White House war-mongers going to have to make up something new...

KingOfFairview

From BBC:


US Democrats want rethink on Iran



The Democrats in the United States have called for a rethink of policy on Iran.
It comes after a major new intelligence assessment suggested the government in Tehran is not trying to develop nuclear weapons at present.
The latest National Intelligence Estimate says it is now believed Iran stopped its weapons programme in 2003.
The Democrat leader of the US Senate, Harry Reid, said he hoped the White House would undertake "a diplomatic surge" to engage with Iran.
"I hope this administration reads this report carefully and appropriately adjusts its rhetoric and policy vis-a-vis Iran," said Mr Reid.
He added that the Bush administration should emulate former President Ronald Reagan's engagement with the Soviet Union.



The BBC Washington correspondent Justin Webb says the Democrat response is a sign of the pivotal importance the new intelligence assessment might turn out to have.
But, our correspondent adds, Washington's Iran hawks are horrified.
In particular they are concerned that news of that key assessment will drown out other findings in the document - for instance, that Tehran is keeping open its option to develop a nuclear weapon and would have all the capacity to do so in the future if its leaders decided to go ahead.
A senior advisor to President Bush said the report was "positive" but the risk of a nuclear Iran remained "serious".
Iran is currently under sanctions from both the UN Security Council, which is demanding the end of uranium enrichment, and unilateral US sanctions.
'Technical problems'
The declassified summary of the report, which draws together information from the US's 16 intelligence agencies, says with "high confidence" that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons programme in 2003 "in response to international pressure".


The assessment says with "moderate confidence" that the programme has not restarted.
This is a turnaround from previous assessments, when US intelligence agencies believed Iran was trying to develop a nuclear weapon.
Iran made "significant progress" in 2007 installing gas centrifuges used to enrich uranium - a process necessary for producing the fissile nuclear material needed to build a nuclear bomb, the report says.
But the report's authors judge with "moderate confidence" that Iran "still faces significant technical problems" operating the new equipment.
And they conclude that the country is not likely to have enough highly enriched uranium to build a bomb until 2010-2015.
'Right strategy'
US National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley said the report's findings confirmed the US was "right to be worried" about Iran's nuclear ambitions and that President George W Bush had "the right strategy".

The international community should "turn up the pressure on Iran" using diplomatic isolation, UN sanctions and other financial leverage, he said. The BBC News website's world affairs correspondent, Paul Reynolds, says the report is cautious in its assessment of Iran's nuclear activities and provides little evidence for those who would like an early military attack. He says it will strengthen the hand of those who want further sanctions since it states that past pressure has worked.

ScumLord

The international community should "turn up the pressure on Iran" using diplomatic isolation, UN sanctions and other financial leverage, he said.

I don't see how alienating Iran is seen as a good plan. All that's happened is they've thought Iran how to survive and prosper on it's own two feet.

I think Iran is fully entitled to develop Nuclear power too. The west is saying it's the only way to meet the future power demands yet Iran can't have it.


We'll never make peace with the middle east in we're determined to keep them in the gutter because we don't like the way they live.

biko

ScumLord wrote: »

We'll never make peace with the middle east in we're determined to keep them in the gutter because we don't like the way they live.

It's the American way.

zuutroy

biko wrote: »

It's the American way.

I'm going to Washington tomorrow :cool:

KingOfFairview

I don't see how alienating Iran is seen as a good plan. All that's happened is they've thought Iran how to survive and prosper on it's own two feet.

Plus the only thing that unites Iranians behind the govt is the nuclear issue. They wont let it drop as its become a matter of pride. Starving them like they di with Iraq wont work either as Iran as two freinds on the security council.

I think Iran is fully entitled to develop Nuclear power too. The west is saying it's the only way to meet the future power demands yet Iran can't have it.

Exactly. Hypocrasy.

ScumLord

KingOfFairview wrote: »

Plus the only thing that unites Iranians behind the govt is the nuclear issue. They wont let it drop as its become a matter of pride. Starving them like they di with Iraq wont work either as Iran as two freinds on the security council.

