Syrian reactor almost ready make bombs, Hayden says.

[bushmeister0]

AP:

"CIA Director Michael Hayden said Monday that the alleged Syrian nuclear reactor destroyed by an Israeli airstrike in September would have produced enough plutonium for one or two bombs within a year of becoming operational . . . 'In the course of a year after they got full up they would have produced enough plutonium for one or two weapons,' Hayden told reporters after a speech at Georgetown University."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080428/ap_on_go_ot/nuclear_syria

I'm so sure. If this was true now, then why weren't they dispatching their "message force-multipliers" out to shout it to the heavens months ago?

Every time you turn around the story gets more and more ridiculous. Now, it turns out Syria was on the verge of nuking Israel.

Btw, supposedly the reason the US didn't inform the IAEA about this -- and maybe get them to go in and check it out -- was because, according to Hayden, "We've made it clear we did not have complete control over the totality of the information because obviously it was the result of a team effort."

A team effort? Now we're on the same team with Israel?

Great, that ought to really complicate our negotiations with the Palestinians. I don't see how we can be an "honest broker" in the Arab/Israeli conflict if Hayden now explicitly admits what was always tacitly understood. So much for the HB myth.

And what about our good friends the North Koreans? Shouldn't we be nuking them or something for proliferating nukes to a deadly foe of Israel, not planning to except them into the world community?

God, I hope it doesn't turn out the Libyans were buying DRP's nukes, too. That would be awkward.

Ah, but apparently they are getting new nukes from France.

"PARIS, July 26 (AFP) Jul 26, 2007

France came under fire Thursday over its plans to build a reactor in Libya, but proliferation experts dismissed concerns that the deal was tantamount to handing Moamer Kadhafi a nuclear bomb . . . United States also threw its support behind France.

'I expect ... that the French government would pay full attention to making sure that any safeguard will be implemented in any sort of deal,' State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said."

http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/30-96601.aspx

So, if the French give the Lockerbee bomber a reactor, that's OK.

Very confusing.

Well, at least Moammar gave up his old nuclear fuel (that got the oil flowing!) -- which he got from the Russians (who also sell it to the Iranians).

Wow! If your not with us your against us . . . but even if you aren't with us, if you have oil and all the multinationals buying you expensive lobbyists to get that oil, then you're with us . . . kind of . .

But look over there, it's Ahmadinejad saying something stupid again! Over there, quick, radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr! And he's not weatring a flag lapel pin!

[Tinksrival]

1. Wonder what Hayden has to say about this:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2008/04/syria-more-ques.html

SYRIA: More questions about alleged nuclear site

Professor William Beeman at the University of Minnesota passed along a note today from "a colleague with a U.S. security clearance" about the mysterious Syrian site targeted in a Sept. 6 Israeli airstrike.

The note raises more questions about the evidence shown last week by U.S. intelligence officials to lawmakers in the House and Senate.

The author of the note pinpoints irregularities about the photographs. Beeman's source alleges that the CIA "enhanced" some of the images


*Photos at link

[yurbud]

2. and even if true, what could they do with those nukes to us without risk utter annihilation?

[annabanana]

3. LIES LIES AND LIES ON LIES

Here:

http://www.atlargely.com/2008/04/massive-propaga.html

[madrchsod]

4. this is all about the "nuclear" talks with the north koreans

there is no evidence that syria was close to finishing the supposed reactor let alone have plutonium with in two years. the united states has`t a shred of believability left in the world