The United States now believes that Iran has amassed enough uranium that with further purification could be used to build an atomic bomb, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff declared Sunday.
The statement by the chairman, Adm. Mike Mullen, went further than previous, official judgments of the Iranian nuclear threat, and it essentially confirmed a new report by the United Nations nuclear watchdog agency, which found that Iran had enough nuclear material for a bomb.
“We think they do, quite frankly,” Admiral Mullen said on “State of the Union” on CNN. “And Iran having a nuclear weapon, I’ve believed for a long time, is a very, very bad outcome for the region and for the world.”
It’s so very puzzling to me how insouciant people are about this these days. Back when it was Reagan and Thatcher with nukes, we had huge demonstrations with much wailing and gnashing of teeth over the imminent demise of the world in a blinding flash at their hands. Now that it’s guys like Kim Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmonnajihad promising a heapin’ helpin’ of isotope surprise for dessert, these folks couldn’t care less.
Jeffersonian,
I recently finished reading the autobiography of Marcus Wolf, the former head of the East German Stassi. He stated that the peace movement in Europe was funded by the communists (often without the knowledge of those in the movements). Perhaps that is the answer to your question.
For my part, I am glad that I do not live in a major urban center or in the immediate down wind range. It is just a matter of time now. When Atlanta, Tampa, Los Angeles, New York or Chicago is radioactive, perhaps we will become concerned.
A – That would explain a lot.
B – I think folks in those towns will get warning when Tel Aviv goes up in a flash. The jihadi that takes down the Zionist Entity is going to be the de facto leader of the Islamic world, and Iran is just aching to be that jihadi.
In partial answer to #1, my analysis is that the large-scale, “Mutually Assured Destruction”-style nuclear exchange that was hanging in the air during the Cold War — a nuclear exchance with real potential to be a civilization-destroyer — is now much less likely since the Cold War ended. In fact, almost impossible.
But while nuclear destruction in wholesale is pretty much off the table, in “retail” it’s significantly more likely. Terrorists might manage to set off a nuke somewhere, or a rogue state like Iran or North Korea might launch a handful; this is a real threat, far more so than during the Cold War. But while it would certainly be bad if it happened, it’s not the End Of The World As We Know It. In comparison to the world of MAD that I grew up in, the possibility of the odd nuke here or there just isn’t the same order of magnitude.
That doesn’t mean we should be careless, of course. But neither should we let the word “nuclear” scare us more than is actually warranted by the threat.
I suppose Jefferson thinks that if NK and Iran were to attack the US, we’d kind of take it politely. He doesn’t understand that it’s not in their interest to attack the US first.
However, I believe that we have always said that we have the right to attack first with a nuclear weapon. Which means that NK and IRan should quake in their boots. From their self-interest, having a weapon is smart policy. We’ve written them off as insane, anyways.
#5: Read carefully, John: Jefferson said ‘Tel Aviv’, which can be reached by an Iranian-supplied rocket from Gaza.
John,
Imagine this scenario (which I think is not impossible)
1. Iran launches against the Zionist Oppressors and nukes Tel Aviv and large sections of Israel.
2. Israel responds with nukes of her own.
3. Pakistan gets involved.
4. India launches a pre-emptive strike against Pakistan.
5. China uses the crisis to either isolate Taiwan or to attack the US directly.
6. The US (of course) responds.
Neither Iran nor North Korea are rational actors. North Korea may be the less irrational of the two and I think it unlikely that they will launch against the US (South Korea or Japan is a different matter). Iran, however, is run by a religious madman who wants to see the end of the world.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
Phil,
I think the key sentence you make is “Neither Iran nor North Korea are rational actors.” I’m not sure how we verify this claim. Individuals are mad; states are different. You seem to have inside information.
Who is the madman who runs Iran? The president? Or the ayatollah? The ayatollah has stated that they do not want nuclear weapons. He does, however consider the US government psychotic and that we want to spread hollywood….
As an objective observer, if I were an Iranian state and considered the US psychotic, I might arm myself.
But there is little real evidence that the government of Iran will start a war with Israel. There is plenty of evidence that Iran wants to be the major player in the Islamic world.
NK is a bit crazier, and will continue to get crazier because there will is little leadership.