Is Bush and his Administration "disappointed" about the new intelligence report on Iran not developing nukes?

Question

Bush & Cheney can't attack Iran now :(

Answer 1

From what I understand in reading about his views concerning the report...it doesn't change a thing. To say that the report means anything would simply justify the fact that he was wrong........and we know that George Bush has never been wrong on anything a day in his life, right?

Answer 2

The latest news from Iran about the supposed abandonment in 2003 of the effort to produce a Bomb — if even remotely accurate — presents somewhat of a dilemma for liberal Democrats.

Are they now to suggest that Republicans have been warmongering over a nonexistent threat for partisan purposes? But to advance that belief is also to concede that Iran, like Libya, likely came to a conjecture (around say early spring 2003?) that it was not wise for regimes to conceal WMD programs, given the unpredictable, but lethal American military reaction.

After all, what critic would wish now to grant that one result of the 2003 war — aside from the real chance that Iraq can stabilize and function under the only consensual government in the region — might have been the elimination, for some time, of two growing and potentially nuclear threats to American security, quite apart from Saddam Hussein?

War is unpredictable and instead of "no blood for oil" (oil went from $20 something to $90 something a barrel after the war, enriching Iraq and the Arab Gulf region at our expense), perhaps the cry, post facto, should have been "no blood for the elimination of nukes."

In the meantime, expect a variety of rebuttals to this assurance that for 4 years the Iranians haven't gotten much closer to producing weapons grade materials.

Answer 3

No. What little I heard sounded to me like he was already twisting it around to suit his opinions. This report doesn't surprise me at all with what I know of the Middle East. We should keep an eye out on what is happening with the world. (other countries) But we should not be looking at going to war so quickly and so foolishly. Bush is incompetent and Cheney is a fear monger. They should be impeached. They are putting the American people in serious danger. We have to remember that any report has errors in it. But that doesn't mean the report is erroneous. It just means that we can't just sit back and ignore everything. We have to pay attention. We have to work in other words. Bush has had a lot of time off. He isn't paying attention. He probably wouldn't know what to pay attention to. He is incompetent and incapable of making a logical and sane decision.

Answer 4

IRONIC the same National interlligence estimate said that Iraq had WMDs in 2003. BUT it was a lie. the Democrats rallied behind that also for politics. Yet again, the NIE has come out with this report, saying the Iranians have halted their Nuke ambitions, the democrats are also rallting behind this report. However, the same NIE was dead wrong about Iraq.

the same National interlligence estimate also says that Iran continues to enrich uranium could FINISH building a Nuke by 2010. Geee.. that sounds like only 2 years from now.

Answer 5

I just gave a long winded reponse to the standard questions uninformed peopel are spewing still, a copy paste will make this easier to post.

The ignorant masses are a force of danger.

Let me address the uninformed:


Explain why they supply IEDs that kill our soldiers.

That was reported by the White House, again providing no evidence. One must truly understand the history of the modern Middle East to know the divsions and factions within it. Persians are Iranians, they are not Arabs, they generalyl dislike Arabs this has been going on for milennia, they would not support elemnts ofo Al Qaeda, as they despise them.

Explain why they stone women to death and hang gay teenagers:

Iran is not completely modernized, it is a rather large coutnry with sprsely sepperated populations. The majority of the county lives in several of the major cities, the largest being Tehran. Tehran is very equivilent to say, Chicago, not quite New York City. The resulting 'spotted' population is spread out from the modern infrastrcuture in the more populated areas of Iran. These less developed areas are not completely caught up in humanitarian standards, this is true. Thisis a product of the culture, and the country 'growing up', we went through the same thing. They are not enacting Iranian governement anti-humanitarian executions, but it does occur. Hardly a reason to violently destroy a country, its growing.

Explain why their president was among the students who stormed our embassy and kidnapped Americans for 444 days:

You must educated yourself on the Iranian Revolution. The Iranian Revolution occured because the Shah of Iran or King, was in the pocket of the CIA. From the American Embasy it was widely known to Iranians to be the staging point the CIA backed coup in Iran occured putting the Western influence Shah in power and driving the country into poverty. The first thing they took over when revolting and instiuting new leadership was guess what, the US Embasy. Who can blame them given its historical use in that country, and well known.

Explain why Iran's president and Venezuela's president recently called for the downfall of America:

Rhetoric to match rhetoric. Look through both postitions of the argument, you will not see a big deviation.

Explain why Iran's nuclear facilities are supposed to generate electricity when they have enough oil to power their country for generations:

Because they want to sell the oil, they made that clear. This by the way is the same thing developed countries do with mass oil stocks. Like Russia, and the United Arab Emirates, of which were allied.

Explain why their nuclear facilities are camouflaged and enclosed in hardened bunkers:

Standard Operating Procedure, listen to your own question.

Explain how a regime that killed a million people during a nine year war with Iraq isn't dangerous:

This is a huge and incorrect statement. Iraq invaded Iran, with the backing of the United Stats. Iran defended itself from Iraqi agression and pushed IRaq back into their country and slightly into it. Iraq initiated the conflcit because it wanted Shat El-Arab, a major shiping point in the PErsian Gulf lcoated just within Iran. Iraq is in a precoctious position of having very limited ocean access for trade. Iran was gased by Iraq, Iran did not gas in return, Iran faced all odds and perservered with a cease-fire being signed 9 years later. More Iranian civilians were killed in that conflcit then anytime since the Mongol Invasion milenia back.

Can you explain ANY of this, or are you covering your eyes and telling us you're invisible:

I am trying to give you more sources of information, so we as Americans can make choices that are from INFORMED information. I have no bias, but truth.

Answer 6

Um, Bush is desperate all ideal--his gang is making an attempt desperately to invent some thing that's no longer there to justify increasing the conflict--their meant "protection of united states of america" being the only fiction that helps them to hold a number of teheir followers. yet do no longer enable the technical information get interior the way--you ignored some issues. whether you conced Iran might have a nuke in 3 years (very no longer likely) it would take them years greater to consruct a deliverable weapon. And a transport gadget. a minimum of a decade universal. additionally--do no longer underestimate Iran's armed forces--bear in mind the Iran-Iraq conflict. they have lots of wrestle adventure. no longer that we could no longer flatten them, even below contemporary circumstances. yet its alwasys a bad theory to underestimate your enemy.

Answer 7

try READING IT liberal.
But the new estimate declares with “high confidence” that a military-run Iranian program intended to transform that raw material into a nuclear weapon has been shut down since 2003, and also says with high confidence that the halt “was directed primarily in response to increasing international scrutiny and pressure.”

and it also says they kept their options open....so there is no dissapointment here, only frustration that liberal EXTREMISTS are not easily muzzled so working americans who understand terrorist threat can deal with the problem.
again your question has no answer as your premise is false.

Answer 8

"Bush said he is not troubled about his standing, about perhaps facing a credibility gap with the American people. "No, I'm feeling pretty spirited — pretty good about life," Bush said.

Bush shouldn't speak without a script.

Answer 9

Saddam put out false intellegence that said he had WMD's to keep Iran from invading. Perhaps Iran is doing the same thing to keep the rest of the world looking the other way.

Answer 10

Did he sound disappointed in his press conference when he addressed this or were you watching The Price is Right then?