the United States repeating the mistakes of 2002?

Antiwar activists, with a fool-me-once skepticism, watch the dispute over the Qum plant with an alarmed sense of déjà vu. And some specialists on arms control and Iran are asking for more evidence and warning against hasty conclusions.

But while the similarities between 2002, when the faulty intelligence estimates were produced, and 2009 are unmistakable, the differences are profound.

This time, by all accounts, there is no White House-led march toward war. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has said that military action would merely delay Iranian nuclear weapons for one to three years, and there is no evidence that President Obama wants to add a third war to his responsibilities.

This time, too, the dispute over facts is narrower. Iran has admitted the existence of nuclear enrichment facilities, and on Tuesday it acknowledged that it was building the plant underground, next to a military base, for its protection. Still, Iran disputes claims that the plant is part of a weapons program.

[ShortnFiery]

1. The media whores at the NYT forgot to add that all the Uranium has been ...

accounted for by the IAEA. Further, according to the IAEA, Iran has NOT been found to be in noncompliance.

President Obama flanked by two former Empire leaders (UK and France) was a needless display of bravado. Perhaps he felt like he needed to do this to show the USA's republicans and the world that "he's tough" but it did NOTHING to progress diplomacy. I was very disappointed.

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/29/fmr_un_weapons_inspector_scott_ritter

Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It has a complete inspection regime conducted by the International Atomic Energy Agency. It’s not been found to be in noncompliance. And yet, here we are condemning Iran for doing its job, declaring a facility, inviting inspectors in. And the conclusion it’s reached from this? That they’re producing nuclear weapons. This is politically motivated hype designed to create a situation this coming Thursday that will find the United States unable to reach any sort of agreement with Iran about its nuclear program.

[grantcart]

4. Ritter is wrong

Its actually quite easy to go to the IAEA link and read the report of the Director General outlining the areas that they feel that Iran has not been in compliance with.

The following is taken from a report by the Director General 3 weeks ago:

The director of the IAEA has outlined the areas that Iran is not cooperating in and wants more information:


From his September 7th report to the board:

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2009/ebsp2009...

In my view, there are three key areas relevant to Iran´s nuclear programme that need to be addressed.

First, and specifically, Iran needs to respond fully to all the questions raised by the Agency in order to exclude the possibility of there being military dimensions to its nuclear programme. To this end, it is essential that Iran substantively re-engage with the Agency to clarify and bring to closure all outstanding issues, including the most difficult and important questions regarding the authenticity of information relating to the alleged weaponization studies, by granting the Agency access to persons, information and locations.

I also call on those who provided the information to enable the Agency to share with Iran as much information as possible to assist the Agency in moving forward with the verification process.

Second, and more generally, Iran needs to implement the Additional Protocol. Without the Protocol, the Agency will not be able to provide credible assurances about the absence of undeclared nuclear activities in Iran, especially given Iran´s past record of failing to declare material and activities.

Third, Iran´s future intentions concerning its nuclear programme need to be clarified to respond to the concerns of the international community. This is essentially a question of confidence-building between Iran and the international community through comprehensive dialogue and other measures. I call on all parties to begin this dialogue as soon as possible and urge Iran to respond positively to the recent US initiative in this regard.

[ShortnFiery]

6. Hello again! You do value my opinion, aye?

Hey, I'm hesitant to entertain your AEI type arguments.

On Edit: after reading all your narrative above, I still can't find any DAMN thing that the IAEA declares Iran is in noncompliance?

Go figure? :shrug:

*edited to be more polite - I try.

[grantcart]

7. I was curious which of the ignores were commenting on nuclear proliferation

Ritter's statement that you have quoted is incorrect and because his previous statements on Iraq were so well founded it is important that his statements be corrected. (He may be influenced by the fact that he was on the ground in Iraq and not had the same ground experience in Iran.)

His comments that Iran has not been found in "non compliance" deals may be correct with specific protocol but not with the larger issues raised by ElBaradei in his comments quoted above.

