rushmc 23
Recommended Posts
rushmc 23
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAnother thing sir. talking down your nose to me is not going to make me shut up. That tactic dont fly with me any more. I have enough confidence in my beliefs that you cant shut me up with that way(like you do to others)
Faith in your beliefs, in the face of overwhelming evidence that you are wrong, is indeed a wonderful thing.
I await your evidence
There are none so blind as those that will not see.
It must be very difficult continuing year after year to defend an administration that has been proven to lie to the Congress and the people, to have run roughshod over guaranteed rights, to have presided over record deficits, to have stood by while the value of the nation's currency drops into the gutter, to have started an immoral war under false pretenses that continues to drain American lives and treasure.
I have to say I admire your tenacity even if your judgment is terrible.
I suspect it becomes easier for him as his withdraws further and further inside a world than can only exist in his mind. As less and less reality gets in, the more confident he is in what he spews out. I used to disagree with his ideology, now I just wonder how he can believe what he just wrote makes sense.
It's quite sad, actually.
Your insult some one to shut them up tactic failed again
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
Amazon 7
QuoteWhat is more sad is the Bush
haterworshipping mentality that has those, such as you sodurangedDERANGED, you cant think at all. Your arrogant know it all attitude is a direct testament to the point I make. Liberal elitism can be cured
There fixed a couple things for you...but the arrogance of ignorance and incompetence on so many posts here really is saddening to think there are so many of you who feel this way... and voted this disaster to our national honor into office based on his psuedo-everyman persona that has so many of you on the right salivating to get his next utterance.. so you have another snippit of his "wisdom" to diefy
![[:/]](/uploads/emoticons/dry.png "[:/]"){kind=small}
kallend 2,148
QuoteYou posted the snipett about why Iran stopped. In that very posing is says in the agreement Iran will stop enrichment, not just the nuke program. Do you believe Iran has stopped enrichment?
Interesting - why are you replying to your own post and asking questions of yourself?
Are you sure you are OK?
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
billvon 3,116
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>such as you so duranged
Your one warning.
Your one warning.
joedirt 0
Gaddafi's invite of inspectors in 2003 was coincidental too of course.
crozby 0
QuoteYou Dr. I am skepical of all of this. I know you hate NewsMax but read
Its most dramatic conclusion — that Iran shut down its nuclear weapons program in 2003 in response to international pressure — is based on a single, unvetted source who provided information to a foreign intelligence service and has not been interviewed directly by the United States
Much of the evidence presented by Colin to the UN was of this quality. You'd think the intelligence services wouldn't make the same mistake so soon after
... but then again
nerdgirl 0
The unclassified version of the NIE suggests that sanctions were largely responsible for spurring the Iranian leadership to choose to shut down the nuclear enrichment program in fall 2003: "Iran may be more vulnerable to influence [via diplomacy, sanctions, & inducements] on the issues than we judged previously."
"Our assessment that Iran halted the program in 2003 primarily in response to international pressure [emphasis nerdgirl] indicates Tehran's decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic, and military costs. This, in turn, suggests that some combination of threats of intensified international scrutiny and pressure, along with opportunities for Iran to achieve its security, prestige, and goals for regional influence in other ways, [i.e., carrots *&* sticks, emphasis nerdgirl] might—if perceived by Iran's leaders as credible—prompt Tehran to extend the current halt to its nuclear weapons program."
According to the unclassified NIE, the alleged single defector’s (Ali Rez Asgari) assertions – I’m guessing that NewsMax is trying to make a parallel to Curveball – were confirmed/corroborated by the IC through signals intelligence (SIGINT, i.e., intercepted telephone calls): "one of more than 1,000 pieces of information [emphasis nerdgirl] cited in footnotes to the 150-page classified version of the document."
Other sources allegedly included “photographs taken during the media [i.e., totally open western photo journalists] visit this year… were reviewed by intelligence analysts who concluded Iran continues to face ‘significant technical problems’ in using the facility to enrich uranium.” Open source analysis - yeah! There's an implicit acknowledgement that a huge 'elitism' barrier may be crumbling, i.e,. acknowledgement by the IC that open source data is valuable!
I know at least two of the people mentioned in the NewsMax article personally … & they aren’t the ones whom Timmerman lauds. Under Fingar’s leadership (who now heads the NIC – the folks ultimately responsible for NIE & PDBs), State INR was correct on the analysis regarding the aluminum tubes, which became the now illustrious footnote to the Iraq WMD NIE: Analyze this: inside the one spy agency that got pre-war intelligence on Iraq—and much else—right.
