PDA

View Full Version : U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003


Alonzo
12-04-2007, 12:21 AM
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Iran halted work toward a nuclear weapon under international scrutiny in 2003 and is unlikely to be able to produce enough enriched uranium for a bomb until 2010 to 2015, a U.S. intelligence report says.

A declassified summary of the latest National Intelligence Estimate found with "high confidence" that the Islamic republic stopped an effort to develop nuclear weapons in the fall of 2003.

The estimate is less severe than a 2005 report that judged the Iranian leadership was "determined to develop nuclear weapons despite its international obligations and international pressure."

But the latest report says Iran -- which declared its ability to produced enriched uranium for a civilian energy program in 2006 -- could reverse that decision and eventually produce a nuclear weapon if it wanted to do so.

Enriched uranium at low concentrations can be used to fuel nuclear power plants, but much higher concentrations are needed to yield a nuclear explosion.

"We judge with moderate confidence that the earliest possible date Iran would be technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a weapon is late 2009, but that this is very unlikely," the report says. A more likely time frame for that production is between 2010 and 2015, it concludes.

Iran has insisted its nuclear program is strictly aimed at producing electricity, and the country has refused the U.N. Security Council's demand to halt its enrichment program.

Monday's report represents the consensus of U.S. intelligence agencies. It suggests that a combination of "threats of intensified international scrutiny and pressures, along with opportunities for Iran to achieve its security, prestige and goals for regional influence in other ways," could persuade the Iranian leadership to continue its suspension of nuclear weapons research.

Available intelligence suggests the Iranian leadership is guided "by a cost-benefit approach," not a headlong rush to develop a bomb, the report concludes.

U.S. National Security adviser Stephen Hadley expressed hope after Monday's announcement, but he said Iran remains a serious threat.

"We have good reason to continue to be concerned about Iran developing a nuclear weapon even after this most recent National Intelligence Estimate," he told reporters at the White House. "In the words of the NIE, quote, Iranian entities are continuing to develop a range of technical capabilities that could be applied to producing nuclear weapons if a decision is made to do so."

He said technology being developed for Iran's civilian nuclear power program could be used to enrich uranium for use in weapons, and that Iran is continuing to develop ballistic missiles.

Hadley said the intelligence community came to the new conclusions on Tuesday, based on information gathered over the past few months, and President Bush was briefed about them on Wednesday.

He said U.S. policy toward Iran has not changed because of the new report.

"If we want to avoid a situation where we either have to accept Iran ... with a path to a nuclear weapon, or the possibility of having to use force to stop it, with all the connotations of World War III -- then we need to step up the diplomacy, step up the pressure, to get Iran to stop their so-called civilian uranium enrichment program," he said. "That's our policy going forward -- no change."

Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV, who chairs the senate intelligence committee, welcomed the news.

"The key judgments show that the Intelligence Community has learned its lessons from the Iraq debacle," the West Virginia Democrat said in a statement. "It has issued judgments that break sharply with its own previous assessments, and they reflect a real difference from the views espoused by top Administration [sic] officials.

"This demonstrates a new willingness to question assumptions internally, and a level of independence from political leadership that was lacking in the recent past."

Sen. Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the fact that Iran was several years away from nuclear weapons capability meant "the international community has a significant window of opportunity in which to act to avoid the stark choice between going to war or accepting a nuclear Iran."

"But the Bush Administration has long lacked a comprehensive strategy to take advantage of this window," the Delaware Democrat and Democratic presidential hopeful said in a statement. "Instead of continuing its obsession with regime change and irresponsible talk of 'World War III,' we need a policy that focuses on conduct change."

The International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, has reported that Iran is cooperating with inspectors by providing access to declared nuclear material, documents and facilities. However, the agency also said Iran is withholding information in other areas, and as a result, the IAEA's knowledge about the status of the program is "diminishing."

Iran says its uranium enrichment work is allowed under the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty. The U.N. Security Council has passed two rounds of sanctions against Tehran, but Washington missed its goal of reaching consensus on tighter restrictions by the end of November, the State Department said last week.

The report comes amid widespread accusations that the Bush administration is attempting to maneuver the United States into a conflict with Iran, which it accuses of meddling in the war in Iraq. In October, the United States designated elements of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps as supporters of terrorism.

NIEs examine current capabilities and vulnerabilities and, perhaps more importantly, consider future developments. Policymakers usually request the estimates, but the intelligence community also can initiate them.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/03/iran.nuclear/index.html

December
12-04-2007, 12:27 AM
U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/03/iran.nuclear/index.html


Really?

Well, it doesn't matter.... you know... those Muslims just "hate our Freedom" which is good reason to bomb them.

USA #1!
I LOVE FOX-NEWS!
BUSH ALL THE WAY!
DEATH TO OSAMA BIN LADEN!

