Thread: Did the CIA give Iran the bomb?

Originally Posted by astralis

yeah, i was wondering what the benefit to the US of having done THAT was...especially doing something so blatantly traceable.

Eric, you have to ask the CIA. I`m not 5 Brigade but the Canadians are p!ssed off for the entire situation but we learned the US military had absolutely no clue to about this. Gen Powell was given a briefing and he was surprised about what we told him.

Krajina happened when 2 R22eR was at its lowest strength. The majority of the battlegroup was away on Christmas leave, leaving the defence to company strength.

THAT COULD ONLY HAVE HAPPENNED IF THE CROATS HAD OUR ROTATIONAL SCHEDULE.

IOW, if you're trying to find out if they're 50% there, you don't put them 75% there to get that information.

I don't believe this is the nature of what is happening. The information given to them is not taking them closer to a weapon. An better analogy would be someone is lost, they ask for directions, you give them, but they are wrong. They are still lost, perhaps they realize they are still lost, but they aren't closer to their destination..

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

He is adament, however, that what he gave the Iranians was not workable. He did state that the Iranians does have the knowledge to discover what is wrong ... only if they test.

And i guess that was the ultimate objective. Make them think they had enough so they would actually go out and test sooner rather than later because...

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

The CIA gave some equations to the Iranians that can nevered be verified unless the Iranians did a test ... in which case proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Iran was violating the NPT.

Which leads me to think that there STILL isn't enough evidence to make a watertight case before the world that Iran has violated the NPT. There are only strong suspicions ie Qom. Still, good enough for sanctions but not enough to go beyond.

Originally Posted by Double Edge

Which leads me to think that there STILL isn't enough evidence to make a watertight case before the world that Iran has violated the NPT. There are only strong suspicions ie Qom. Still, good enough for sanctions but not enough to go beyond.

Depends on how you define watertight case. Moscow threatened China after she exploded her nuke while the same Soviet threat to Israel never saw an Israeli nuke test materialized.

Asking for designs can be denied and is difficult to prove.

Conducting a test sounds pretty watertight, there is no doubt left as to what the intention is. But there is the NK path here, quite the NPT and then do the test. Thing is if they ever conduct a test, what happens ? some will say now its too late.

This would bring into question the rationale of giving them the plans in the first place.

Originally Posted by Double Edge

Asking for designs can be denied and is difficult to prove.

Post Iraq, I would agree with you that the bar for WMD proof was set higher but the fact is that we now have three sets of plans that were sold to the Iranians and the sellers confirmed it

Originally Posted by Double Edge

Conducting a test sounds pretty watertight, there is no doubt left as to what the intention is. But there is the NK path here, quite the NPT and then do the test. Thing is if they ever conduct a test, what happens ? some will say now its too late.

Acquiring the knowledge and deploying an arsenal are two different things. The latter will not escape notice, especially when Iran starts testing fuses and zero yeild tests.

I think the world, at least Obama, is willing to allow Iran to get the knowledge. After all, most NATO and former Warsaw Pact members, Japan, and Australia are all nuclear weapons capable and in some cases, conducting nuclear weapons trade that is quasi legal under the NPT. The Canadian government may not be in the nuclear weapons trade but nothing is stopping Canadian scientists working on American and British nuclear weapons programs as individuals.

Originally Posted by Double Edge

This would bring into question the rationale of giving them the plans in the first place.

I take the word of the former Soviet warhead designer, you have to test to find out what's wrong. Pakistani, even Chinese, nuclear warheads experts won't be able to figure them out.

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

I take the word of the former Soviet warhead designer, you have to test to find out what's wrong.

ok, thats the other part of this topic that is not clear. Its very hard to tell the extent of what happened or not. Whether what Risen says has credibilty.

If the adminstration has filed espionage charges against him then maybe there is, but thats about it.

Originally Posted by highsea

The reason I post this is because the question of "what we say" vs. "what we do" is also the subject of another thread

Which one ?

Col,

It seems the CIA's thought line is that Iran can be stopped, but can it? It seems to me the CIA is looking for that all-smoking gun of a test and then go 'a-hah' via the UN. But can that stop things? Can you stop knowledge? Once the dud fizzles Iran will start working hard to resolve the issues and with time they will, then what?

Me thinks the CIA is now resigned to the fact that Iran will acquire a nuclear weapon.

A bit dated and ignores the CIA plot and concentrates on the technical aspects/


Jeffrey Lewis • Iran & the Bomb 1: How Close Is Iran?
Jeffrey Lewis • Iran & the Bomb 2: Iran's Missiles
Jeffrey Lewis • Iran & The Bomb 3: Strike options