Iran Agrees to Draft of Deal on Exporting Nuclear Fuel

This will make the neo cons heads explode. Is this the framework for a deal, or is it posturing?

Peacenik recalls the weapons inspectors in Iraq prior to the Iraq war. Every time they asked for more access they were given it. But nothing could satisfy the U.S. or the neo cons. A balsa model plane was held up as a threat to the U.S. It will be curious to see how this proceeds. But remember. Lots of people want failure. And success will be redefined as failure. Watch the goal posts as they get moved.

By DAVID E. SANGER
Published: October 21, 2009

Herwig Prammer /Reuters

Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the I.A.E.A., spoke to journalists in Vienna on Wednesday.

VIENNA — The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said Wednesday that Iranian negotiators had agreed to a draft of an agreement to ship much of its stockpile of nuclear fuel to Russia, but cautioned that it would have to be approved by Friday in both Tehran and Washington.

The draft, which came after three days of talks here between Iran, the United States, France and Russia, fills in the details of an agreement in principle made on Oct. 1 following a preliminary round of negotiations.

Read on...

Leaving Israel With No Choice?

So Iran has agreed to allow international inspection of its nuclear facilities. Problem solved. Whew. No more worries. That was close. Peacenik is relieved.

Except that the neo cons will never be satisfied. An opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal says Iran doesn't have the right to any nuclear technology. This article says Israel might not be satisfied with inspections. And of course the demonization of Iran's leaders will continue. Don't forget, Iraq allowed inspectors and look what happened to them. Should Peacenik be relieved? Are you?

By Michael Gerson
Friday, October 2, 2009

On June 7, 1981, Israeli F-15s and F-16s took off for the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq, after the pilots were emotionally briefed that "the alternative is our destruction." In fact, Prime Minister Menachem Begin had no idea whether the raid would stop the Iraqi nuclear program or merely slow it. But slowing it was reason enough.

Since the George W. Bush administration, the American military has estimated that an attack against Iran's nuclear facilities would only delay the development of its program. "The reality is," Defense Secretary Robert Gates said recently, "there is no military option that does anything more than buy time. The estimates are one to three years or so."

Read on...

It's Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran Time

This article is a very good summary of the anti-Iranian manipulation in the western media. The propaganda would be laughable if it wasn't so dangerous. Because there are some very dangerous neo-cons who really do want to bomb Iran.

And of course Obama continues to kowtow. Will the neocons be satisfied with stricter sanctions? They never are. And sanctions not supported by China, who gets oil from Iran, or by India, who exports gas to Iran, will fail. Peacenik wonders how the neo- cons will back down from their hysterical warmongering. Multilateral talks with Iran start today. Peacenik is hoping for some rational outcome.

by Pepe Escobar

The United States and Western "bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" crowd -- hysteria running at fever pitch ahead of Thursday's multilateral nuclear talks in Geneva -- could do worse than have a word with Brazilian President Luis Inacio Lula da Silva.

Lula actually talked to Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad face-to-face for over an hour on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly last week. He invited Ahmadinejad to visit Brazil in November. About the meeting, he went straight to the point, "What I wish for Iran is what I always wanted for Brazil -- a peaceful, civilian nuclear program."

Lula is an island of common sense in an ocean of hysteria. French President Nicolas Sarkozy publicly gave a December deadline for Iran not to make a "tragic mistake", as in provoking Armageddon. Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini reiterated the Group of Eight was giving Iran only three more months.

Read on...

U.S. Story on Iran Nuke Facility Doesn't Add Up

punditman says...It goes without saying that things are not always as they appear to be, especially when it comes to the byzantine world of US-Iranian relations. But for those naive enough to think the Obama administration does not play loose with the truth just like the Bush administration, punditman said it anyway. Try weeding your way through the article below, dear readers. It's dense. Has peacenik found a used bomb shelter yet?

Analysis by Gareth Porter

WASHINGTON, Sep 29 (IPS) - The story line that dominated media coverage of the second Iranian uranium enrichment facility last week was the official assertion that U.S. intelligence had caught Iran trying to conceal a "secret" nuclear facility.

But an analysis of the transcript of that briefing by senior administration officials that was the sole basis for the news stories and other evidence reveals damaging admissions, conflicts with the facts and unanswered questions that undermine its credibility.

