Iran can now build and deliver nukes, US intel reports

[Mosby]

Source: Times of Israel

Iran now has all the technical infrastructure to produce nuclear weapons should it make the political decision to do, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper wrote in a report to a Senate intelligence committee published Wednesday. However, he added, it could not break out to the bomb without being detected.

In the “US Intelligence Worldwide Threat Assessment,” delivered to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Clapper reported that Tehran has made significant advances recently in its nuclear program to the point where it could produce and deliver nuclear bombs should it be so inclined.

“Tehran has made technical progress in a number of areas — including uranium enrichment, nuclear reactors, and ballistic missiles — from which it could draw if it decided to build missile-deliverable nuclear weapons,” Clapper wrote. “These technical advancements strengthen our assessment that Iran has the scientific, technical, and industrial capacity to eventually produce nuclear weapons. This makes the central issue its political will to do so.”






Read more: http://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-now-has-nuclear-breakout-capability-us-intel-reports

[L0oniX]

1. "Times of Israel" ...need I explain.

[ctsnowman]

3. Exactly!

[bananas]

14. Except he's right.

There's really no controversy about this.

“Tehran has made technical progress in a number of areas — including uranium enrichment, nuclear reactors, and ballistic missiles — from which it could draw if it decided to build missile-deliverable nuclear weapons,” Clapper wrote. “These technical advancements strengthen our assessment that Iran has the scientific, technical, and industrial capacity to eventually produce nuclear weapons. This makes the central issue its political will to do so.”

[RiverNoord]

25. Um.. the word 'eventually' really deserves

some attention in that quote. It sort of seriously qualifies the value of the entire statement... Not that you can't still use it for propaganda if you frame it properly...

[KamaAina]

10. James Clapper ...need I explain.

[24601]

47. The only things you need to explain about James Clapper is that President Obama handpicked him

to be Director of National Intelligence, that he is a direct report to the President; and, that, unlike the FBI director who has a fixed term, Clapper serves at the pleasure of the President.

You could explain also that the Director of National Intelligence is "Command" of very little. Most Intelligence Agencies (e.g. NSA, DIA, NRO, NGA) report to the Secretary of Defense. The Director of National Intelligence supervises the CIA Director - but only those functions for the production of foreign intelligence. When the CIA is taking direct action pursuant to a Presidential Finding (the best example is the Abbottabad raid to kill Bin Laden) the DNI will be informed, but the Command chain runs from the CIA Director directly to the President.

[KamaAina]

49. He handpicked Arne Duncan, too. And Rahm Emanuel.

If any of the above were on fire, I would not piss on them to put them out.

[Half-Century Man]

13. In the TOI's defense

They only broke the story about an American intelligence report and how it might play into internal Israeli politics. The Times of Israel took no stance themselves, just did a straight news story.

[Archae]

2. Where was this Clapper guy when Bush and Cheney were in a panic over Saddam?

Even money Clapper was agreeing 100% with Bush and Cheney saying Saddam had nukes, poison gas, germ bombs, etc...

[DisgustipatedinCA]

4. Alternate headline: Liar Testifies Before Congress Again

He may be telling the truth.
He may be lying.
Assuming he's lying is the only sane approach with a confirmed liar.

[closeupready]

6. +1000. How can this be 'news'?

Then, you consider the source, and realize, 'oh! That's why.'

[TwilightGardener]

5. And they did all that under sanctions. Which makes me wonder what good sanctions do

in cases like this--especially since other countries maneuver around them anyway. It certainly didn't slow them down much, or act as a deterrent to advancing their program. We need to focus on persuading them that it's not in their interests to have what will ultimately be a nuclear arms race in the middle east. I don't know how we do that, though.

[brisas2k]

42. who is "we", will determine the answer to your question

Talkd to the military industrial complex officers. they will tell you straight: we do not pursuit persuasion. we demand surrender.

[Alamuti Lotus]

7. According to US and Israeli "intelligence", Iran has been six months away from The Bomb since 1985

Given the severe credibility gap on such matters, I will treat this "report" from Lt. Gen. Clapper and the Times of Israel with 97 grains of NaCl. This is a very familiar drum-beat from very familiar narrators.

[Swede Atlanta]

8. If this is true me thinks.....

Clapper wrote the report himself while on the Crapper. He needed something to occupy his time while he voided himself of all the S**t he has.