There are lots of pieces of the story with which I’m having trouble and have yet to form my own firm conclusions w/r/t the role & how to increase the value of IAEA inspections and transparency (not limited to the nuclear realm), multi-lateral negotiations, the role of the removal of Saddam Hussayn/OIF in Iran’s leadership calculus (if any), if the 2005 NIE report was wrong when it claimed with “high confidence” that Iran had a active nuclear weapons program, why should the 2007 NIE be any more credible when it claims that Iran cut its nuclear weapons program in 2003? What changed? One hopes better intelligence data & less stove-piping w/in the IC … result of following recommendations of the Intelligence Commission & reorganization of the IC/creation of the DNI?
As far as low enriched uranium (LEU), which is (very) generally 5-20% enriched uranium, Iran does not have to stop that program. That’s their right under NPT. Iran’s plans to produce LEU were so widely known that Iran invited IAEA to inspect its uranium mines back in the mid-1990s.
It’s the HEU (~ >90%) that is of concern ... as well, as pre-2003 allegations of indicators of enrichment in between those levels (for example, ~30-80%). Would that suggest they were inadvertantly doing *really* well in their LEU ... or suggest that they were (past tense) doing poorly at their HEU attempts?
VR/Marg
Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying
"Our assessment that Iran halted the program in 2003 primarily in response to international pressure [emphasis nerdgirl] indicates Tehran's decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic, and military costs. This, in turn, suggests that some combination of threats of intensified international scrutiny and pressure, along with opportunities for Iran to achieve its security, prestige, and goals for regional influence in other ways, [i.e., carrots *&* sticks, emphasis nerdgirl] might—if perceived by Iran's leaders as credible—prompt Tehran to extend the current halt to its nuclear weapons program."
According to the unclassified NIE, the alleged single defector’s (Ali Rez Asgari) assertions – I’m guessing that NewsMax is trying to make a parallel to Curveball – were confirmed/corroborated by the IC through signals intelligence (SIGINT, i.e., intercepted telephone calls): "one of more than 1,000 pieces of information [emphasis nerdgirl] cited in footnotes to the 150-page classified version of the document."
Other sources allegedly included “photographs taken during the media [i.e., totally open western photo journalists] visit this year… were reviewed by intelligence analysts who concluded Iran continues to face ‘significant technical problems’ in using the facility to enrich uranium.” Open source analysis - yeah! There's an implicit acknowledgement that a huge 'elitism' barrier may be crumbling, i.e,. acknowledgement by the IC that open source data is valuable!
I know at least two of the people mentioned in the NewsMax article personally … & they aren’t the ones whom Timmerman lauds. Under Fingar’s leadership (who now heads the NIC – the folks ultimately responsible for NIE & PDBs), State INR was correct on the analysis regarding the aluminum tubes, which became the now illustrious footnote to the Iraq WMD NIE: Analyze this: inside the one spy agency that got pre-war intelligence on Iraq—and much else—right.
There are lots of pieces of the story with which I’m having trouble and have yet to form my own firm conclusions w/r/t the role & how to increase the value of IAEA inspections and transparency (not limited to the nuclear realm), multi-lateral negotiations, the role of the removal of Saddam Hussayn/OIF in Iran’s leadership calculus (if any), if the 2005 NIE report was wrong when it claimed with “high confidence” that Iran had a active nuclear weapons program, why should the 2007 NIE be any more credible when it claims that Iran cut its nuclear weapons program in 2003? What changed? One hopes better intelligence data & less stove-piping w/in the IC … result of following recommendations of the Intelligence Commission & reorganization of the IC/creation of the DNI?
As far as low enriched uranium (LEU), which is (very) generally 5-20% enriched uranium, Iran does not have to stop that program. That’s their right under NPT. Iran’s plans to produce LEU were so widely known that Iran invited IAEA to inspect its uranium mines back in the mid-1990s.
It’s the HEU (~ >90%) that is of concern ... as well, as pre-2003 allegations of indicators of enrichment in between those levels (for example, ~30-80%). Would that suggest they were inadvertantly doing *really* well in their LEU ... or suggest that they were (past tense) doing poorly at their HEU attempts?
VR/Marg
Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying
rushmc 23
QuoteQuoteYou posted the snipett about why Iran stopped. In that very posing is says in the agreement Iran will stop enrichment, not just the nuke program. Do you believe Iran has stopped enrichment?