Iran's notification to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of the second enrichment facility in a letter on Sep. 21 was buried deep in most of the news stories and explained as a response to being detected by U.S. intelligence. In reporting the story in that way, journalists were relying entirely on the testimony of "senior administration officials" who briefed them at the G20 summit in Pittsburgh Friday.

U.S. intelligence had "learned that the Iranians learned that the secrecy of the facility was compromised", one of the officials said, according to the White House transcript. The Iranians had informed the IAEA, he asserted, because "they came to believe that the value of the facility as a secret facility was no longer valid..."

Keep Reading...

Is the Media Exaggerating the Iranian Nuke Threat?

Peacenik doesn't know what the extent of Iran's nuclear facilities are. Peacenik suspects the facilities are exaggerated by the media. The media wants war. The neo cons want war. What happens when and if Iran allows IAEA inspection of it facilities. U.N. inspectors were given free reign in Iraq prior to the invasion of Iraq. They didn't find anything. But the revision of history is complete. Neo cons and the media say Iraq wouldn't allow inspections. Will Obama accept the veracity of IAEA inspections of Iran's facilities? Will the media? Will the neo cons? Will Don Cherry?

If Iran is open to U.N. inspections, it's probably not constructing nuclear weapons

by Juan Cole

Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, reaffirmed Monday that a date would soon be set for the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect the planned nuclear enrichment facility near Qom about which the Iranian government informed the IAEA on Monday a week ago.

If Iran really does permit full, ongoing IAEA inspections of the facility, then it cannot be used for weapons production. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton admitted Sunday that Iran cannot use the Natanz plant for bomb-making because it is being regularly inspected by the UN.

Read on...

Keeping Iran honest

punditman says...
Is Iran close to having nukes? Are they the new Soviets? Is it time for Peacenik to start looking for an old bomb shelter on Kijiji? You may think so if you've been taken in by the media's hype and half-truths regarding the current state of Iran's nuclear energy program and the apparent "discovery" of the Qom nuclear plant. But punditman says not so fast, doomers.

First, get the facts. Former weapons inspector Scott Ritter knows a thing or two about inspections regimes, their legal rigamarole and the politics that can accompany them. He saw the lies coming out of the US and Britain before the Iraq War was launched under false pretenses, and he sees what is happening now with regard to Iran. Says Ritter, "Simply put, Iran is no closer to producing a hypothetical nuclear weapon today than it was prior to Obama's announcement concerning the Qom facility." For instance, how many people reading this post know that Iran declared the Qom nuclear facility to the IAEA several days before Obama's announcement last week?

Punditman says forget the corporate media. They distort, deceive, dumb-down and deflect. Read Scott Ritter instead. Wait, the Guardian is corporate...Well, read on anyway...

Iran's secret nuclear plant will spark a new round of IAEA inspections and lead to a period of even greater transparency

It was very much a moment of high drama. Barack Obama, fresh from his history-making stint hosting the UN security council, took a break from his duties at the G20 economic summit in Pittsburgh to announce the existence of a secret, undeclared nuclear facility in Iran which was inconsistent with a peaceful nuclear programme, underscoring the president's conclusion that "Iran is breaking rules that all nations must follow".

Obama, backed by Gordon Brown and Nicolas Sarkozy, threatened tough sanctions against Iran if it did not fully comply with its obligations concerning the international monitoring of its nuclear programme, which at the present time is being defined by the US, Britain and France as requiring an immediate suspension of all nuclear-enrichment activity.

The facility in question, said to be located on a secret Iranian military installation outside of the holy city of Qom and capable of housing up to 3,000 centrifuges used to enrich uranium, had been monitored by the intelligence services of the US and other nations for some time. But it wasn't until Monday that the IAEA found out about its existence, based not on any intelligence "scoop" provided by the US, but rather Iran's own voluntary declaration. Iran's actions forced the hand of the US, leading to Obama's hurried press conference Friday morning.

Beware politically motivated hype. While on the surface, Obama's dramatic intervention seemed sound, the devil is always in the details. The "rules" Iran is accused of breaking are not vague, but rather spelled out in clear terms. In accordance with Article 42 of Iran's Safeguards Agreement, and Code 3.1 of the General Part of the Subsidiary Arrangements (also known as the "additional protocol") to that agreement, Iran is obliged to inform the IAEA of any decision to construct a facility which would house operational centrifuges, and to provide preliminary design information about that facility, even if nuclear material had not been introduced. This would initiate a process of complementary access and design verification inspections by the IAEA.

