COL Gene COL Gene

NIE Report Says Iran Stopped Nuclear Program in 2003!

▼

NIE Report Says Iran Stopped Nuclear Program in 2003!

from JoeUser Forums



Bush has been telling the world we must stop Iran from going nuclear and our intelligence agencies say they ended their nuclear program in 2003. Last month Bush was warning about the grave danger from Iran and talking about WW III. The conclusions of our intelligence agencies and the Bush rhetoric are not in agreement. What does Bush say about the latest Intelligence that has been made public? He says it shows we are in danger from Iran.

There is something very wrong with Bush. No matter what the intelligence or facts are make no difference to Bush. He comes out with the same line. It is time Congress make it clear to Bush he can not attack Iran without a declaration of war against Iran by Congress! This man is dangerous!
politics
33,027 views 113 replies
Reply #26 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: Island DogPosted: Wednesday, December 05, 2007
Bush should have sent our troops aginst those responsible for 9/11 and that is NOT IRAQ
The people who were behind Sept. 11 have mostly been killed or captured.


Al-Qaeda is alive and well in Afghanistan. The situation in that country is not good and after 6 years of fighting we have not destroyed Al-Qaeda. The Commandant of the Marine Corps wants to pull the 20,000 Marines from Iraq and send them to Afghanistan. The Army CoS wants to reduce the tours in Iraq which would mean cutting the force levels. Only Bush prevents these things from taking place. It is time that Congress require this with the funding restrictions in the DoD funding!

I don't this "report" is any reason to start believing Iran is not a threat. But then again what do you care, it's just something else for you to complain about.


It is EVERY reason to believe Iran is not the nuclear threat Bush warned about. It is another Mushroom Cloud threat like the Iraq WMD.
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top
Stratfor Geopolitical Intelligence Report George Friedman


The United States released a new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Dec. 3. It said, "We judge with high confidence that in the fall of 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program." It went on to say, "Tehran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005." It further said, "Our assessment that Iran halted the program in 2003 primarily in response to international pressure indicates Tehran's decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic and military costs."

With this announcement, the dynamics of the Middle Eastern region, Iraq and U.S.-Iranian relations shift dramatically. For one thing, the probability of a unilateral strike against Iranian nuclear targets is gone. Since there is no Iranian nuclear weapons program, there is no rationale for a strike. Moreover, if Iran is not engaged in weapons production, then a broader air campaign designed to destabilize the Iranian regime has no foundation either.

The NIE release represents a transformation of U.S. policy toward Iran. The Bush administration made Iran's nuclear weapons program the main reason for its attempt to create an international coalition against Iran, on the premise that a nuclear-armed Iran was unacceptable. If there is no Iranian nuclear program, then what is the rationale for the coalition? Moreover, what is the logic of resisting Iran's efforts in Iraq, rather than cooperating?
Elemental: Reforged
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top
Al-Qaeda is alive and well in Afghanistan. The situation in that country is not good and after 6 years of fighting we have not destroyed Al-Qaeda.
End of quote


When is the last time you have been to Afghanistan?


The NIE release represents a transformation of U.S. policy toward Iran.
End of quote


As i said, this NIE is not the end case with Iran, no matter how many bolds and underlines you use.
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: Island DogPosted: Wednesday, December 05, 2007
Al-Qaeda is alive and well in Afghanistan. The situation in that country is not good and after 6 years of fighting we have not destroyed Al-Qaeda.
When is the last time you have been to Afghanistan?


I do not have to go to Afghanistan. I listen to what our military leaders are saying and watch the national news. If you are saying that the war in Afghanistan is not getting worse you do not know what you are talking about. Why would the Commandant of the Marine Corps want to send the 20,000 Marines in Anbar in Iraq to Afghanistan if the war was going well?

