US: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work

CNN ^ | 12/03/2007

[PRePublic]

US: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work CNN International - 18 minutes ago WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Iran halted work toward a nuclear weapon under international scrutiny in 2003 and is unlikely to be able to produce enough enriched uranium for a bomb until 2010 to 2015, a US intelligence report says.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/03/iran.nuclear/?iref=mpstoryview

[RightWhale]

Multithreaded monstrosity.

[samtheman]

US: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work ... 18 minutes ago

Maybe it's just a coffee break.

[softwarecreator]

I’m confused. According to the UN and Russia, Iran was NEVER building a nuke. So how can they stop something they were never doing in the first place?

[oneamericanvoice]

2010 and 2015 are still too close for comfort.

[InvisibleChurch]

bump

[NorCoGOP]

Can't trust the source:

CNN?

Any CREDIBLE sources reporting this?

The Onion, perhaps?

[McGruff]

"We judge with moderate confidence that the earliest possible date Iran would be technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a weapon is late 2009, but that this is very unlikely,"

Why does this sound like a weather forecast?

[claudiustg]

Let’s pretend...

[PRePublic]

I’m confused. According to the UN and Russia, Iran was NEVER building a nuke. So how can they stop something they were never doing in the first place?

You are right, Good Question, like How did Saddam GAS the Kurds, if he hasn't had any WMD?

[Fox_Mulder77]

Some people may be missing the point: iran still claims it isnt trying to make a bomb. this report shows that they are lying about their intentions, which is a BIG problem.

[Fox_Mulder77]

“We judge with moderate confidence that the earliest possible date Iran would be technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a weapon is late 2009, but that this is very unlikely,”

I would love to see the evidence they used to create their moderately confident estimations.

[billbears]

It does? How exactly? That's not the point though is it? Come on what we really need is a good way for Junior's administration to sell Iran to the public as a 'threat'. After all, if we don't have a 'threat' we don't get to bomb Iran. And that just won't do well for next year's election will it?

I mean if we're being serious the Republicans have given up completely on fiscal conservatism. About the only card they have left to play is the continued attitude of 'terrorism' around the corner and 'they' are out to get 'us'..

Of course the US government could open negotiations and trade to alleviate tensions and work through this crisis....nah that'd never work, best to go ahead and bomb 'em.......

[Red6]

I think that was always the premise anyhow. No one seriously believed that Iran would have a nuke by 2008, and while their is a possibility of future military action, no one seriously thought that we would strike them in 2006 or 2007, although I wish we would have.

There is a reason why the “timetables” for interceptor in Europe etc. are what they are. These sort of things are not coincidental. CNN is reporting the obvious now and stating this as some new story.

Hint: 2010 that more or less two years away - not very long from now.

[bmwcyle]

In other words our underground operation is in full swing and your spy satellites can’t see us.

[MindBender26]

We know they stopped, becuase they told us so....

< sarcasm >

[Diogenesis]

[SaxxonWoods]

What could have happened in 2003 that might have made Iran consider halting their nuclear weapons program?

Hmmmmmmm.

[kabar]

They could also buy nuclear material from North Korea or even Pakistan.

[Alter Kaker]

Any CREDIBLE sources reporting this?

It's in the National Intelligence Estimate published as a consensus of 16 US intelligence agencies. There's a copy of the Executive Summary up on the New York Times website.