Well, I give Drudge credit for not using a red font for the headline--that's showing unusual retraint!
Do I believe the claim made by [http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000100&sid=aduNTcpDuDd4&refer=germany|an April 12, 2006 article] at Bloomberg.Com is accurate? Who cares? Not Bush, that's for sure.
Once again we're rushing into a war that we are not ready for and have, once again, not thought through. But does it matter what I think? What does it matter what you think? It doesn't. All that matters is what Bush thinks.
Is Iran seriously this close to a nuke weapon? I doubt it. Everything I've read up until now has said it's going to be several years--5 to 10 in most estimates--even American ones. That's what's odd about this article is that all of the sudden, Iran is very close to a nuke weapon. This is very sudden and I'm pretty sure, based on our experiences in Iraq, that US intelligence sources should not be trusted. Here's what the Bloomberg.com article says:
Iran, defying United Nations Security Council demands to halt its nuclear program, may be capable of making a nuclear bomb within 16 days, a U.S. State Department official said.
Iran will move to ``industrial scale'' uranium enrichment involving 54,000 centrifuges at its Natanz plant, the Associated Press quoted deputy nuclear chief Mohammad Saeedi as telling state-run television today.
``Using those 50,000 centrifuges they could produce enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 16 days,'' Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, told reporters today in Moscow.
Yeah and Sadam had WMD, too.
Why should we trust anything the USG says, regardless of whether it's pro or con an Iran Attack?
In the end, I'm not sure what to think about Iran, but I know I don't trust the USG.
No comments:
Post a Comment