:madlaugh:

jafar00
12-04-2007, 06:56 PM
I shudder think of the next excuse by Bush to push his sanctions through. The current sanctions should be lifted immediately!

December
12-04-2007, 11:35 PM
I shudder think of the next excuse by Bush to push his sanctions through. The current sanctions should be lifted immediately!


There will be time when the world will push for sanctions against the USA.
That day is coming....

bobbylien
12-04-2007, 11:38 PM
I guess the question is.. will anybody trust us once Bush leave office?

I Like Beer
12-05-2007, 03:42 AM
I shudder think of the next excuse by Bush to push his sanctions through. The current sanctions should be lifted immediately!


There will be time when the world will push for sanctions against the USA.
That day is coming....

You know what - and I can hardly believe I'm agreeing with you - but I agree with that statement.

In fact, if most Americans actually supported Bush right now, I'd be leading the charge for a boycott of American products in my home country.

My family and I will be going to Mexico this year - we didn't even look at US destinations - and the reason is political.

lily
12-05-2007, 03:48 AM
I shudder think of the next excuse by Bush to push his sanctions through. The current sanctions should be lifted immediately!


There will be time when the world will push for sanctions against the USA.
That day is coming....


You know......you may be right on that.[hr]
I guess the question is.. will anybody trust us once Bush leave office?



I think if Hillary is President and Bill does what she tells him to do.....try and get our reputation back, it'll take time, but it will happen. If not Bill, then Obama is smart enough to make good use of Richardson's diplomacy and experience it would work also.......hey.......maybe both of them together?

I Like Beer
12-05-2007, 03:55 AM
I guess the question is.. will anybody trust us once Bush leave office?


For my part, I will take a long look at whoever is elected but I can't say that I will give them the benefit of the doubt. I hope to see substantial changes very quickly.

I prefer a Democrat in the White House but, IMHO, that is certainly no guarantee that things will improve.

I am keeping an open mind and I am optimistic - that's about all I can say.

ECW
12-05-2007, 05:40 AM
The Bushies sat on this report for more than a year. That should tell you that it was contradictory to everything that Bush tried to make us believe including that crap about WW3 being right around the corner. It appears that alone of all of the current government agencies, the Intel community has a backbone and tries to be straight up with their assessments. You gotta go outside the country to get accurate information about the manipulations of this White House.

WASHINGTON - The US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran has been held up for more than a year in an effort to force the intelligence community to remove dissenting judgments on the Iranian nuclear program. The aim is to make the document more supportive of Vice President Dick Cheney's militarily aggressive policy toward Iran, according to accounts provided by participants in the NIE process to two former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officers.

But this pressure on intelligence analysts, obviously instigated by Cheney himself, has not produced a draft estimate without those dissenting views, these sources say. The White House has now apparently decided to release the "unsatisfactory" draft NIE, but without making its key findings public.

A NIE coordinates the judgments of the US's 16 intelligence agencies on a specific country or issue.

A former CIA intelligence officer who has asked not to be identified told Inter Press Service (IPS) that an official involved in the NIE process says the Iran estimate was ready to be published a year ago but has been delayed because the director of national intelligence wanted a draft reflecting a consensus on key conclusions - particularly on Iran's nuclear program.

There is a split in the intelligence community on how much of a threat the Iranian nuclear program poses, according to the intelligence official's account. Some analysts who are less independent are willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the alarmist view coming from Cheney's office, but others have rejected that view.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IK10Ak01.html

jafar00
12-05-2007, 11:15 AM
I shudder think of the next excuse by Bush to push his sanctions through. The current sanctions should be lifted immediately!


There will be time when the world will push for sanctions against the USA.
That day is coming....


That gets me to thinking. Has the plane to the Hague taken off already? Bush and Cheney should have boarded that flight for their Crimes against Humanity trial.

lawless168
12-05-2007, 02:40 PM
You all can do your typical political bashing of one another. I'm going to have a beer or two and celebrate the fact that the USA will not be a war with Iran.

Cheers :peace:

ECW
12-05-2007, 03:39 PM
I shudder think of the next excuse by Bush to push his sanctions through. The current sanctions should be lifted immediately!


There will be time when the world will push for sanctions against the USA.
That day is coming....


That gets me to thinking. Has the plane to the Hague taken off already? Bush and Cheney should have boarded that flight for their Crimes against Humanity trial.


I hope they broadcast it on Court TV. I want to watch.

qwerty
12-05-2007, 03:42 PM
I shudder think of the next excuse by Bush to push his sanctions through. The current sanctions should be lifted immediately!


There will be time when the world will push for sanctions against the USA.
That day is coming....


Yes, just imagine the day when China stops borrowing money to USA...