U.S. Notes Limited Progress in Afghan War
Strategic Goals Unmet, White House Concludes

By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 25, 2007; Page A01

A White House assessment of the war in Afghanistan has concluded that wide-ranging strategic goals that the Bush administration set for 2007 have not been met, even as U.S. and NATO forces have scored significant combat successes against resurgent Taliban fighters, according to U.S. officials.
Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top
Iran had to stop working on their bomb. because they had no way of getting their bomb to its target. the method they have chosen to deliver it is rockets. they are still working on their rocket program. thus when they have their rocket they will go back to their weapon if we don't make them stop all together.


also who you going to blame when the Iranians do attack someone in the next 5 years.


one more thing. Iran is providing weapons to the taliban.
Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top
As usual gene you paint the worst picture just to try and prove your point, which you never do.  If you want to believe everything from the news, well then....

And all of this political and diplomatic activity is making a difference where it matters most -- in Afghanistan:

--Six years after the U.S. led the world into Afghanistan, 26 million Afghans are free from the medieval Taliban.

--U.S. and coalition troops are clearing away what has been called "a devil's garden" of minefields in Afghanistan, paving the way toward one of the greatest reverse Diasporas in history. More than 4.6 million Afghan refugees have returned home since 2001.

--Some 5 million Afghan children are now in school -- about 1.8 million of them are girls.

--Afghan President Hamid Karzai reports that no less than 135,000 children under the age of five are alive today because of the U.S.-led liberation.
End of quote




Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top
So this NIE is gospel? Just like all the previous NIE's?
Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top
I'll never understand the inner workings of Col gene's mind. Leave it to him to think that because a report suggest that Iran has not pursued nukes in 4 years that they somehow have become good citizens of this world. I guess the chanting of death to Israel, the pursuit of nuclear energy and the death of American soldiers due to their guards involving themselves in a war that is not theirs doesn't count.

Way to go champ.
Reply #34 from JoeUser Forums Top
gene doesn't care what a report says as long as he has something to use against bush.
Reply #35 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: danielostPosted: Wednesday, December 05, 2007Iran had to stop working on their bomb. because they had no way of getting their bomb to its target. the method they have chosen to deliver it is rockets. they are still working on their rocket program. thus when they have their rocket they will go back to their weapon if we don't make them stop all together. also who you going to blame when the Iranians do attack someone in the next 5 years.one more thing. Iran is providing weapons to the taliban.


Any number of countries could attack someone in the next 5 years. The issue here is that Bush said Iran was a danger because of their development of nuclear weapons. Therefore if they are not doing that the danger Bush warned against DOES NOT EXIST!
Reply #36 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: danielostPosted: Wednesday, December 05, 2007gene doesn't care what a report says as long as he has something to use against bush.


I did not write the report however it contradicts what Bush has been saying and he was told about this change in August! It is another example of how Bush IGNORES and information that does not agree with what he wants. It is just like the Intel that did not support the WMD in Iraq. Bush only listened to the Intel he thought supported his position and ignored anything that said there was no WMD. The Intel that Bush Ignored was CORRECT and what Bush used was WRONG!
Reply #37 from JoeUser Forums Top
or they can now make the bomb and are just waiting for the rocket ability to get it to isreal.
Reply #38 from JoeUser Forums Top
The Intel that Bush Ignored was CORRECT and what Bush used was WRONG!
End of quote


then the intel that bush was using over the last 4 years was correct and bush was right.
Reply #39 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: Island DogPosted: Wednesday, December 05, 2007As usual gene you paint the worst picture just to try and prove your point, which you never do. If you want to believe everything from the news, well then....
And all of this political and diplomatic activity is making a difference where it matters most -- in Afghanistan:--Six years after the U.S. led the world into Afghanistan, 26 million Afghans are free from the medieval Taliban.--U.S. and coalition troops are clearing away what has been called "a devil's garden" of minefields in Afghanistan, paving the way toward one of the greatest reverse Diasporas in history. More than 4.6 million Afghan refugees have returned home since 2001.--Some 5 million Afghan children are now in school -- about 1.8 million of them are girls.--Afghan President Hamid Karzai reports that no less than 135,000 children under the age of five are alive today because of the U.S.-led liberation.


