NIE REPORT -now how will the conservatives spin this?

Question

The persident said the Iran had nukes or a nuke program 3 years ago LIES!

Answer 1

The supposed "no spin zone" will find a way to spin it. Fox News is the best at spin all the while claiming to be no spin.

Answer 2

http://freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes
read thru the entire text
Please.
The last administration believed firmly Saddam had WMD and the "capacity" to create nuclear weapons. There are numerous reports and video of Clinton as he expalined bombing Iraq, Sudan & Afghanistan.
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/iraq1.html

IRAN has had nuclear facilities. Just not capacity to utilize as weapons. That has always been the case. We have had hundred's of debate on YA over this already. It is the cocktail to enrich Uranium that has been the concern. ANd then this regime with President Amdj is capable of outsourcing the products or exchanging the materials. If not for the sanctions to the wealthy Iranian Revolutionary Guard & freezing their assets they could move forward. This President is from that military group. He is not working with his 2 superiors... #1 The Grand Ayatollah.

As to President Bush these were no lies. If so you & I would never hear about them. If you had been reading foreign papers you may have already known. Bookmark these for future reference. BTW Iran was, is and will be a threat. Just as the President said in his press conference. AND how would you explain years from now ? If they do it again and more seriously activate a nuclear weapon? The NIE was a warning to stay alert. Not a reason to bash Bush again. If Clinton had been so alert maybe we could have avoided 9-11? That President was too busy. No lies here. Just full declaration of the truth even if it hurts. SO you can spin away. I stick with facts. Thank you.

Answer 3

Are you serious?! Do you honestly realize how you serve to discredit yourself with your own mouth? Do you know how the NIE is complied? Do you know when the last one was? Do you even understand the situation on the ground enough to merit any input into the findings of the NIE? I would imagine not, as this would then mean you would not make a comment such as this one.
I am so tired if idiots from both parties fligging crap on our intelligence sector, just because it isn't like Hollywood. Who is the bigger *** here, the person risking life and limb for US protection or the person who turns to CNN and Hollywood for their facts on the ground and to understand how the Intel world works.
The last NIE came out in 05. Yeah, two years ago. A LOT OF INFORMATION CAN COME IN THOSE 2 YEARS. Satellites cannot see into the earth. Duh! Yet the Clinton Administration spent billions of dollars to build a complex spy satellite network (which largely failed, resulting in the erroroneuos bombing of a Chinese Embassy in Kosovo...or have we forgotten that too). This billions was not added to the Intelligence community, but taken from its existing stockpile...meaning no new hires, and no agent relations.
So we have only two other means to obtain this information:
1) send in an Intel Operator. This is in no way as easy as the toolsheds at Hollywood portray it. If anyone is content with letting this be the standard of the understanding regarding the Intel World, than that is fine, as Barney and the Teletubies are likely their resource of proper Governance too. These tools are right to be mocked and laughed at. The problem with sending in an Operator is that it is nearly impossible to get the access needed to truly penetrate the security system. Moreover, the type of people who traditionally become Operators are not the same type that also become Nuclear Scientists. So even if the Operator is well trained on what to look for, he is merely trainined on what to expect to look for and therefore a LOT can be missed.
Option 2) Recruit someone who is already inside. This is 99.9% of what is done, and it requires lots of money...but most importantly, it requires a massive amount of time. The Agent has to trust the Operator, which doesn't happen over night...and if it did, than our trust of them would fade pretty quick. Moreover, think about the people the Agents are. You are paying someone to betray their country. This doesn't rank very high on the list of qualified candidate who have this access. So, you are stuck with dealing with low-lifes. Since that is the case, generally, there is the massive risk that this Agent is simply doing it for money, they are doing it for revenge, or they are doing it because they are actually double agents. The first two do yield intelligence, but this Agent has an objective outside of our own, which means they may not be telling us everything. Therefore they are put through the ringer to make sure they are authentic...meaning we send them on missions we already know the answers to. The last one is the worse, as not only is the mission compromised but so too is the Operator, which means there exists the strong possibility of a loss of US life.
Now, in such a situation as the one we have with Iran, there will need to be multiple Agents operating on this...and, if in the attempt to recruit an Agent there is the reality they will refuse and run and tell Tehran...or they may be found out by Tehran and subsequently killed...making it even harder then on to recruit new Agents.
All in all, this is not a piece of cake.
What we do know, is there was a nuclear facility that was built in a Suburb of Tehran...literally in a residential area (as this would then preclude bombing). The UN Security Council insisted this place be inspected, at which point Iran stalled. A year later, the site was completely gone...everything was gone!!! Israeli intelligence sent in an Operator to obtain soil samples and it there was some residual radioactivitiy indicating a nuclear site.
Now, EVERYONE to include the Russians believed Iran was building Nuclear weapons. We all believe the Iranian President to be an Insane Chimp....what no one was calculating on was that they were bluffing in order to develop a bargaining chip in Iraq. They new that if they built a weapon the US would attack. Which means money lost for them, and while they could defend themselves we would not seek to occupy them and they could not be able to retaliate. So this would become a major loss to them. Additionally, if they nuked Israel, the US would turn their entire country to dust...not exactly a victory either. BUT, if they bluffed, they could garner international recognition, which they need to lift the embargos already in place. They could solidify their position domestically, as they are in a fragile position there too. And, most of all, they would secure a position within Iraq's development, as the War with Iraq from 80-88 taught them the fraility of their defense...especially if Iraq was a new Sunni government backed by the US again.
The reality is, we did see from this perspective but it was one too hopeful to work from...not without Intell to substantiate it. Now we have it and the tables are turned.
So, to answer your question...NO, the President did not lie.

Answer 4

Charles S its more like you who is lying, the President has never said they had nukes, he said they are developing them and he is correct they are enriching uranium to be able to make them. What he is saying is correct Iran is a threat both with and without this capability, suggest you sort yourself out and quote facts not what YOU THINK you hear or want to hear, methinks you are more in the latter group, your blind stupid hatred of the President makes you not able to think straight

Answer 5

And the same organization said Sadam no longer had any chem/bio weapons nor the means to use them. Yet that's been proven false.
The missiles found at the start of the war, the chemical weapons with chemicals in them found last year.
Yeah these guys are a great Gage.
Hey you know what, Iran is also the most honest and open country in the world.

Answer 6

The NIE from 2005 said they had a program. The IAEA said they were enriching uranium.

The spin is trying to say this isn't a good thing for Bush (and the world in general).

Answer 7

The NIE is looking to cover their tails after the false reports they gave on WMD's back in 2002. In other words, they want to lay some crap on the administration to make themselves look good by virtue of making the President look bad. The President already knew this intelligence. The fact remains that Iran has demonstrated it's intentions toward nuclear armament. That is what the President is concerned about.

Answer 8

They do have a nuke program. It is currently "suspended," whatever that means.

The President never said they had nukes.

I spin it this way: I don't hear Iran denying they have (or had) a program to build nuclear weapons. They are glad we agree it has been "suspended." So, I guess they now admit they have a program to build a nuclear weapon, it's just "suspended."

Answer 9

The Sanction's worked Give the President his Props would you.

Answer 10

- "I view this report as a warning signal that they had the program, they halted the program," Bush said. "The reason why it's a warning signal is they could restart it." -

Bush has already sent the memo.