It is important that the IAEA's stance not be misquoted so I responded. In this case Ritter, somebody who I would have believed to be a respected source, is simply mistating the facts. The IAEA position on Iran is rather accessible and right on their website.

Ironically if you had gone to the Director General's report and found out that some of his statements actually support your position about some countries spreading some unfounded facts:




Now let's let the Director General's words on what Iran's noncompliance on (1)suspension of heavy water projects "as required by the Security Council", (2) their failure to implement the "Additional Protocol" and (3) "other remaining issues" speak for themselves:

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2009/bog070909.html

The Director General reported that although the Islamic Republic of Iran has cooperated with the Agency on some issues, several critical areas remain unaddressed.

"Iran has not suspended its enrichment related activities or its work on heavy water related projects as required by the Security Council, nor has Iran implemented the Additional Protocol. Likewise, Iran has not cooperated with the Agency in connection with the remaining issues, detailed fully and completely in the Agency´s reports, which need to be clarified in order to exclude the possibility of there being military dimensions to Iran´s nuclear programme," he said.

Also, Dr. ElBaradei answered accusations that information has been withheld from the Board of Governors about Iran´s nuclear programme. "I am dismayed by the allegations of some Member States, which have been fed to the media, that information has been withheld from the Board. These allegations are politically motivated and totally baseless. Such attempts to influence the work of the Secretariat and undermine its independence and objectivity are in violation of Article VII.F. of the IAEA Statute and should cease forthwith."

[ShortnFiery]

8. Yes, after all that they STILL have not been found to be in NON-COMPLIANCE.

Thanks. BYE! ;)

[grantcart]

9. The IAEA has found that they are in non compliance with UN Security Council

"Iran has not suspended its enrichment related activities or its work on heavy water related projects as required by the Security Council


Lying about Iran simply doesn't improve the situation in any way.

[grantcart]

10. and now more charges by the IAEA

IAEA: Iran broke law by not revealing nuclear

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/09/30/iran.iaea.nuclear/index.html

NEW DELHI, India (CNN) -- The head of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog agency said Iran broke the law by not disclosing sooner its recently revealed uranium enrichment site.


IAEA's Mohamed El Baradei says he does not think Iran has an ongoing nuclear weapons program.

"Iran was supposed to inform us on the day it was decided to construct the facility. They have not done that," International Atomic Energy Agency's Mohamed El Baradei told CNN's sister station, CNN-IBN. "They are saying that this was meant to be a back-up facility in case we were attacked and so they could not tell us earlier on.

"Nonetheless, they have been on the wrong side of the law, you know in so far as informing the agency about the construction and as you have seen it, it has created concern in the international community," he said.

Last week, Iran wrote a letter to the IAEA revealing the existence of the facility. The admission prompted President Obama and the leaders of Britain and France to publicly chide the Islamic republic and threaten further sanctions.

Now you can argue that the IAEA is wrong but the Ritter's assertion that the IAEA has not found Iran in non compliance is simply not logical.

[Rex]

2. Well we all know Obama won't just rush into a country like a fool

and just start shooting up the place. It takes a Repuke to be that stupid, well at least in recent decades.

[grantcart]

3. and finds "the differences are profound"

not the least of which the Iranians have admitted that the facts alleged are true.

[ShortnFiery]

5. Especially since Iran has not done anything WRONG in this area ... there's not an ISSUE

Just hype.

The key here isn’t the technicality of the legal documents; it’s about the diversion of nuclear material. And the IAEA has a 100 percent accounting for the totality of Iran’s nuclear material. So, even if Iran produces this new facility, which, by the way, is not in operation and won’t be in operation for over a year, no nuclear material has been diverted, there still is a full material balance, and the IAEA is in complete control of the situation. Iran is not in violation.

This is not a reason to panic. This is much ado about nothing. But again, we come back to the original premise: this is about political hype, the United States hyping up a capability in Iran which doesn’t exist, and that is the capability to produce nuclear weapons.