we still remember mitch hedberg

A severed foot is the ultimate stocking stuffer.

Dec 4th 2007

wow! iranian nuke program stopped in 2003

according to a declassified US intelligence report, iran backed away from its nuclear weapons program in 2003. on the situation room monday, CNN’s wolf blitzer and others seemed to imply that this report shows iran’s motives are peaceful and that the bush administration’s tough talk since 2003 has been inappropriate.

but wait! what else happened in 2003?


um, yeah. we kicked the crap out of iran’s neighboring government over its alleged weapons program.

so, while iran may have hit the pause button on the bomb, i wouldn’t jump to the conclusion that they have forsaken their evil ways all together. aquavelvethead is still enriching uranium that could be used for a nuclear weapons program, he still talks about wiping israel off the map, he still claims that those who oppose iran’s search for nuclear power will, one day, “regret” it, his speeches end to deafening chants of “death to america! death to israel!” iranian men and weapons are being used in large numbers to kill americans and innocent civilians in iraq, and iran’s outfitting of hezbollah fighters during the 2006 syria war was so extensive it would put top brand-placement corporations like nike to shame.

{vidavee id=”3931″ w=”320″ }
(count the swooshes)

so, anyway, what i’m saying is: i see this story completely differently than CNN does.

UPDATE: john bolton explains why this news isn’t as earth shattering as some are interpreting it (for example: the civilian vs. military distinction in nukes isn’t that important). he even points out what i did originally: that there was a significant event in 2003 that the NIE ignores.

7 Responses to “wow! iranian nuke program stopped in 2003”

  1. Of course you would see it differently. It doesn’t matter what evidence comes out. You will always want war with Iran, because you just do.

  2. travis

    i wrote this post because CNN missed a major aspect of the story. i didn’t say i want war with iran, but to point out that tough talk with them is helpful.

    It doesn’t matter what evidence comes out. You will always want war with Iran, because you just do.

    “tough talk” is not war. just like curtis, who opposes america’s non-violent public relations efforts in the middle east, it seems like you don’t even want america to use non-war methods to accomplish our foreign policy objectives. and that seems to be taking your hatred of america too far.

    come on dan, at least give me credit for watching the communist news network.

  3. no Travis, you’re not engaging in “tough talk.” You’ve been engaging in childish irresponsible talk. There is a massive difference between the two. If you threaten a country with war, that is not tough talk. If you threaten to bomb a country, that is not tough talk. If you threaten to kill people in another country, that is not tough talk. That is all childish and irresponsible. I’m sorry you cannot see that. You’ve been so thoroughly immersed in the violent world of the neo-conservative that you cannot see reality very well anymore.

  4. doug

    I don’t think Travis wants war with Iran. I certainly don’t.

    no Travis, you’re not engaging in “tough talk.” You’ve been engaging in childish irresponsible talk.

    Tough talk and childish irresponsible talk are not mutually exclusive. See: big stick, carrots, etc. Big stick diplomacy can be an effective tool, or it can be irresponsibly used. Ditto for carrots.

    In any case, the original post brought up the rather interesting point that Iran coincidentally gave up its weapons program as we were planning and then executing an invasion of Iraq for, among other things (it was obviously mainly about oil!), having a weapons program.

    Joking aside, it is a point that CNN could have at least explored. But whatever…they can’t even use Google to vet YouTube questioners, so I’m not surprised it never occurred to them that this was an interesting coincidence.

  5. Holy Crap Dan! We’re all missing the point! The US Intelligence community said Iraq had weapons and was wrong. Now they say Iran doesn’t. Lets invade tomorrow!

  6. Dan, if you don’t take me up on my first post, then lets you and I go and see if Code Pink will let us join.

  7. travis, i really question your point that disagreeing with american foreign policy goals is to “hate america.” your logic implies that these goals equal america. so in your opinion, every foreign policy goal of the US, even ones you disagree with, can only be critiqued by those who “hate” america? so when you disagree with one or another of these goals, do you imagine yourself as an america hater?

    of course you don’t. it is only people who criticize who show they care. i fail to see how fawning all over the state is equal to patriotism.

    i do disagree with US policy vis a vis iran. i do so for rational reasons, and they have nothing to do with the childish emotions of “hatred” and “love” that conservatives often seem unable to break out of. please tell me: how is this “hating america”? and please do tell: how are your critiques of US policy NOT “hating america”? or is it possible you agree with every single government policy? no. . . i did not think so. you simply have one standard for yourself and one for the left.