Why is the US/Europe threatening Iran if there is little suspicion of weapons development among experts?

Question

Mohamed ElBaradei: "I repeat: we have not seen any undeclared facilities operating in Iran, we have not seen any concrete evidence that the Iran program is being weaponized. We have not received any information to that effect. So, I haven't heard any other information, to the contrary. So while we are still concerned about the nature of the Iranian program, we should not... I do not believe, at this stage, that we are facing clear and present danger that requires that we go beyond diplomacy."
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/18/1359244

Should we suspect a second propaganda offensive of the "WMD/Iraq" type? Why should the US/European populations trusts the governments that lied to them before rather than support the NPT regime and oblige their own countries to abide by it, dismantling their own weapons?
Read the NPT:
http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/npt/text/npt2.htm
Iran is clearly abiding. The US is not (spec. art. III and VI).

Wiggi: El Baradei's Feb.2003 Report:
"As I have reported on numerous occasions, the IAEA concluded, by December 1998, that it had neutralized Iraq's past nuclear program and that, therefore, there were no unresolved disarmament issues left at that time. Hence, our focus since the resumption of our inspections in Iraq, two and a half months ago, has been verifying whether Iraq revived its nuclear program in the intervening years.

We have to date found no evidence of ongoing prohibited nuclear or nuclear related activities in Iraq. However, as I have just indicated, a number of issues are still under investigation and we are not yet in a position to reach a conclusion about them, although we are moving forward with regard to some of them. To that end, we intend to make full use of the authority granted to us under all relevant Security Council resolutions to build as much capacity into the inspection process as necessary."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/14/iraq/main540690.shtml

Sounds like Mr. El Baradei was right on Iraq.
Your government lied to you. The UN and the IAEA said the truth.

Sub: The centrifuges enrich uranium. They are necessary for both energy production and weapons production. The inspectors in Iran can tell the difference. Uranium for energy production need only be 5% pure, or low grade, whereas weapons grade uranium must be 90%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weapons_grade

Answer 1

It's the "might makes right" mentality. No sane person wants more countries to have nukes - but to think that threatening people (however veiled) will make them drop development programs borders on insanity.

Answer 2

Some experts do believe that Iran is developing weapons. While forensic evidence is somewhat lacking, motivation for Iran to develop and use such weapons is not. So long as that's a concern, their weapons development, real or imagined will be too.

Also, concerning your claim of "propaganda" you can't prove that US and EU leaders willingly lied to people. Years of intelligence gathered around the world suspected that all of the allegations were true. There was little evidence to oppose it then (even though I was in the "I don't believe it camp" I acknowledge this fact).

One thing that stands out about Iraq and Afghanistan was the lack of willingness of foreign nations, especially our allies, to participate. If the nations of the world determined that Iran was a threat and force was necessary, I would rally behind them. If it was a small handful of countries, I would be more skeptical.

Answer 3

Are these the same experts that said Saddam had weapons?

I hardly think the Director of the IAEA can speak critically about the organization he directs.

My experience with so-called experts is they typically come out after the fact with 20/20 hindsight.

Answer 4

I’m amazed at how many who answer continue to deny Iraq had WMDs. They should attempt to explain how so many thousands of Kurds died simultaneously? Likely global warming caused by neocons, or seeding the clouds with poison via the evil US Air Force.

Any idea what will happen if the entire Middle East turns
their support to Iran, which they will obviously do if we pull out of Iraq?
It is not the price of oil we will have to worry about. Oil WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE to this country at any price.

Sooner, or later, we are
going to be forced to confront Iran, and it better be before they gain nuclear capability.

Answer 5

Does the statment: "Iraq definitely has Weapons of Mass destruction" ring a bell? The main plot of this drama has not changed in six years -- only some of the actors playing the roles have changed. If you start doubting the director, you get replaced with a new actor who will follow the director's lead!

Answer 6

The leaders of our Great Country...The United States of America....want a One World Government...they make up or cause a crisis, watch the public's reaction, and then provide the solution.

Answer 7

The U.S. is oil greedy. It's why we occupy Iraq. Besides, Prez Bush and Mohamed ElBaradei are in a pissing match. This is the same thing that goes on in grade school, only now they are the rulers of our world and they have bombs.

Answer 8

MThe term Mohamed should be a dead give-away as to why he's saying there are no WMD's. The only experts I trust is Isreal------they seem to know better than anyone what's going on in the Middle East.

Answer 9

It's all about real estate and money. Power/control is also
a key element. Go back to ww1 to the present and review
what was done and why, no matter the party in power.

Answer 10

Let's see, would a guy named Mohamed lie to protect a radical Islamic nation? I think you should pack your bags and go to Iran and see for yourself. You would love the freedoms they have and you could kiss their a s s in person.