Posted on 03/14/2002 8:04:12 AM PST by My Identity
When you testify to Congress in measured tones, what you say doesn't always get the attention it deserves.
That's the lesson from Robert Walpole's March 11th testimony before a Senate subcommittee. Walpole is the National Intelligence Officer for Strategic and Nuclear Programs for the CIA and was there to update senators on the National Intelligence Estimate.
He calmly delivered the following blockbuster: "The Intelligence Community judged in the mid-1990s that North Korea had produced one, possibly two, nuclear weapons."
That means North Korea may already be a nuclear-weapon state. This is news.
Just last Sunday, the Washington Post reported, "North Korea may have enough fissile material for one or two nuclear weapons, U.S. analysts say."
But this conventional wisdom appears to be outdated.
Also according to Walpole, the North Korean "multiple-stage Taepo Dong-2, which is capable of reaching the United States with a nuclear-weapon-sized payload, may be ready for flight testing."
Feeling secure yet?
The conventional wisdom also previously held that Iran could probably achieve an ICBM capability within 15 years.
Walpole reports, "All agencies agree that Iran could attempt to launch an ICBM about mid-decade." That could, then, be in three or five years so. (He went on to say, "[the agencies] believe Iran is likely to take until the last half of the decade to do so. One agency further judges that Iran is unlikely to achieve a successful test of an ICBM before 2015.")
It is clear that Iran has been overachieving when it comes to nuclear and ballistic-missile technology.
Walpole again: "The Intelligence Community judges that Iran does not yet have a nuclear weapon. Most agencies assess that Tehran could have one by the end of the decade, although one agency judges it will take longer. All agree that Iran could reduce this time frame by several years with foreign assistance."
Foreign assistance is the great friend of rogues generally.
If it bought the right engines, according to Walpole, Iraq "could test an ICBM within about five years of the acquisition."
And if it slipped out from various U.N. prohibitions, "Iraq would be likely to test an ICBM probably masked as an SLV [space launch vehicle] before 2015, possibly before 2010 with significant foreign assistance."
The bottom line, according to Walpole: "All this leads us to assess that the probability that a missile with a weapon of mass destruction will be used against U.S. forces or interests is higher today than during most of the Cold War, and it will continue to grow as the capabilities of potential adversaries mature."
It is worth noting that all this was occurring before the Bush administration pursued missile defense and thought about designing a low-yield nuke to deter rogues from developing and using weapons of mass destruction.
So, the administration's critics have it backwards — Bush isn't creating a threatening international environment, he's reacting to one.
Unless the New York Times and others will now consider North Korea just another mature, responsible country — since, after all, it may already have joined the nuclear "club."
If a country as poor as North Korea has a nuke and an ICBM to hook it up to, it's a pretty safe bet that Iran already has one.
Masked? That'd be about as effective as those fake black plastic glasses with the "Groucho" nose and mustache. None of the countries under discussion are interested in space exploration, nor do they need the ability to launch their own commsats. France happily does that for them.
Instead, we should work to implement a change in that evil regime.
Clinton gave NK reactors....another distinguishing characteristic that squarely indicts Clinton as America's worst president and most dangerous traitor.
1. Offering the Japanese nuclear-tipped Tomahawks and SSNs (the early 688s would be ideal candidates).
2. Deploying tactical nukes on our carrier in Japan, and probably also equipping our F-16 wings in the ROK with tacticaal nukes.
Which one do we take?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.