And I have not doubt Clapper is being paid handsomely by the Jewish lobby and U.S. arms industries to promote this line.

[RiverNoord]

26. I hope you recognize a very serious distinction between

the Israeli right-wing lobby and the 'Jewish' lobby...

[Scootaloo]

33. The Israel lobby calls itself "the Jewish Lobby"

About two fith of Israeli lobby organizations shoehorn the word "Jewish" into their name, all of them speak as if they fully represent all American jews.

Of course anyone with a lick of sense recognizes the difference - that Israel does not equal Jews (startling how many ardent israel supporters LACK that lick of sense) - but so long as these organizations persist in using the obfuscation, I don't think someone can be blamed for using the term - up until of course a point where "Jewish lobby" is obviously being used ot speka of jews in general rather than the lobby groups that insist on using the term.

[CreekDog]

9. by all means, let's have another war

if we have enough of them, those of us that aren't sacrificed for them will be soooooo much safer.

[sir pball]

11. The technological capability to build a bomb isn't an issue, hasn't been for decades.

Iran's a fairly advanced country, moreso than North Korea and probably even apartheid-era South Africa and they both easily built bombs. It's just not that difficult anymore - the theoretical developments were all settled decades ago, nowadays it's pretty much just a matter of having the right precision manufacturing capability. It's no longer the domain of the physicists, but now just a problem for the opticians and watchmakers. IMO our PTB stick with the technological argument because nukes are deep voodoo to a lot of people; they do think the technology is the major stumbling block - and it's a lot easier to accomplish the goals of sanctions and socioeconomic aggression in the framework of slowing said technological development, rather than the much harder sell of changing the hearts and minds of their PTB.


Without offering any opinions on whether or not Iran should have weapons, the critical point is, has been, and remains the last sentence in the assessment - "...its political will to do so.”

[Fred Sanders]

18. You are correct, sir. Without uranium enriched to a inch of its life equipment is all just dust.

[NickB79]

21. True that. Nukes are 1940's technology

Slam two chunks of sub-critical fissile material together violently enough and BOOM.

It's all about the refinement and delivery strategies these days.

[KansDem]

12. Are we sure we're not getting the intel "wrong" again?

[TroglodyteScholar]

15. From the Times of Israel, huh...?

And based on a report by James "Least Untruthful Man In the Room" Clapper?

Where's my grain of salt...?

[SamKnause]

16. James Clapper is a LIAR !!!

Take anything he says with a grain of salt.

Israel wants war with Iran.

Take anything Israel says with a grain of salt.

[RiverNoord]

30. It's not that Israel wants war with Iran -

It's that the Israeli right wants us to fight it for them...

[Scootaloo]

35. You're very right

Israel lacks the ability to do anything to Iran except saber-rattle. It's too far for Israeli planes to fly, and even if they could, a handful of ASM's isn't going to do much... And then when you figure in Iran's very robust air defense system, any unilateral attack on iran from Israel becomes a pointless exercise that could very well kill a bunch of Israeli fighter pilots.

Israel's one hope is to get the US on board - Israel ramped up the rattling when we were in iraq, obviously hoping they could use our bases as a resupply. No luck, so now they have to try to wheedle us into outright war.. .which the Us has no interest in. even Bush told Israel to get stiffed on the subject.

And of course, Israel's desire for war with iran has nothing to do with nukes at all... butthat turns into a long rambling discourse about international politics as related to themiddle east...

[notemason]

17. A thought

I wonder if this is not part of the “deal” with Iran; if not allowed to build nukes per the world then let eveyone know they can at any time if needed.

[PeoViejo]

19. Man seen drinking a Beer and wiping a few drops of Gas off of his Lawn Mower

while refueling it. He suddenly finds himself on a Terrorist watch list because someone added up: Bottle, Gasoline and fuel-soaked rag as the formula for making a Molotov Cocktail. I would bet that most people reading this, who own a Garage, could find the exact same items in their possession.

This article has about the same credibility

[onwardsand upwards]

20. Iran should have nuclear weapons.

Since the nuclear powers (particularly the US) have reneged on their non-proliferation agreements (to eliminate their nuclear weapons) there is no moral reason why the non-nuclear countries should live up to their agreements (to not develop nuclear weapons).

Recent history has demonstrated, also, that nuclear weapons are the only deterrent guaranteed to protect your country from the US imposing a nasty corporate puppet leader there.