This is the same government that wanted to put to DEATH the man who converted from Islam to Christianity. This is the country that produces over 90% of the WORLDS Opium. This is the country where Al-Qaeda is operating at the same levels as on 9/11. All that after six years of fighting. This is the place where Ben Laden and his deputy are still free. WHY does the Marine Corps Commandant want to send 20,000 troops there?
Reply #40 from JoeUser Forums Top
Hey Colonel, put on your uniform, fly to Iran and go tell Ahmadinejad how much you admire and trust him. After all, if he is no threat to us... ;~D
Reply #41 from JoeUser Forums Top
This is the place where Ben Laden and his deputy are still free.
End of quote


you talking Afghanistan or Pakistan. last i heard he was in Pakistan and the Pakistan army was kicking their butts.
Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top
Al-Qaeda is alive and well in Afghanistan. The situation in that country is not good and after 6 years of fighting we have not destroyed Al-Qaeda.
End of quote


That is quite mis-information Gene.

Al-Qaeda was definetly crippled because of both the invasion of Afghanistan and efficient intelligence work worldwide. Except in Iraq, Al-Qaeda has changed methods and is now rebuilding/recovering.

It's the Talibans who are alive and well in Afghanistan, which is only part-time allies of Al-Qaeda, but not the same kind of menace than an international terrorist organisation.
Reply #43 from JoeUser Forums Top


Aha! Just as I suspected! ;~D
Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: ParaTed2kPosted: Wednesday, December 05, 2007Hey Colonel, put on your uniform, fly to Iran and go tell Ahmadinejad how much you admire and trust him. After all, if he is no threat to us... ;~D


Why don't you join Bush and Cheney and strap on a 45's and go to Iran and remove Ahmadinejad from power. Arrest him and take him to Guantanamo. You are such an ASS!!!!!!!
Reply #45 from JoeUser Forums Top
so gene i guess you agree with iran that the holocaust didn't happen. you agree with them that they are not making nuke weapons. just researching civilian use of nuke power which just happens to be the same research to make weapons with.
Reply #46 from JoeUser Forums Top
gene you appear to be pro anyone who is anti bush.

this makes you

pro irainian

pro taliban

pro alquida

pro terriosts that are anti bush.


which also means that your anti anyone who is pro bush.

making you

anti republican

anti military(yes i am aware that some in the military is anti bush.)

anti the majority of people who voted for bush in the last election.(those who voted)

Reply #47 from JoeUser Forums Top
What President would simply let Iran off the hook by saying OK, you guys are no problem?
End of quote


clinton either of them.
Reply #48 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: danielostPosted: Thursday, December 06, 2007so gene i guess you agree with iran that the holocaust didn't happen. you agree with them that they are not making nuke weapons. just researching civilian use of nuke power which just happens to be the same research to make weapons with.


I accept the NIE which says Iran STOPPED their Nuclear Weapons Program in 2003. That means they do not pose a real danger today and what took place before 2003 in not important. I know the holocaust took place and if the people of Iran want a new leader that would be great. What I DO NOT WANT IS Bush sending any of our troops into another unjustified war. They have the right to provide enriched Uranium for power generation and I would like to have the IAEA monitor Iran in the future to make sure that is all they do.

The issue is that Bush does not use available intelligence to develop policy. He makes up his mind and then Ignores ANY and ALL Intel that does not support what he wants to do. That is what he did in Iraq and he is trying that same thing in Iran. He will not get away with that this time!
Reply #49 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: danielostPosted: Thursday, December 06, 2007gene you appear to be pro anyone who is anti bush.


No I see Bush for what HE is- An Arrogant, Incompetent and Dangerous President.
Reply #50 from JoeUser Forums Top
What I DO NOT WANT IS Bush sending any of our troops into another unjustified war.
End of quote


these people are attack us directly and indirectly as we speak. i dont want to hear about if we werent in iraq because we are