PERSIAN PASSION
So, they do not have a nuclear weapons program after all.
What to make of the just released National Intelligence Estimate ("NIE" for the acronym-meisters) -- which states, with "high confidence", that Iran four years ago abandoned its plans to build a nuclear bomb and, with "moderate confidence," that the Iranian program remains "suspended" -- is the buzz in Washington (and elsewhere) today.
Here's my take.
I have "no confidence" that the Bush administration cares much about the new NIE. Upon its release, the Bushies engaged in their usual double talk and denial. The National Security Adviser said the NIE proves that the pressure of economic sanctions worked, which is odd, since the Iranian program ended in 2003, or before the sanctions were really ratcheted up. The Secretary of Defense said, in effect, so what, they (Iran) had one (a nuke weapons program) before and can start one again, especially given the program they now have in place for the development of nuclear energy. He neglected to note that the administration approves of the Iranian nuclear energy program -- bombs bother them but nuclear waste is just fine.
Not to be outdone, however, the President eclipsed his aides with the type of assessment of which only he is capable. He said "the NIE provides an opportunity for us to rally the international community . . . to pressure the Iranian regime to suspend its program"; he followed that up with the statement that the NIE means "nothing's changed."
Sometimes I think this guy is not living on the same planet as the rest of us. Unfortunately, however, he is the President and we already have a bomb (which he can launch), so we have to take him seriously, despite the ever present need this creates to engage in hand to hand combat with logic, the English language and empirical reality.
But enough about us. Really . . . what's up with this guy? And how dangerous is he? To begin, assuming the NIE is right, whatever it means we have to do, it cannot mean that we have to pressure Iran to suspend its nuclear weapons program. Because this, apparently, is what they already have done. If I were the Iranians, however, I'd be worried. Bush has a lot of trouble accepting "Yes " for an answer. No nukes! You'd think we won and Bush would graciously accept the victory. But "nothing's changed," according to W. This is crazy talk -- illogical, un-empirical, ill advised, and just plain stupid.
But it's also Bush's m.o. In the run up to the war in Iraq, as the weapons inspectors found no wmd and as the Iraquis issued their required report to the UN stating (quite accurately) that they then had no wmd, the President did not care. He said, in effect, that the Iraquis were lying (they weren't) and that he did not care what Hans Blix found (or did not find).
And he's doing it again. The NIE means "nothing's changed" because for him, it hasn't. We still must do today what we were doing yesterday, or pressure the Iranians to suspend their nuclear weapons program, even though there is no such program to suspend. Question: how precisely could Iran demonstrate future compliance with this latest demand? Answer: it can't, any more than Iraq could demonstrate compliance with the UN wmd mandates in late 2002 and early 2003. At least not to this guy.
Joe Biden recently said that if Bush bombs or goes to war against Iran, he (Biden) would move for impeachment. If I were Biden, I'd get the resolution ready. Because, "nothing's changed."
So, they do not have a nuclear weapons program after all.
What to make of the just released National Intelligence Estimate ("NIE" for the acronym-meisters) -- which states, with "high confidence", that Iran four years ago abandoned its plans to build a nuclear bomb and, with "moderate confidence," that the Iranian program remains "suspended" -- is the buzz in Washington (and elsewhere) today.
Here's my take.
I have "no confidence" that the Bush administration cares much about the new NIE. Upon its release, the Bushies engaged in their usual double talk and denial. The National Security Adviser said the NIE proves that the pressure of economic sanctions worked, which is odd, since the Iranian program ended in 2003, or before the sanctions were really ratcheted up. The Secretary of Defense said, in effect, so what, they (Iran) had one (a nuke weapons program) before and can start one again, especially given the program they now have in place for the development of nuclear energy. He neglected to note that the administration approves of the Iranian nuclear energy program -- bombs bother them but nuclear waste is just fine.
Not to be outdone, however, the President eclipsed his aides with the type of assessment of which only he is capable. He said "the NIE provides an opportunity for us to rally the international community . . . to pressure the Iranian regime to suspend its program"; he followed that up with the statement that the NIE means "nothing's changed."
Sometimes I think this guy is not living on the same planet as the rest of us. Unfortunately, however, he is the President and we already have a bomb (which he can launch), so we have to take him seriously, despite the ever present need this creates to engage in hand to hand combat with logic, the English language and empirical reality.
But enough about us. Really . . . what's up with this guy? And how dangerous is he? To begin, assuming the NIE is right, whatever it means we have to do, it cannot mean that we have to pressure Iran to suspend its nuclear weapons program. Because this, apparently, is what they already have done. If I were the Iranians, however, I'd be worried. Bush has a lot of trouble accepting "Yes " for an answer. No nukes! You'd think we won and Bush would graciously accept the victory. But "nothing's changed," according to W. This is crazy talk -- illogical, un-empirical, ill advised, and just plain stupid.
But it's also Bush's m.o. In the run up to the war in Iraq, as the weapons inspectors found no wmd and as the Iraquis issued their required report to the UN stating (quite accurately) that they then had no wmd, the President did not care. He said, in effect, that the Iraquis were lying (they weren't) and that he did not care what Hans Blix found (or did not find).
And he's doing it again. The NIE means "nothing's changed" because for him, it hasn't. We still must do today what we were doing yesterday, or pressure the Iranians to suspend their nuclear weapons program, even though there is no such program to suspend. Question: how precisely could Iran demonstrate future compliance with this latest demand? Answer: it can't, any more than Iraq could demonstrate compliance with the UN wmd mandates in late 2002 and early 2003. At least not to this guy.
Joe Biden recently said that if Bush bombs or goes to war against Iran, he (Biden) would move for impeachment. If I were Biden, I'd get the resolution ready. Because, "nothing's changed."
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment