Iran

Back in July 2009, this was the news:

"During a recent appearance on ABC's "This Week," Vice President Joe Biden seemed to say the administration wouldn't stand in the way of an Israeli attack.

"Look, Israel can determine for itself - it's a sovereign nation - what's in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else," he said.
Two days later, President Obama told CNN. " What is also true is that it is the policy of the United States to resolve the issue of Iran's nuclear capabilities in a peaceful way through diplomatic channels."

Today, February 19, 2010 the headline was this -

VIENNA — The U.N. nuclear agency on Thursday said it was worried Iran may currently be working on making a nuclear warhead, suggesting for the first time that Tehran had either resumed such work or never stopped at the time U.S. intelligence thought it did. The report by the International Atomic Energy Agency appeared to put the U.N. nuclear monitor on the side of Germany, France, Britain and Israel. These nations and other U.S. allies have disputed the conclusions of a U.S. intelligence assessment published three years ago that said Tehran appeared to have suspended such work in 2003. "

US intel thought the Iranians had ceased work .  In September 2009, US intel reports reported "... U.S. intelligence agencies have informed policymakers at the White House and other agencies that the status of Iranian work on development and production of a nuclear bomb has not changed since the formal National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran's "Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities" in November 2007. Public portions of that report stated that U.S. intelligence agencies had "high confidence" that, ...Iranian military ..."halted its nuclear weapons program."  This opinion changed in January 2010, when U.S. intelligence agencies now suspect that Iran never halted work on its nuclear arms program in 2003, as stated in a national intelligence estimate . " So the news today, if true, means that while we believed them to not be seeking a nuke, Iran was toiling away for the last SEVEN years to in fact build a nuke...and I don't mean a power plant, but a thermonuclear weapon. 

This conclusion is bolstered when one accounts for the statement by  Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who ordered his country's atomic agency  to begin the production of higher enriched uranium. On state television, Ahmadinejad said: "God willing, 20% enrichment will start" to meet Iran's needs.

20% enrichment is not a power plant requirement, but is if you intend to weaponize. Iran already had achieved 4.5% enrichment, which conforms to the data from the nuclear power industry that "...the most prevalent power reactors in the world, uranium is enriched to 3 to 5%"

"To the mullahs, nukes are the way to ensure that no matter how badly they provoke us, we’ll never attack for fear of a nuclear exchange. And if you think it over carefully, for the Mullahs basic geopolitical strategy requires nuclear weapons – that they are insane and shouldn't’t do it doesn’t matter. You have to think of it from the lunatic’s point of view."

The problem is that now we’ve got a President who has already shown himself unwilling to offend our enemies. The plain fact of the matter is we need a President who can grimly look that fact in the face, and still do the right thing. Obama doesn’t impress me as a man who can do this.

And that means that Israel, if it wishes to survive, will have to strike…and by implication will bring us along as well (we're basically next door now in Iraq). If Israeli planes do penetrate Iraqi airspace, will U.S. military commanders order them to turn back?

Will American fighters be scrambled to intercept them? Will we shoot them down, or will we allow them to continue on to their Iranian targets?

The other interesting development is Iran showing off their new destroyer....possibly for Straits of Hormuz combat??? Commentary and discussion here is welcome..these are weird times for sure...