Keep Reading...

Can the US-Iran Talks Succeed?

Peacenik was working on a post about Iran this morning which concluded that a military strike against Iran was inevitable. Peacenik allowed the media hype to influence Peacenik. But Peacenik pressed a wrong key on Peacenik's keyboard and the post disappeared. This caused Peacenik to go back and read some more.

This Dreyfuss article seems to be a little more rational than the hysteria Peacenik was reading elsewhere. Nobody thinks a military strike is plausible except the neo cons in the U.S. and Israel. Supposedly the neo cons in the U.S. are in retreat after the Iraq and Ahghanistan fiasco. Or they should be. Do the neo cons have enough influence left to manipulate the U.S. into a shooting war with Iran? Peacenik doesn't think so. Peacenik hopes not. But they are trying hard. It's deja vu. The warmongers methods have worked before. Will they work again?

Posted by Robert Dreyfuss on 09/28/2009 @ 09:00am

The US-Iran talks start Thursday in Geneva and, while a lot of other countries will be there too -- the UK, France, Russia, China, and Germany are all part of the so-called P5 + 1 -- it's really the United States and Iran who will have to make a deal. Even the latest flareup over the secret Iranian enrichment facility doesn't change the basic fact: that Washington and Tehran, after three decades without diplomatic relations, will be talking. It's a startling and important reversal of US policy, as promised by candidate Barack Obama in 2008, abandoning the charged rhetoric of the Bush administration, which lumped Iran incongruously into the Axis of Evil in 2002 and looked aghast at the idea of negotiating with Iran.

Robert Gates, the secretary of defense, did his part yesterday to lower the temperature of the rhetoric by stating explicitly that the US does not have a military option to deal with Iran's nuclear program. He didn't exactly take the military option "off the table," as the unfortunate phrase goes, but he did say:

Read on...

Iran Said to Have Covert Nuclear Facility

Peacenik just watched Obama and Brown and Sarkozy get their shirts in a knot over Iran's "secret" nuclear facility. Looking grim they promised sanctions if Iran didn't stop doing whatever they say Iran is doing. By the way, the U.S., France, and U.K. have known about this facility for years.

Peacenik fears that as western leaders lose legitimacy they would like nothing better than heightened tensions with Iran in order to keep the sheeple terrified, and distracted from their own malfeasance. Who knows, they may even convince themselves that another war might be just the ticket. The neo cons in the U.S., highly placed neo cons in government and the media, have been openly advocating attacking Iran for years. If you were Iran, what would you do?

By DAVID E. SANGER and HELENE COOPER
Published: September 25, 2009

Richard Drew/Associated Press (left); Daniel Acker/Bloomberg

PITTSBURGH — President Obama and the leaders of Britain and France will accuse Iran Friday of building a secret underground plant to manufacture nuclear fuel, saying the country hid the covert operation from international weapons inspectors for years, according to senior administration officials.

The revelation, which the three leaders will make before the opening of the Group of 20 economic summit here, appears bound to add urgency to the diplomatic confrontation with Iran over its suspected ambitions to build a nuclear weapons capacity. Mr. Obama, along with Prime Minister Gordon Brown of Britain and President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, will demand that Iran allow the International Atomic Energy Agency to conduct an immediate inspection of the facility, which is said to be 100 miles southwest of Tehran.

Read on...

Iran War Drums Begin Beating in Washington

Peacenik must have missed the memo where the world agreed that Iran cannot have nuclear power, and the U.S. and or Israel have the responsibility to prevent Iran from having nuclear power. In fact Peacenik seems to recall the U.S. unilaterally disavowing the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

But the warmongers want their war and the fearmongering media is only too happy to play along. The U.S. has circled Iran. The U.S. has shown a willingness and desire to wage war. If you were Iran what would you do?

by Daniel Luban and Jim Lobe



WASHINGTON - As nuclear negotiations between Iran and the West continue to move slowly, U.S. President Barack Obama is coming under growing pressure from what appears to be a concerted lobbying and media campaign urging him to act more aggressively to stop Iran's nuclear program.

Obama has given Tehran an end-of-September deadline to respond substantively to his offer of diplomatic engagement. But already hawks in the U.S. – backed by hardline pro-Israel organizations – have pressed him to quickly impose "crippling" economic sanctions against Tehran, and some are arguing that he should make preparations for a military attack on Iranian nuclear facilities.

The pressure campaign kicked off in earnest this week. On Thursday, hundreds of leaders and activists from the U.S. Jewish community descended on Washington to lobby for harsher sanctions, while widely-publicised media reports suggested that Iran is already nearing the verge of a nuclear capability.

Read on...

Iran Nuclear 'Threat' Hyped: IAEA's ElBaradei

It will be curious to see how much attention ElBaradei gets in the U.S. mainstream media. Peacenik recalls he didn't get much attention in the runup to the Iraq war. That was when Bush et.al. were warning about mushroom clouds at a time when the Iraqi weapons programs were defunct. Any attention he does get will be derisive.

And of course Obama and his neocon buddies are threatening to play hardball (gasoline sanctions) if Iran doesn't stop their non-existent nuclear program. These guys are going to talk themselves into another war if they don't stop with all the posturing. The way things are going they may as well bring Cheney back into the administration ferchrissakes.

In an interview published on Tuesday, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei, pictured here in 2008, called the threat from Iran "hyped" and that there was no evidence that Tehran will soon have nuclear weapons. (AFP/File/Samuel Kubani)

VIENNA - Iran is not going to produce a nuclear weapon any time soon and the threat posed by its atomic program has been exaggerated, the U.N. nuclear watchdog chief said in a published interview.

The West suspects Iran wants to develop a nuclear weapons capability under the guise of a declared civilian atomic energy program. Tehran rejects the charge, saying its uranium enrichment program is a peaceful way to generate electricity.

Read on...

Clinton Threatens to Attack Iran ‘The Way That We Did’ Iraq

punditman says...Thanks Hilary. Is this the new beginning with the Muslim world that your boss Obama was calling for last week? Can someone tell punditman exactly what is going on inside the Obama cabinet when it comes to the middle east? Given the facts as they are known, any first strike on Iran would be based on lies, half-truths and distortions.

by Jason Ditz
http://news.antiwar.com

Citing the disastrous 2003 US invasion of Iraq as an example, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today warned that by continuing to refuse to abandon its civilian nuclear program, Iran was risking the possibility of an invasion by the US or “some other enemy that would do that to them.”

The comments came during an interview on ABC’s “This Week” program, and when asked by interviewer and former Clinton-era official George Stephanopoulus, Secretary Clinton reiterated “that’s right, as a first strike.”

The bulk of the interview emphasized US opposition to the Iranian program, along with unquestioned claims that the nation was pursuing nuclear weapons. Secretary Clinton also extended the American nuclear umbrella over Israel in the event that Iran attacked them.

Considering it was no more than 72 hours ago that President Obama made his historic call for a “new beginning” to US relations with the Muslim world, it seems incredible that his administration is already raising the prospect of an Iraq-style invasion of Iran.

Already six years in, the Iraq occupation has killed thousands of US soldiers, sucked trillions from the American economy, and is stretching the military to its limits. It is unfathomable that with this war still far from over, the Obama Administration is considering an Iraq redux in its larger neighbor to the east.

Barack Obama, Meet Team B

By Scott Ritter

President Obama received a lesson in international gamesmanship last week, when his secret offer to trade the deployment of a controversial missile defense system in Eastern Europe for Russian assistance in getting Iran to back down from its nuclear program was publicly rebuffed. The lesson? You don’t get something for nothing, especially when the something you’re looking for is, itself, nothing.

If the members of the Obama administration would bother to take a stroll down memory lane, they might recall that once upon a time there was a document called the anti-ballistic missile treaty, signed in 1972 between the United States and the former Soviet Union, which recognized that anti-missile defense shields were inherently destabilizing, and as such should not be deployed. The ABM treaty represented the foundational agreement for a series of strategic arms limitation and arms reduction agreements that followed. President Obama was 10 years old when that treaty was signed. He was 40 years old when President George W. Bush withdrew from it, in December 2001, and set in motion a series of events that saw arms control between the U.S. and Russia completely unravel. The proposed U.S. missile defense shield, to be deployed in Poland and the Czech Republic, had the Russians talking about scrapping the INF treaty (which eliminated two classes of nuclear-armed ballistic missiles that threatened Europe) and deploying highly accurate SS-21 “Iskander” missiles within striking range of the proposed Polish interceptor site.

