Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Tue 08/02/2005 View Mon 08/01/2005 View Sun 07/31/2005 View Sat 07/30/2005 View Fri 07/29/2005 View Thu 07/28/2005 View Wed 07/27/2005
1
2005-08-02 Syria-Lebanon-Iran
NIE Review Finds Iran Far From Nuclear Bomb
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Steve White 2005-08-02 00:32|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [11134 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 We begin bombing in five minutes.
Posted by Raj Reagan 2005-08-02 01:10||   2005-08-02 01:10|| Front Page Top

#2 The people who did the NIE are gun shy. They were wrong before. Now they are super careful. Is this wrong?
Posted by Sock Puppet 0’ Doom 2005-08-02 01:13||   2005-08-02 01:13|| Front Page Top

#3 Editor note: This article was MUCH longer when I put the rest of it on Page 49. But p. 49 seems to have gone away. Sorry, Steve!
Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious  2005-08-02 01:46||   2005-08-02 01:46|| Front Page Top

#4 Sock Puppet, I think you're right, though perhaps it's not just the Iraq NIE that is relevant background. Many -- most? -- intelligence estimates are wrong, which is why they're called estimates. Of course they have to write something down and hand it in at some point, but I would think after the UNSCOM episode (discovering Iraq was far ahead of estimate timetables and pursuing a much broader program than assessed) and then the AQ Khan episode (which potentially placed all proliferators far ahead of conventional timetables) the hedging on this particular item would be high as a t-wall in the Green Zone.

One great failure of the administration in connection with the Iraq war and associated intelligence -- and directly in connection with the pre-emption tactic -- has been not to educate. Intelligence is unavoidably flawed and limited. Down-side surprises are harmless, but in matters of WMD and terrorism, up-side surprises are potentially catastrophic and therefore unacceptable.

Thus, one must make judgements based on unavoidably flawed intel to cover the up-side surprises. Pre-emption is the chief tactic to achieve this prudent coverage. Simple common sense -- though each judgement call can go either way, and be horribly difficult.

Tenet and others were urged to educate the public and shape the debate into an intelligent discussion, but clearly opted not to do so. Too bad.
Posted by Verlaine in Iraq 2005-08-02 02:18||   2005-08-02 02:18|| Front Page Top

#5 For me, Iran being a major supp of revolutionary Islam and Internat Terror is, by itself, a reason for mil action, regardless of whether it actually has a nuke bomb. Internat Terror is a diversified coalition, a congregate of collusory cells, persons, networks/orgs, and State govts - Dubya is absolutely correct in going after Govts that supp terror.
Posted by JosephMendiola 2005-08-02 02:40||   2005-08-02 02:40|| Front Page Top

#6 a quick google of Dafna Linzer shows she is an avid Bush blamer.
Posted by 2b 2005-08-02 03:22||   2005-08-02 03:22|| Front Page Top

#7 Iran is about a decade away from manufacturing the key ingredient for a nuclear weapon,

And if Russia or China or NORK or whoever sells it to them, then where are they in the process of designing and using a nuclear weapon?
Posted by Spemble Achrinatus9967 2005-08-02 06:39||   2005-08-02 06:39|| Front Page Top

#8 Tenet and others were urged to educate the public and shape the debate into an intelligent discussion, but clearly opted not to do so. Too bad.

It would have gotten in the way of their anonymous leaks to the press.
Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford  2005-08-02 07:25|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/]  2005-08-02 07:25|| Front Page Top

#9 The thing we've discovered is that the only way to discover the truth (and thus more closely correlate intel estimates to reality) is to invade the country and let the troops examine the evidence.
Posted by trailing wife 2005-08-02 08:06||   2005-08-02 08:06|| Front Page Top

#10 That's what they said about the USSR in the late 40s. Didn't turn out that way.

Posted by Jackal">Jackal  2005-08-02 09:08|| home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html]">[home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html]  2005-08-02 09:08|| Front Page Top

#11 And the USSR was 10 years away from having a nuclear bomb in 1948, but detonated their first in 1949.
Posted by Glenmore">Glenmore  2005-08-02 09:18||   2005-08-02 09:18|| Front Page Top

#12 Oops, I stepped on you, Jackal. Great minds think alike?
Posted by Glenmore">Glenmore  2005-08-02 09:19||   2005-08-02 09:19|| Front Page Top

#13 Khan's Grandfather. Runs in the family.
Posted by Phumble Ebbomotch4624 2005-08-02 09:27||   2005-08-02 09:27|| Front Page Top

#14 Perhaps the only organization in the Federal government more dysfunctional than NASA is the CIA. These guys should look at what the military did after Vietnam to reconstitute itself as the world's premier military organization. It wasn't easy or quick, think Desert One and the fiasco at Grenada. But they stuck with it and it paid off. Go Goss, Go!
Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-08-02 09:44||   2005-08-02 09:44|| Front Page Top

#15 A Journalist who may or may not have her own agenda has not read the report. I assume it's highly classified. She interviews a few people willing to leak talk who may or may not have their own agendas. An Editor who may or may not have an agenda puts a headline on the article. But the writer is able to state with certainty that the Bush Administration who have access to this an all previous reports have their own Agenda. Sigh. The truth is out there somewhere.
Posted by john">john  2005-08-02 10:29||   2005-08-02 10:29|| Front Page Top

#16 Administration officials have asserted, but have not offered proof

As contrasted with your three leaking sources who brought us the flawed estimates highlighted above. Do your sources have proof, sweetheart? Wodda dope!

Hey! Isn't this Valerie's secret section? Maybe she's leaking classified information to get back at Bush? Or Wilson is making up stuff as he goes along? Sheesh!
Posted by Bobby 2005-08-02 11:05||   2005-08-02 11:05|| Front Page Top

#17 Now wait a moment, this finding has instant credibility because it was based upon a "consensus" of idiots (I mean intelligence experts).

The wacky WaPo always goes for the consensus, meaning that all those with foresight are automatically ruled out.
Posted by Captain America 2005-08-02 12:56||   2005-08-02 12:56|| Front Page Top

23:59 JosephMendiola
23:59 AgentProvocateur
23:54 Jackal
23:51 Bomb-a-rama
23:49 Mike
23:42 Red Lief
23:39 Bomb-a-rama
23:38 Sock Puppet 0’ Doom
23:35 JosephMendiola
23:34 JosephMendiola
23:27 AzCat
23:14 BigEd
23:11 Rafael
23:10 Ernest Brown
23:04 trailing wife
23:03 Captain America
22:48 BigEd
22:42 Rafael
22:41 Captain America
22:38 Raj
22:32 Zhang Fei
22:29 jn1
22:25 Robert Crawford
22:17 trailing wife
Merry-Go-Blog










Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com