PDA

View Full Version : General Politics 1992: Israeli member of parliament Netanyahu predicts Iran 3 to 5 yrs nuclear


Lightrise
09-16-2012, 06:48 AM
"1992: Israeli member of parliament Binyamin Netanyahu predicts that Iran was “3 to 5 years” from having a nuclear weapon.

1992: Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres predicts an Iranian nuclear warhead by 1999 to French TV.

1995: The New York Times quotes US and Israeli officials saying that Iran would have the bomb by 2000.

1998: Donald Rumsfeld tells Congress that Iran could have an
intercontinental ballistic missile that could hit the US by 2003."

A war with Iran would be crazy. I think Netanyahu has irritated so many people both in America and in Israel I expect his coalition to fall apart by Christmas.

RubberSponge
09-16-2012, 08:17 AM
A war with Iran would be crazy. I think Netanyahu has irritated so many people both in America and in Israel I expect his coalition to fall apart by Christmas.

Netanyahu is just doing what he always does. Using the U.S. to gain more power for himself. He really doesn't have much political competition in Israel, yet. But the sentiment is no doubt growing that Netanyahu is not leading the right course there.

This is what Haaretz has to say...
http://www.haaretz.com/business/israel-s-100-most-influential-people-this-jewish-year-the-monopolist-benjamin-netanyahu-1.465237
When he finds himself cornered, Netanyahu relies on old faithful: shining the spotlight on Iran. Blocking Iran's development of nuclear weapons is the centerpiece of Netanyahu's foreign policy, and the possibility of going to war puts the prime minister in full control of the agenda. Potential rivals Shelly Yacimovich and Yair Lapid are not authorities in such matters and appear woefully out of their depth when Bibi and Barak start beating the war drums.

Donger
09-16-2012, 09:54 AM
Meh. The fact remains that Iran is much, much closer now to having the ingredients of a physics package than they ever have been before. Undeniable and irrefutable.

mnchiefsguy
09-16-2012, 10:09 AM
Allowing a terrorist nation to have nuclear weapons is even crazier.

BWillie
09-16-2012, 02:47 PM
The war against Iran is unwinnable. If you go to war with them you are going to perpetuate Muslim anti american extremism and cost more American lives.

qabbaan
09-16-2012, 02:53 PM
The war against Iran is unwinnable. If you go to war with them you are going to perpetuate Muslim anti american extremism and cost more American lives.

You're going to make water wetter?

BucEyedPea
09-16-2012, 10:11 PM
Allowing a terrorist nation to have nuclear weapons is even crazier.

Why? Terrorism is guerilla warfare and works better in taking down a superpower. A nuke would just draw attention to them resulting in their being wiped out.

BucEyedPea
09-16-2012, 10:12 PM
Meh. The fact remains that Iran is much, much closer now to having the ingredients of a physics package than they ever have been before. Undeniable and irrefutable.

Nope—not all all irrefutable since there's no hard evidence. Bibi is a lying sack of you know what.

"Taking to the airwaves to make his case directly to the American public..." This takes the most arrogant chutzpah to do when polls show Americans wants even Afghanistan to end.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/17/us-iran-nuclear-netanyahu-idUSBRE88F06P20120917

FishingRod
09-17-2012, 10:02 AM
Lightrise

This is probably the best thing you have ever posted but you should have credited Scott Peterson of the Christian Science Monitor when you cut-n-pated it.

Direckshun
09-17-2012, 10:03 AM
Netanyahu is just doing what he always does. Using the U.S. to gain more power for himself. He really doesn't have much political competition in Israel, yet. But the sentiment is no doubt growing that Netanyahu is not leading the right course there.

Agreed.

La literatura
09-17-2012, 10:08 AM
Why? Terrorism is guerilla warfare and works better in taking down a superpower. A nuke would just draw attention to them resulting in their being wiped out.

We've never had a nation like Iran have a nuke. The closest thing we have is Pakistan, which is a scary enough thought itself. You can't say you know how a terrorist-supporting, rouge nation will operate with nuclear weapons because we've never known it. I'd rather destroy Iran's capabilities than find out firsthand.

Donger
09-17-2012, 10:11 AM
Nope—not all all irrefutable since there's no hard evidence. Bibi is a lying sack of you know what.

As usual on this subject, you are wrong. IAEA has confirmed that Iran has and is enriching to 20%. Iran also admits it.

KILLER_CLOWN
09-17-2012, 10:21 AM
As usual on this subject, you are wrong. IAEA has confirmed that Iran has and is enriching to 20%. Iran also admits it.

20%? Isn't that for medical Isotopes? Isn't 90% enrichment required for Weapons grade?

patteeu
09-17-2012, 10:24 AM
This warning isn't as far fetched as it might seem. In the late 80s or early 90s, Pakistan's godfather of nuclear proliferation, A.Q.Khan, started working with Iran on selling them a turnkey nuclear operation and, in fact, did supply some equipment and expertise. I can't remember how much progress was made or what caused the Iranians to abandon the effort, but it's certainly possible that Netanyahu's warning was accurate at the time. Fortunately, events intervened and the A.Q.Khan connection was severed.

Donger
09-17-2012, 10:25 AM
20%? Isn't that for medical Isotopes? Isn't 90% enrichment required for Weapons grade?

20% EU can be used in medical reactors, yes. It's also a necessary step in getting WG. They already have enough 20% to use in their medical reactor. Much more than enough, actually.

Lightrise
09-17-2012, 11:55 AM
Lightrise

This is probably the best thing you have ever posted but you should have credited Scott Peterson of the Christian Science Monitor when you cut-n-pated it.

That's not where I came across it but your point is of course important. Thank you for filling in the blanks from the source where you and obviously thousands of others learned this too.

Direckshun
09-17-2012, 12:25 PM
20% EU can be used in medical reactors, yes. It's also a necessary step in getting WG. They already have enough 20% to use in their medical reactor. Much more than enough, actually.

Interesting...

FishingRod
09-17-2012, 02:02 PM
Partially because I like to be a little contrarian and to add a little historical perspective to our airtight intelligence agencies. I do believe the US was Surprised when the USSR, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea first tested their bombs.

patteeu
09-17-2012, 03:05 PM
Partially because I like to be a little contrarian and to add a little historical perspective to our airtight intelligence agencies. I do believe the US was Surprised when the USSR, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea first tested their bombs.

And when we found out how close Saddam was to getting a nuke after the first gulf war (which, in turn, colored the thinking of our intel agencies wrt intel gathered in advance of the second war).