Russia did not create the missile defense system crisis. The United States did, and, as such, cannot expect to suddenly receive diplomatic credit when it puts this controversial program on the foreign policy gaming table as if it were a legitimate chip to be bargained away.

Russia has always, correctly, claimed that any missile defense system deployed in Eastern Europe can only be directed at Russia.

Keep Reading...

punditman says...If there were real justice in the world, Scott Ritter would have been offered an important post in the Obama administration.

Report: Israel ‘Seriously Considering’ Attacking Iran

www.antiwar.com

Timeframe for Potential Attack Growing Shorter

A report issued today by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) warned that the Israeli government believes that it still retains the ability to destroy Iran’s nuclear program with a unilateral attack, and as the international community’s diplomatic path remains unsuccessful in stopping a weapons program or indeed proving that one exists, Israel is “seriously considering” attacking Iran.

The prospect of an attack is primarily in the near term, because the attack on Iran’s illusory secret nuclear weapons program would be seriously complicated by the prospect of the Iranian government acquiring an S-300 air defense system from Russia. Russia has repeatedly insisted that it doesn’t intend to give Iran the system, but the IAEA insists Iran doesn’t have the ability to make nuclear weapons either. The Israeli government is less interested in the reality of the situation than with what has been repeated over and over domestically: that Iran is an “existential” threat to Israel and has to be stopped with military force.

But the WINEP report points out that Israel isn’t the only one that stands to lose from such an attack: the US would pay an enormous penalty internationally because whether it is the case or not they will be perceived as having given Israel a green light for the attack.

punditman says...

Just when you thought the economy was the main problem in the world and were about to jump out of your basement apartment window as a result of all of Peacenik's doom mongering, Punditman urges you to pause and think. Consider that if you think we have problems now, imagine what an Israeli/Iran showdown would do to our current political and economic reality. In doing so, you will realize that these are indeed the good old days by comparison. In fact, Punditman always tries to look on the bright side of life, so he offers you the following link here and another here, as a means to act in the face of this potential global conflagration.

(Note: If you still decide to jump out of your basement apartment window, Punditman recommends you wear a ballistic vest so you don't scratch your torso as you take that quantum leap upwards).

Clinton: US Doesn’t Expect Diplomacy to Work With Iran

Iran Again Insists Charges About Nuclear Program Are Baseless

www.antiwar.com

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says she has serious doubts that Iran would respond to the Obama Administration’s interest to engage in diplomacy on its nuclear program, and that “our eyes are wide open on Iran.”

Secretary Clinton apparently did not believe that the Iranian President’s remarks during last month’s 30th anniversary of the Iranian revolution celebration that his nation was ready to talk with the United States constituted a response. Nor apparently did the numerous other times since President Obama’s elections in which the Iranian government spoke of its eagerness to improve relations.

But Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hassan Ghashghavi again told reporters that the repeated US claims that his government was attempting to make a nuclear weapon were “baseless remarks, even from the technical viewpoint, and just for political propaganda.”

The spokesman pointed to the fact that the latest accusations, made by Admiral Mullen, were immediately contradicted by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, adding that his government is neither capable nor willing to begin enriching uranium to the levels necessary to make nuclear weapons. The IAEA has repeatedly confirmed that the uranium enriched so far to only the low levels needed for its upcoming nuclear power plant has not been diverted to any other use.

punditman says...This type of rhetoric does not bode well. Let's hope that it is just posturing by the Obama/Clinton team and that they are actually seriously pursuing back channel contacts with Iran. The problem with this issue is that the level of propaganda is immense. Let's hope that it is mostly propaganda and that an Israeli-US/Iran showdown doesn't plunge the world into the abyss.

One More Time!

The Intelligence is Wrong

By TERRY LODGE

Iran has zero nuclear weapons capability! Worse still, for the Chicken Littles in the media and government, they don't intend to have nuclear weapons!

Federal officials are frothing over the disclosure by the International Atomic Energy Agency that Iran has underestimated the amount of low-level enriched uranium (LEU) it has produced. This is ignorant melodrama, replete with warnings from the State Department that certain unspecified measures must quickly be taken against Iran.