Interesting - why are you replying to your own post and asking questions of yourself?
Are you sure you are OK?
Nice
Your post indicated an agreement stopped enrichment as well as nuke developement. do you think enrichment processing stopped??
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
rushmc 23
Fine. I will acept the warning as I had is coming. But you dont see this as needing one I suppose.
"I suspect it becomes easier for him as his withdraws further and further inside a world than can only exist in his mind. As less and less reality gets in, the more confident he is in what he spews out. I used to disagree with his ideology, now I just wonder how he can believe what he just wrote makes sense.
It's quite sad, actually."
"I suspect it becomes easier for him as his withdraws further and further inside a world than can only exist in his mind. As less and less reality gets in, the more confident he is in what he spews out. I used to disagree with his ideology, now I just wonder how he can believe what he just wrote makes sense.
It's quite sad, actually."
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
rushmc 23
QuoteQuoteYou Dr. I am skepical of all of this. I know you hate NewsMax but read
Its most dramatic conclusion — that Iran shut down its nuclear weapons program in 2003 in response to international pressure — is based on a single, unvetted source who provided information to a foreign intelligence service and has not been interviewed directly by the United States
Much of the evidence presented by Colin to the UN was of this quality. You'd think the intelligence services wouldn't make the same mistake so soon after
... but then again
Good point.
Some in the gov have pointed out that when Clinton came into office he put his own people in the State Department. Those loyal to his idealogy. Now, before anyone gets their panties in a bundle, I agree with that. Bush should have done the same. Because he has not he has lived with leaks and a bunch of zelots that want to "get him".
Examples, Joe Wilson and Plame now this.
But no, he wanted to play nice with the left. You know, set a new tone. It has worked well hasnt it
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
rushmc 23
So the LEU is what all the centrifuges are for?
Also
I apreciate your response! Thank You
Anymore on this site one simply need aska question and many of the hard core get thier britches in a wad
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
rushmc 23
Oh, and question
I am assuming that LEU is non weapons grade, correct?
I am assuming that LEU is non weapons grade, correct?
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
nerdgirl 0
QuoteI am assuming that LEU is non weapons grade, correct?
Yes, correct. LEU is non-weapons grade for use in nuclear power.
VR/Marg
Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying
nerdgirl 0
QuoteGaddafi's invite of inspectors in 2003 was coincidental too of course.
Yes & no. Yes, in many ways, it was a coincidence. Diplomatic efforts started in 1999 (as far as has been publicly acknowledged) and were largely spurred by the success of sanctions that had effectively isolated Libya and were impacting (negatively) the Libyan economy. Much has also been speculated regarding Gadafi's concern with the future of Libya and succession. He's a rationale actor.
VR/Marg
Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying
DSE 5
Quote[Oh come on Bill! After the Iraqi WMD intelligence fiasco are you suggesting that Bush change his policy based on more questionable "intel" from these clowns. Obviously the Prez needs to push ahead and pay these guys no mind.
You have apparently forgotten;"I am the Decider."
Intelligence means nothing to him.
kallend 2,148
QuoteQuoteQuoteYou posted the snipett about why Iran stopped. In that very posing is says in the agreement Iran will stop enrichment, not just the nuke program. Do you believe Iran has stopped enrichment?
Interesting - why are you replying to your own post and asking questions of yourself?
Are you sure you are OK?
Nice
Well, it's not exactly normal to write questions to yourself as if you are a different person, and post them on a public forum. So just making sure you're OK.
Quote
Your post indicated an agreement stopped enrichment as well as nuke developement. do you think enrichment processing stopped??
Low level enrichment is not forbidden under the treaty, so how is that relevant to anything? My post also contained the phrase "as defined by the IAEA", which you conveniently ignored.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Quote
I've seen laddles that are sharper then that knife.
what does that say about the people who voted him in?
That they were apparently "left behind" and probably went through the same education program as this person.
http://www.break.com/index/kelly-pickler-on-game-show1.html
Quote
I liked the quote "Iran was dangerous, Iran is dangerous and Iran will be dangerous if they have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."
Reminds me of a similar string of accusations:
Has WMD's
(altered to)
Has WMD related programs
(altered to)
Has WMD related program activity
(altered to)
Wanted WMD's
Any justification in a storm I guess.
SkyDekker 1,465
QuoteLol, why did it maybe stop?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL
You may want to refer to the link provided earlier
Don't think you got it.
It is hard to answer a question about why something maybe happened. It is a lot easier to first establish if something happened, than answer why it happened.
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites