Israeli ambassador says Iran could be approaching nuclear threshold ["two years"]

Associated Press by way of KRIS TV ^ | 06JUN07 | Associated Press

[familyop]

WASHINGTON (AP) - Israel's ambassador to Washington says Iran has not yet crossed the threshold of being able to make nuclear weapons, but may be only two years away.

The ambassador says Iran is having trouble with the process of installing centrifuges, and was trying to decide between "quantity and quality" in its program.

He calls 2009 "the worst-case scenario" for Iran to have the bomb, and renewed Israel's vow to try to derail any nuclear weapons program.

Iran insists that its program is designed to produce civilian energy. It has resisted Western offers of diplomatic and economic benefits if it would suspend enrichment programs.

The Israeli ambassador said today that Iran is susceptible to economic pressure because it is dependent on foreign investment.

[familyop]

How soon...depends on how much help Iran is getting or will be getting from other nations.

[Diogenesis]

Iran may already have nukes from Pakistan
and is attempting to make hundreds more.

[SolidWood]

They even may have nukes from the Russians.

[familyop]

Also, Iranian and N. Korean engineers have been going back and forth between the two countries for missile tests. I wouldn’t be surprised, if they’ve been doing the same for work on nuclear weapons technology.

[LegendHasIt]

It is beyond my comprehension that anyone can even question this. Anyone that has a clue knows that they are only six months (at best) away from building their own.

And I have a bad feeling that the have already purchased more than a few from other sources.

[expatguy]

Pakistan

Pakistan

Pakistan

An American Expat in Southeast Asia

[familyop]

"Pakistan"

Yes. A couple of years or so ago, soil on nuclear development equipment in Iran was found to be from Pakistan. So...Pakistan, N. Korea, and likely, other nations.

[familyop]

"It is beyond my comprehension that anyone can even question this."

Our nation is administered indirectly by constituents who are most concerned about acknowledgments of their authority and their business costs (labor, oil, freight fuel,...) today. They don't want our politicians to really do defense. Their main argument in bureaucratic board meetings without public releases would be something like, "The worst threat to our nation is the possibility of harm to our markets."

[LilyBean]

A question for you.

Will the US go out with a whimper, or a roar?

[familyop]

"A question for you.

Will the US go out with a whimper, or a roar?"

IMO, that depends on whether or not we continue to base our nominations of candidates on entertainment, vanity, regional ties and/or money alone.

Duncan Hunter is not getting enough funding, because he doesn't appeal to most of those who have the money.

The following are Fortune 500s that filed briefs in favor of "affirmative action" in the Michigan "Grutter v. Bollinger" (Michigan University) case.

http://www.umich.edu/~urel/admissions/legal/gru_amicus/32_internatl.pdf

3M
Abbott Laboratories
American Airlines
Ashland
Bank One
Boeing
Coca-Cola
Dow Chemical
E.I. Du Pont De Nemours
Eastman Kodak
Eli Lilly
Ernst & Young
Exelon
Fannie Mae
General Dynamics
General Mills
Intel
Johnson & Johnson
Kellogg
KPMG
Lucent Technologies
Microsoft
Mitsubishi
Nationwide Mutual Insurance
Nationwide Financial
Pfizer
PPG
Proctor & Gamble
Sara Lee
Steelcase
Texaco
TRW
United Airlines
General Motors Corporation

http://www.umich.edu/~urel/admissions/legal/gru_amicus/gru_gm.html