You didn't see the week long report Channel 4 news did from Iran a good while ago, they're not backwards by any means. I gained allot of respect for the country after seeing those reports, they've become pretty much completely self reliant which isn't something that can be said for allot of western countries. The west wouldn't share technology with them so they just went off and thought themselves. They certainly wouldn't be a walkover like Iraq was.

Iran also has the worlds most successful Heroin addicts treatment programme. In fairness they tried beheading first but it wasn't working so they switched to rehabilitation.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

is that Rageh inside iran scumlord? saw that myself, very iunteresting docu

Reku

Well it's not like any of us would have fallen for the WMD line again so this report doesn't really change anything since claims Iran has "the bomb" would be laughed at if they came from the US/Britain (probably even if any of the intelligence used in such a report came from them).

User45701

ScumLord wrote: »

You didn't see the week long report Channel 4 news did from Iran a good while ago, they're not backwards by any means. I gained allot of respect for the country after seeing those reports, they've become pretty much completely self reliant which isn't something that can be said for allot of western countries. The west wouldn't share technology with them so they just went off and thought themselves. They certainly wouldn't be a walkover like Iraq was.

Iran also has the worlds most successful Heroin addicts treatment programme. In fairness they tried beheading first but it wasn't working so they switched to rehabilitation.

another interesting fact is the first record of use of hashish was in a mountin range in Iran

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

that's it, I'm on their side.

KingOfFairview

ScumLord wrote: »

You didn't see the week long report Channel 4 news did from Iran a good while ago, they're not backwards by any means. I gained allot of respect for the country after seeing those reports, they've become pretty much completely self reliant which isn't something that can be said for allot of western countries. The west wouldn't share technology with them so they just went off and thought themselves. They certainly wouldn't be a walkover like Iraq was.

Iran also has the worlds most successful Heroin addicts treatment programme. In fairness they tried beheading first but it wasn't working so they switched to rehabilitation.

Yeah compared to places Like Saudi arabia its a liberals wet dream.

Little known fact: Iran has a Jewish MP.

ScumLord

Mordeth wrote: »

is that Rageh inside iran scumlord? saw that myself, very iunteresting docu

It wasn't a doco no. That grey haired fella went over there for the week and every day they'd do a different 10 minute report on some different aspect of life in Iran ie: they're heroin rehabilitation plan.

KingOfFairview

Sex changes are legal there too. the Ayotollah Khomeini himself made it legal. Sounds like BS but its not, look it up

ScumLord

KingOfFairview wrote: »

Sex changes are legal there too. the Ayotollah Khomeini himself made it legal. Sounds like BS but its not, look it up

I think the way it works over there is that everything's legal until someone can show why it shouldn't be legal according to the Koran/shira law. That's why allot of cloning research is done there too. :eek:

eoin5

Isnt this one of the 'turn the terror warning down so we can turn it back up again in two days time to put it back in the papers and remind everyone that theyre scared' kinda things? Watch for something damning in the next few days.

azezil

Durka durka durka, mohammed jihad

KingOfFairview

ScumLord wrote: »

I think the way it works over there is that everything's legal until someone can show why it shouldn't be legal according to the Koran/shira law. That's why allot of cloning research is done there too. :eek:

A lot of things work that way I think, but Khomeini SPECIFICALLY said sex-changes should be lega. Bizarre.

Didnt know about the cloning, maybe theyre going to soon have thousands of Immortals in the Revolutionary Guard!

ScumLord

KingOfFairview wrote: »

A lot of things work that way I think, but Khomeini SPECIFICALLY said sex-changes should be lega. Bizarre.

Didnt know about the cloning, maybe theyre going to soon have thousands of Immortals in the Revolutionary Guard!

The Americans are probably worried Al Qaeda will end up with an infinite supply of suicide bombers.

KingOfFairview

ScumLord wrote: »

The Americans are probably worried Al Qaeda will end up with an infinite supply of suicide bombers.

Probably, as they probably have no idea Iran and al Qaeda despise eachother!

KingOfFairview

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7127198.stm

He's not going to let this spoil his plans for next summer...

