White House brushes off CIA draft on Iran: report
Quote:
"The CIA found no conclusive evidence, as yet, of a secret Iranian nuclear weapons program running parallel to the civilian operations that Iran has declared to the International Atomic Energy Agency," according to the article.
Quote:
A current senior intelligence official confirmed the existence of the CIA analysis, and told me that the White House had been hostile to it," it said.
Quote:
"If the Democrats won on November 7th, the vice president said, that victory would not stop the administration from pursuing a military option with Iran," Hersh wrote, citing an unidentified source familiar with the discussion.
Seriously - hasn't this administration done enough damage? Have they learned nothing?
I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?
Heard this on NPR yesterday.
No, the administration will not have done enough until they relieve the american citizens of their basic human rights. </sarc>
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
I'm gonna relieve myself on the White /out house lawn.
Drone riots .... anyone ?
Russia and China both, lick Iran's anal cavity enough to make any administration think twice
about invasion, without pissin them off , they have billions invested with each other.
Of course we are talking the Bushwacker administration here, so who knows
what'll happen tomorrow .. start collecting your pots and pans.
Quote:
"The CIA found no conclusive evidence, as yet, of a secret Iranian nuclear weapons program running parallel to the civilian operations that Iran has declared to the International Atomic Energy Agency," according to the article.
Iraq had no WMD's either... invasion?
Quote:
A current senior intelligence official confirmed the existence of the CIA analysis, and told me that the White House had been hostile to it," it said.
Common sense is the enemy, and we must make war on it!
Quote:
"If the Democrats won on November 7th, the vice president said, that victory would not stop the administration from pursuing a military option with Iran," Hersh wrote, citing an unidentified source familiar with the discussion.
Another couple trillion dollars in the hole, who's counting anymore?
Quote:
Seriously - hasn't this administration done enough damage? Have they learned nothing?
Is this a rhetorical question? Or did you really want an answer?
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Invade them. Iran doest have any use for nuclear power. Remember that the US has not built a nuclear power plant since the 1970's, unless you consider our aircraft carriers. Which in the case of a nuclear meltdown would be in the middle of the ocean. If the most powerful nation in the world cant build a safe nuclear power plant, then you damn well know what Iran intends to do with its nuclear capabilities.
^^^ You DO know that there have been at least 30 Natural Gas and 10 new coal fired power plants built, right? As well, you think that re-invading Afghanistan (which is weird, because you already have troops stationed there, but whatever) is a bad idea... try invading Iran... again... and see how well things work out. You think Iraq is going well, this might just sort out your thinking process. One last idea: PAY FOR IT.
US companies can build proper reactors, but no one wants one after 3 mile island, and I don't blame them, privatizing them was a collossally BAD idea. BTW, Iran has a use for Nuclear power, they don't have as much oil as Iraq, and they actually need nuclear power a little more because their economy is starting to gather steam.
BTW, I'd rather them have Nuclear power (their reactors are based off the CANDU series) that can't make bomb-grade plutonium, than have one of those Russian disasters in waiting.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
I say that the US SHOULD be building nuclear reactors like crazy - to get us that much less dependent on fossile fuels - most of which are imported. The danger is really overstated. But like usual, people are scared of what they don't understand. The benefits are huge - and we will be paying a ton less on our utility bills(the electic portion that is).
As far as Iran having them - many people ask "why would a country full of oil need that?" - well for one I'm sure they're well aware that their oil will not last forever. Aside from that - they're burning oil that they could be selling. I think the economics of that speak for itself. Not to mention that nuclear power is still cheaper than fossil fuel power even if they do produce it themselves(it's still hardly free when they have to pump it out of the ground and then refine it). Of course if their economy grows too big then they will be out-using the amount of energy that they can produce from their oil production alone. That might not be true today but its never bad to plan for tomorrow.
Let them have their reactors.
I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?
The US certainly can build safe reactors. Canada developed very safe reactors decades ago and there's no reason that the US could not build those reactors or similar reactors. Just stay away from graphite cores and use some good design.. Not a problem... We have built them all over the world and they have always been safe.. A bit of a maintanence nightmare, but safe.
PAX
NO ! let's build a solar panel that circumnavigates the equator ... imagine all the
window cleaning jobs ! squee-gee <sp* kids could finally make something
outta themselves.
I'm in favor of more reactors, always have been, that is of course until
we Chernobyl or worse, then i'm gonna wobble, hop or crawl off that bandwagon
if i still can.
What happened in Chernobyl cannot happen with a water core reactor.. Sure can with a graphite core though.. Long Island was almost a Chernobyl for that very reason... The difference was you didn't have quite as many failures or irresponsible people involved.
PAX