[Psephos]

22. so you are in favor of nuclear proliferation

more nukes in the hands of relgious fundies = less chance one gets used

riiiiiiiiigggghhhht

[RiverNoord]

32. um....

not that I agree with nuclear proliferation, but Israel has a lot of nuclear warheads, and, well, ethnic fundamentalism has generally been a far more powerful force of destruction than the religious sort...

[Scootaloo]

36. You know nukes are absolute shit as an offensive weapon, right?

And you also know that "religious fundies" in places like Israel, the US, india, and Pakistan all have nukes, and have thus far declined to use them, right?

Cue the special exceptions just for iran.

also cue ignoring hte fact that the head "religious fundie" in iran has multiple times issued religious decrees proscribing the development of nuclear weapons. I love how they're "religious fundie" enough for you to scream about, but not religious fundie enough to take their political and religious leader's religious declarations seriously. Whatever scaremongers the most i suppose. OOH MUSLIMS BOOJA BOOJA BOOJA!

[brisas2k]

43. it's kind of late now..

us authorities, long ago decided to allow israel to build nukes.

us killed proliferation efforts back then.

Unilateral enforcement is, to say the least, suspicious.

Therefor, any nation valuing its liberty and sovereignity better have nukes. Otherwise their very existence is in present and clear danger.

[Bandit]

23. This man is a known LIAR who LIED to Congress right to their face.

Why should anyone believe a word he says?

[24601]

48. No, I learned from Bill Clinton that a literal truth cannot be a lie. NSA is not collecting any

domestic meta-data. Instead, the telecoms generate it and give it to the government. The government doesn't have to collect a thing.

See the difference?

[Maedhros]

24. Israel has been able to build and deliver nuclear weapons for quite some time now,

and they have a history of violent conflict with their neighbors - hell, they keep a political and ethnic sub-class hemmed into ghettos.

Where is all the wailing and gnashing of teeth over that? Why is nuclear Iran so much worse than nuclear Israel?

[ForgoTheConsequence]

29. Not just violence towards their neighbors.

Violence towards the United States!

[ForgoTheConsequence]

27. So let's nuke the fuck out of them.

Every minute we're not dropping bombs is a minute wasted not defending Israel's honor. I won't be happy until I see dead brown kids on television and a smile on Bibi's handsome face.


Israel! Israel! Israel!

[easychoice]

28. I love the smell of fresh BULLSHIT

not worth any further comment.

[Purveyor]

31. Thank You For Posting. +1000 {{{chuckle}}}

[Scootaloo]

37. It's funny to see them try to woo the general populace of DU, innit? n/t

[Mosby]

44. I posted this to inform DUers

I'm well aware of the general sentiment many DUers have towards the Iranian nuclear weapon program and Israel's concerns about it.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

34. Times of Israel is a conservative rag.

And it's owner Seth Klarman supported Mitt Romney.


Funny how these "Israel at any cost" liberals lean to the right when it comes to Israel and US/Israel relations. Things that make you go "hmmm.....".

[Mosby]

38. klarman said he doesn't support the settlement project

That puts him in the liberal Zionist camp.

Further, he maintains that he does not exert any editorial control over the content at ToI.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

39. "Liberal"

Liberals donate to Mitt Romney, John Boehner, and the national republican senate committee?



Are you denying that the Times of Israel leans to the right?

[Ash_F]

40. Who would distrust The Clapper? /nt

[JackRiddler]

41. This is not LBN. Iranians know about physics.

This is not more Israeli propaganda in the ever-more distant hope that the United States can be driven to start a war of aggression on Iran on the basis of non-existent nukes. (As if existent nukes would justify such a move.)

ISRAEL HAS HUNDREDS OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND IS THE BIGGEST THREAT TO PEACE.

[penultimate]

45. I don't care if Iran can or cannot build nuclear weapons... Well, I mean, I hope they don't but

if they do I don't get why anyone has any moral right to say they can't. If they build them and use them, then they will be end up being destroyed by the world. I will also say I fully understand why other countries would try to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, as that's in their best interest, but there is no moral justification behind it. It's just countries looking out for their own interests.

[yurbud]

46. Oh my god! Now or thousands of nukes and Israel's hundreds are useless

Iran will make a handle of nukes or even just one and immediately use it to to destroy an american or israeli city, totally disregarding both countries' capability to burn Iran off the map in retaliation.

Because everyone in Iran is as stupid as a cartoon villain right?