Mr.Micro

It suggests one thing that Bush and Co. has it in for Iran and would have ignored any intelligence that was not in favour of action had the whole Iraq intelligence debacle not been such a shambles.It means also that Bush does not listen to his intelligence service if all the BS that has emanated from the White house in the last 18 months is anything to go by.

ScumLord

Is it next year the US presidential elections are on?

The world should celebrate the loss of that fool.

Mr.Micro

ScumLord wrote: »

Is it next year the US presidential elections are on?

The world should celebrate the loss of that fool.

There is still 13 months for that fool to do damage of some sort .

KingOfFairview

the thig is they'll fins a way to attack regardless of fact if they want to. Only way it could be stopped would be if Russia made a defence pact with Iran, and thats unlikely to say the least

toiletduck

KingOfFairview wrote: »

the thig is they'll fins a way to attack regardless of fact if they want to. Only way it could be stopped would be if Russia made a defence pact with Iran, and thats unlikely to say the least

Indeed, to the point of not mentioning perhaps?

Christ, they're not going to invade Iran. The usual suspects have been continuely harping on about for this for years.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7127198.stm

He's not going to let this spoil his plans for next summer...

I'm so glad everyone is happy with American Intelligence now...

Mr.Micro

I'm so glad everyone is happy with American Intelligence now... [/QUOTE]

George does not seem too happy,like someone burst his balloon.

KingOfFairview

Christ, they're not going to invade Iran. The usual suspects have been continuely harping on about for this for years.

I dont think anyone expects them to invade, they wouldnt be capable of it. Any attack would just be bombing, they dont have the manpower or will to invade.

faceman

No one care to comment about what a nice country Iran is, how lovely their leader is and how well he treats their people?

Lands Leaving

KingOfFairview wrote: »

I dont think anyone expects them to invade, they wouldnt be capable of it. Any attack would just be bombing, they dont have the manpower or will to invade.

It all comes down to profits, America needs to continue the war on terror to keep its economy strong, but they can just as easily find a weaker, easier target than Iran. And they probably will.

faceman

Lands Leaving wrote: »

It all comes down to profits, America needs to continue the war on terror to keep its economy strong, but they can just as easily find a weaker, easier target than Iran. And they probably will.

Isnt America in a recession at the moment and the credit crunch has caused knock on effects to the rest of the world? So how has the war on terror helped the economy again?

Lands Leaving

faceman wrote: »

Isnt America in a recession at the moment and the credit crunch has caused knock on effects to the rest of the world? So how has the war on terror helped the economy again?

Thats unrelated, its a property thing, the war on terror is still a massive source of profit and recession is a necessary part of U.S. economic policy

faceman

Lands Leaving wrote: »

Thats unrelated, its a property thing, the war on terror is still a massive source of profit and recession is a necessary part of U.S. economic policy

what? Please explain? Are you saying that the property market has no affect on the US economy? Terror is a massive source of profit? For those that build missiles maybe but how does the US economy benefit? How much is the dollar worth at the moment?? Its

Increased US spending on national defense and homeland security combined with the US gov’s tax cutting agenda has reduced natural spending increases in areas that are traditionally considered contributors to economic growth and national security.

The US gov curtailed health, education and public safety spending in recent years as it pumped the extra cash into its military. The spending growth and tax cuts have led to budget deficits (approx $250 billion at present). This leads to higher interest rates (as we saw from 2003 to 2007 where the trend was one way - up) The long term effect of increased spending on military resources has the long term effect of actually costing more in terms of foregone growth opportunities, especially in the context of the need to allocate greater resources to an aging population.

KingOfFairview

Lands Leaving wrote: »

It all comes down to profits, America needs to continue the war on terror to keep its economy strong, but they can just as easily find a weaker, easier target than Iran. And they probably will.

Maybe, but its hard to see who? they could get very unpublic support in the Arab world for an attack on Iran, they wouldnt fight North Korea unless their lives depended on it, they would be a far far more difficult proposition than Iran, any war with Syria would probably daw Iran in anyway... no matter who takes over in Pakistan theyre going to have 100 nuclear warheads so that rules them out....