Nuclear Iran NOT an "Acceptable Risk"

One might well wonder if the CNAS study is a "trial balloon" from the Biden Administration to begin preparing the nation and world psychologically for the advent of Iran's "Islamic bomb."

One might also wonder if the CNAS study is an attempt to justify consequent U.S. retreat from the Middle East, not as another humiliating defeat, but as a prudent and wise reprioritization of resources to meet the threat from China.

President Biden is defunding nuclear weapons critical to U.S. national security, such as the SLCM-N and B-83. He is also still seriously considering abolition of U.S. intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and is doing nothing to accelerate desperately needed modernization of the U.S. nuclear deterrent -- despite increasing nuclear threats from Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran.

If America, the most benign and humane civilization that has ever existed in history, is capable of using nuclear weapons, what can be expected from the evil empires that are Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran?

At minimum, a nuclear Iran will be even more aggressive supporting terrorism against moderate Arab states, Israel, and the U.S.. Iran might well also arm its proxies -- many of which are officially designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations -- with weapons of mass destruction, while relying on anonymity and its nuclear deterrent to escape retaliation.

Unlike North Korea, whose overt pursuit of nuclear weapons is used for atomic diplomacy and blackmail, Iran's nuclear weapons program is clandestine and may remain covertly secret -- because Iran plans actually to use its "Islamic bomb."

Expect the Center for a New American Security to weave more fig leaves rationalizing Biden Administration blunders and irresponsible policy as a species of wisdom. Coming soon, U.S. nuclear inferiority to Russia and China will be called an "acceptable risk."

The Center for a New American Security (CNAS), comprising largely former, mostly Democrat administration foreign policy and defense officials, in a new study — "Risk and Responsibility: Managing Future Iranian Weapons of Mass Destruction Threats" — tries to sell the notion that Iran armed with nuclear, biological and chemical offensive weapons will be an acceptable risk. CNAS is a source of staff and "expertise" to the Biden Administration. Unfortunately, their idea is preposterous.

"...[T]he US gave them that couple hundred pounds of fissile nuclear material in the first place.",

It was stolen, not given freely. In 2016, the Israelis stole Iran's entire nuclear intelligence archive in one night. They are (and probably long have been) the world's most accomplished thieves.

And the exploits of "Demo Dick" Marcinko proved that America's defenses of its atomic weapons stockpiles is (or at least was) slipshod.

But that wasn't Israel's "first" acquisition of fissile material. France had been providing them with HEU and yellowcake (officially and surreptitiously through 3rd-party intermediaries) probably since 1954. Israelis wouldn't be Israelis if they didn't utilize that opportunity to figure a way to cut out the middleman -- France -- and go straight to the source. Which they ultimately had to do because France cut them off after the 1967 war.

To keep the supply coming, the next year Israel set up a German shell company that bought 200 tons of yellowcake from a Belgian multinational (enough for about 2800 lbs of HEU), which they smuggled into Israel.

I can't say that the 206 lbs of HEU they (possibly) stole from the US wasn't a boon, but neither was it the linchpin of their weapons program.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.