:clapper:

AlanC
12-05-2007, 03:44 PM
Has anyone asked why they stopped in 2003?

I don't suppose us being in Iraq could have had any influence? Or maybe, they just became concerned about the environment?

ECW
12-05-2007, 03:46 PM
I shudder think of the next excuse by Bush to push his sanctions through. The current sanctions should be lifted immediately!


There will be time when the world will push for sanctions against the USA.
That day is coming....


Yes, just imagine the day when China stops borrowing money to USA...


And then they demand that we redeem the debt they bought. You think the housing crisis, the loss of our manufacturing base and job outsourcing shook up the economy. Just wait. It will look like WW3.

December
12-05-2007, 10:10 PM
Lily, why was my post deleted?

crimzonsol
12-05-2007, 11:20 PM
I don't suppose us being in Iraq could have had any influence?

No because that would mean that Bush did something right, which we all know is impossible.:rolleyes:

lily
12-06-2007, 12:23 AM
But this pressure on intelligence analysts, obviously instigated by Cheney himself, has not produced a draft estimate without those dissenting views, these sources say. The White House has now apparently decided to release the "unsatisfactory" draft NIE, but without making its key findings public.

If this is the version we're getting.......I can't imagine what they are keeping back. I watched that press conference the other day and Bush did not look good.[hr]
You all can do your typical political bashing of one another. I'm going to have a beer or two and celebrate the fact that the USA will not be a war with Iran.

Cheers :peace:



You do that Lawless........and while you are having that beer, think about what that report makes the United States look like and while you're thinking about that........think about how right it makes Ahmadinejad look, not only to his country.....where he is facing re-election, but to the rest of the world. Somehow he just doesn't look so crazy now. He may just get re-elected because of this.
[hr]
Lily, why was my post deleted?


December, we do not delete posts. Your post was moved to Fools Paradise because it was off topic. You insert this silly stuff that has nothing to do with anything anyone is discussing.

ECW
12-06-2007, 06:39 PM
Has anyone asked why they stopped in 2003?

I don't suppose us being in Iraq could have had any influence? Or maybe, they just became concerned about the environment?


A serious answer to your question, if I may.

The Iranians stopped in 2003 under pressure from the European community. Their economy is very dependent on trade with the EU because we have banned all trade with them. If you have to listen to someone, you will listen to your trading partners before you will listen to the saber-rattling of your enemies. When they realized they would have much less trouble acquiring the technology to make electricity from uranium than to make weapons from uranium, they went for the easy one knowing they could use that to make the weapons part later if they needed/wanted to.

The US has very little influence over Iran. Militarily, it is a suicide mission to attack them while still in Iraq and Afghanistan. They know that. So, while our hands are tied, they are proceeding with their "peaceful" nuclear program.

AlanC
12-06-2007, 06:56 PM
ECW,

I don't disagree with most of what you said. However, it points out the fact that it is Euorpe most at risk of Iran and I think most of the pressure even now comes from there, not the US.

But in line with this, I made this post on another thread about the same thing.

I know everyone is enjoying their new round of Bush bashing and the press is having some of the best time of all. But there is one man you all should be paying more attention to. His name is Deputy Director of Analysis Thomas Fingar.

Just last June Fingar gave this testimony, under oath, to the House Armed Services Committee:

Iran and North Korea are the states of most concern to us. The United States’ concerns about Iran are shared by many nations, including many of Iran’s neighbors. Iran is continuing to pursue uranium enrichment and has shown more interest in protracting negotiations and working to delay and diminish the impact of UNSC sanctions than in reaching an acceptable diplomatic solution. We assess that Tehran is determined to develop nuclear weapons--despite its international obligations and international pressure. This is a grave concern to the other countries in the region whose security would be threatened should Iran acquire nuclear weapons.

Link to Fingar story (http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2007/12/nie_an_abrupt_aboutface.asp)

Now this would not be remarkable except for the fact that Fingar is one of the three people responsible for publishing the NIE.

So, shouldn’t that raise the issue of Fingar. Did he commit deliberate perjury under oath in June, or is he somehow falsifying the NIE or did things change that dramatically in just 4 months?

The other issue is this admission that they had a nuclear weapons program in 2003. How far along was it when they stopped? Can it be reconstituted immediately or over time? Does this “stoppage” have any real effect on their over all plans to develop these weapons?

Without answers to some of these questions, it seems that the NIE report really changes nothing.

Oh and did I mention, it seems that Fingar has been someone openly opposed to and critical of Bush. Seems unlikely he would be committing perjury on his behalf

link (http://www.nysun.com/article/67479)[hr]I think Iran is as dangerous today as they were in 2003, maybe more so. I don't agree that we need a military solution yet and when we do, I think it is Europe that needs to bear the brunt of this one.