The IAEA says the underestimation of Iran’s production of LEU results from a technical measuring error, and that it has been carefully recorded with remote cameras installed to supervise the stockpile. If the Iranians intend to transport enriched uranium to a secret location for further processing, the IAEA's inspectors will find out immediately. Moreover, Iran has slowed down its uranium enrichment program.

Those plumping for another American war once again have their facts completely wrong when alleging threats of WMDs. Low-enriched uranium CANNOT be used in a nuclear bomb. LEU is 4% enriched, while weapons-grade highly-enriched uranium (HEU) must contain a 90% or greater concentration of uranium. Significant major further enrichment is required to have a nuclear weapon, which would require 2 to 5 years. Iran has not chosen that path, which requires construction of massive new centrifuge facilities that would be detectable by our satellites. Iran would have to buy centrifuges on the international black market, which the CIA would quickly discover if they chose divulge their intelligence.

The new Israeli government warmongers and its sycophants in the White House and Congress are ginning up for war against Iran which will destroy what's left of the global economy. It is being built on groundless speculation and lies and will be fought from the depths of the Second Great Depression, using our unemployed children.

Be forewarned.

Terry Lodge is an attorney in Toledo, Ohio. He can be reached at tjlodge50@yahoo.com.

Obama Administration Accuses Iran of Pursuing Nuclear Weapons

Accusations Show New Administration's Clean Break From Intelligence Estimate

www.antiwar.com

It has been 15 months since the release of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran which determined that the Iranian government had halted all efforts to create a nuclear weapon, and the outgoing chairman of the National Intelligence Council reaffirmed those findings only two months ago. The Obama Administration didn’t seem to read those reports, however.

President Obama accused Iran of “development of a nuclear weapon” during a press conference. Incoming CIA director Leon Panetta declared during his testimony that “I think there is no question that they are seeking that capability.”

While the Iranian government continues to express its desire to improve relations, Obama and associates just keep hurling accusations at Iran’s civilian nuclear program. There’s one thing the administration is missing though, and that’s evidence. Officials concede there is no evidence that undercuts the 2007 findings, but like the Bush Administration, the newcomers don’t seem to want fact to get in the way of good rhetoric.

punditman says...This does not surprise Punditman in the least; unlike a common assumption out there amongst the sheeple, there is no structural change in US foreign policy just because Obama is in charge.

So long as there is no fundamental change at the institutional level, it appears impossible for a US President to not huff and puff and threaten Iran. It's been going on since the CIA organized the overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mosaddeq and installed the Shaw in 1953.

Current tensions between the US and Iran are far from resolved and have the potential to become a very hot crisis. Or, the Obama administration can stop misleading the public and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton can save the day by taking Iranian overtures seriously and open a serious dialogue that could lead to detente.

What scenario is more likely, the former or the latter? Punditman is unsure but the former will make financial armageddon look like a picnic.

Attack on Iran Off the Table?

by Ray McGovern

On Sept. 23, the neo-conservative chiefs of the Washington Post's editorial page mourned, in a tone much like what one hears on the death of a close friend, that "a military strike by the United States or Israel [on Iran is not] likely in the coming months." One could almost hear a wistful sigh, as they complained that efforts to stop Iran's nuclear program has "slipped down Washington's list of priorities...as Iran races toward accumulating enough uranium for a bomb."

We are spared, this go-round, from "mushroom clouds." But racing to a bomb? Never mind that the 16 agencies of the U.S. intelligence community concluded in a formal National Intelligence Estimate last November that work on the nuclear weapons-related part of Iran's nuclear program was halted in mid-2003. And never mind that Thomas Fingar, National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell's deputy for national estimates, reiterated that judgment as recently as Sept. 4. Never mind that the Post's own Walter Pincus reported on Sept. 10 that Fingar added that Iran has not restarted its nuclear weapons work. Hey, the editorial fellows know best.

Read on...

Peacenik was feeling reassured by this article until the last section. The last section lays out why an attack may still happen and it sounds logical. Two weeks to go. Two weeks for Peacenik to hold his breath and hope the crazies don't do something crazy.

Iran Shows Its Cards

By Scott Ritter

There can no longer be any doubt about the consequences of any U.S. and/or Israeli military action against Iran. Armchair warriors, pundits and blustering politicians alike have been advocating a pre-emptive military strike against Iran for the purpose of neutralizing its nuclear-related infrastructure, as well as retarding Iran’s ability to train and equip “terrorist” forces on Iranian soil before dispatching them to Iraq or parts unknown. Some, including me, have warned of the folly of such action, and now Iran itself has demonstrated why an attack would be insane

I’ve always pointed out that no plan survives initial contact with the enemy, and furthermore one can never forget that, in war, the enemy gets to vote. On the issue of an American and/or Israeli attack on Iran, the Iranian military has demonstrated exactly how it would cast its vote. Iran recently fired off medium- and long-range missiles and rockets, in a clear demonstration of capability and intent. Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, regional oil production capability and U.S. military concentrations, along with Israeli cities, would all be subjected to an Iranian military response if Iran was attacked.

The Bush administration has shrugged off the Iranian military display as yet another example of how irresponsible the government in Tehran is. But the Pentagon for one has had to sit up and pay attention. For some time now, the admirals commanding the U.S. 5th Fleet in the Persian Gulf have maintained that they have the ability to keep the Strait of Hormuz open. But the fact is, the only way the United States could guarantee that the strait remained open would be to launch a massive pre-emptive military strike that swept the Iranian coast clear of the deadly Chinese-made surface-to-surface missiles that Iran would use to sink cargo ships in the strategic lane. This strike would involve hundreds of tactical aircraft backed up by limited ground action by Marines and U.S. Special Operations forces which would involve “boots on the ground” for several days, if not weeks. Such a strike is not envisioned in any “limited” military action being planned by the United States. But now that it is clear what the Iranian response would entail, there can no longer be any talk of a “limited” military attack on Iran.

The moment the United States makes a move to secure the Strait of Hormuz, Iran will unleash a massive bombardment of the military and industrial facilities of the United States and its allies, including the oil fields in Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. American military bases in Iraq and Kuwait, large—fixed and well known— would be smothered by rockets and missiles carrying deadly cluster bombs. The damage done would run into the hundreds of millions, if not into billions, of dollars, and hundreds, if not thousands, of U.S. military personnel would be killed and wounded.

Keep Reading...

punditman says...Back from vacation...and I see that my ignoring the world scene has done nothing. Looks like an Iran attack is still very much in the cards. Stay tuned, folks: it's going to be a tense ride heading into the Fall.

For an interview with Scott Ritter, courtesy of antiwar.com, check this out:

MP3 here. (47:29)

Attacking Iran? How Does $300 Oil Sound?

Robert Dreyfuss

The Nation -- Last week the Middle East Policy Council held an interesting and important discussion of what to do about Iran. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to attend it, but the MEPC has helpfully posted the transcript of that event. Led by the astute Chas Freeman, a former American ambassador to Saudi Arabia, the discussion was a very thoughtful effort to analyze the consequences of an American and/or Israeli attack on Iran. If you have the time, read it.

An important aspect of the idea of war with Iran is how it would be viewed by the Arab Gulf states and Iraq. Freeman, who is well connected in the Arab Gulf, made this rather scary point, which I haven't heard anywhere else:

Because logistics require cooperation from countries in the region, they cannot avoid a measure of complicity with a U.S. operation against Iran, and the word in the region is that Iran has already told Qatar, for example, that if there is such an attack, the Qatari regime is toast.

Qatar, of course, is where the U.S. Central Command has its local headquarters.

Keep Reading...

punditman says...Check out this map of the region as well as this one to see Quatar's North Dome natural gas field and the maritime border between Iran and Quatar.

'Hotline to Iran' Aims to Head Off War

Alison Raphael
OneWorld US

WASHINGTON, Jun 10 (OneWorld) - Members of Congress joined religious and civil society leaders today in an urgent call to stop the "drumbeat of war" with Iran and open up diplomatic talks to resolve growing tensions between Washington and Tehran.

At a previous 'hotline' event. © Campaign for a New American Policy on Iran

"We hear the same people who supported a disastrous war in Iraq now steadily beating the drum for war with Iran," said Congresswoman Barbara Lee, adding: "We have been down this road before."

Lee joined Reps. Ron Paul and Sheila Jackson Lee in a "Time to Talk to Iran" event on Capitol Hill, organized by the Campaign for a New American Policy on Iran (CNAPI), along with groups such as Physicians for Social Responsibility and the American Friends Service Committee.

The event featured 1960s-style red "hotline" telephones that enabled people to speak with ordinary citizens in Iran, including Washington, D.C. tourists attracted by the outdoors event.

Keep Reading...