Iran May Be Closer To Nukes Than Thought

U.S. Intelligence Moves Up Worst-Case Scenario Date To 2010, But Says Iran Will Likely Take Longer

(CBS)  CBS News has learned that a new intelligence report says Iran has overcome technical difficulties in enriching uranium and could have enough bomb-grade material for a single nuclear weapon in less than three years.

U.S. intelligence officials caution that before Iran could meet or beat that 2010 date, it would have to make further technical progress in operating a uranium enrichment plant now under construction, reports CBS News national security correspondent David Martin.

As a result, there is no change in the official estimate that it will take Iran until 2015 to become a nuclear power. But David Albright, a leading expert, thinks that doesn't give Iranian scientists enough credit.

"I think Iran can get enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon sooner than that," Albright says. "I think the 2015 number reflects too much skepticism about Iran's technical capabilities, and they are making progress."

Although U.S. intelligence still considers an Iranian nuclear weapon by 2010 as a worst-case scenario, Pentagon officials say the new report narrows the window in which Israel might launch a preemptive strike against Iran, as it did in 1981 against an Iraqi nuclear reactor.

Israel is the country most threatened by the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapon. Former CIA officer Bruce Riedel says this latest intelligence would increase the chances of an Israeli strike launched with American-built warplanes.

"The Israelis have long believed that Iran is closer than U.S. intelligence believes it is," Riedel says. "If they now hear that the Americans think it's getting closer as well, it puts pressure on Israel to take its own action."

Riedel adds that an Israeli strike would be seen in Iran as no different from an American strike and could involve the U.S. in a war against a much tougher opponent than Iraq.

In Tehran, CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer reports the nuclear program is a matter of national pride.

A few weeks ago, president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gathered reporters at the main nuclear plant in Natanz to boast that his country now could enrich uranium on an industrial scale.

But what exactly does that mean?

In the enrichment process, scientists feed uranium gas into linked centrifuges. Iranian officials hint that they have 3,000 centrifuges working at Natanz. But international atomic energy commission inspectors — who toured the plant last month — are reported to have seen less than half that many working — 1,300 — and only a few had uranium gas in them.

Iran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only — to make fuel for power plants being built in Iran by the Russians.

Two years ago, Palmer and her CBS News crew were the first Western reporters to be shown the heavy water plant at Arak, which the Iranians say is for making medical radioactive isotopes.

The trouble is few world leaders are convinced and at the moment there is no surefire way of checking until — perhaps — it's too late.

[nebyetti]

Let's just sum this up w/o bringing politics into it. It doesn't matter whether there is a Democrat or Republican in office when a nuke goes off on American soil. The fact of the matter is that if Iran gets nukes; terrorists WILL get nukes as well.....and then 9/11 will seem like a minor historical precursor to the worse act of terror the world has ever seen in war or peacetime....but you guys just keep being bickering partisians...the rest of us are out buying iodine because of our inept federal government (whether it is democrat or republican controlled.)

[gulfwarvet3]

Think of this.
First: President Bush is NOT a one man show. He has advisors that help in making mostly ALL decisions. SO stop the BUSH DID IT theory or Bush lied theory. The decisions made are based on some information that is classified and you really don't know of it. Because if you did and the American public did, they couldn't handle it. Some Americans couldn't wrap their minds around the intense puzzle and stratigic planning that goes into these decisions. This is not like making a grocery list.

Second: If President Bush were to stop all terrorism campains, or had never started them, I wonder where we woud be today? The United States would start looking like a third world country as the Headlines of every news paper in America would have stories of bombings and chaos daily.
Do you want that? I'll answer for you. No!

Third: All Presidents have their downfall. We all know this. But this Country needs to pick itself up, dust itself off, and regroup. It doesn't matter if the President is Democrat or Republican. It doesn't matter if it is a HE or a SHE (or both) It doesn't matter if they are Black or White. What matters is they are supported by the people. Remember we voted for him....so suck it up and drive on.

Gulf War Vet 3

[honest_news]

j-whitman:

Jews are not "accepted" in Iran. The remaining population, which dates back a thousand years before Muhammad, currently exists in a tenuous state of "tolerance" -- with severe restrictions on employment, civil rights and contact with anyone outside of Iran.

Less than 30 years ago, the number of Jewish Iranians was estimated at 80,000. Now it is down to less than a third of that -- about 25,000. This remians by far the largest number of Jews in any single Muslim country, but it is important to understand that these people have lived in Iran (Persia) for thousands of years. It's not as if Iran permits Jews to immigrate into their country -- just to leave it. At the current rate of disintegration, there will be no Jewish people, no 3,000-year Jewish culture remaining in Tehran by 2020.

[j-whitman]

singinrick,,,
You might surf over to another CBS Story,, in today's news.. It's how Jews are accepted in Iran

But despite what appears to be a dwindling minority under constant threat of persecution, Iranian Jews say they live in relative freedom in the Islamic Republic, remain loyal to the land of their birth, and are striving to separate politics from religion.

They caution against comparing Iran's official and visceral opposition to the creation of Israel and Zionism with the regime's acceptance of Jews and Judaism itself.

[wolf563]

IRAN IS A THREAT TO ANY MIDDLE EAST COUNTRY EVEN WITHOUT A FULL SCALE NUKE . AT THIS POINT IN TIME THEY COULD USE WHAT THEY HAVE AGAINST ISRAEL "DIRTY BOMBS" .IRAN IS MORE INTERESTED IN TAKING CONTROL OF THE MIDDLE EAST . MUSLIMS AROUND THE WORLD ARE STAGING PROTESTS AND ATTACKS .

[tiredofthebs]

Had this been an article about the "failures" in Iraq, or the "failures" of the Bush administration, it would miraculously become the truth to libs, but since the article is actually pointing the finger to the true enemy's of peace in the world like Iran, who openly supports radical Islamic jihad, it can't possibly be true news according to liberal guidelines and principles.

It becomes propoganda only when it has nothing to do with spitting out more disgusting hatred towards the US and our president, right?

Sadly, this is the reality of the culture we live in nowadays.

Posted by singinrick at 10:03 PM : Apr 26, 2007


Are you kiddin' ?! The reality that we live in is that our (IDIOT) president is dancin' around the constitution like a rockette. He lied to invade IRAQ ..... period. US citizens are no longer welcome in ANY country but the US !!!! I don' t need to bash your "HERO" from Texas. He's doin' a great job makin' a fool of himself for the world to see.

[wolf563]

grazinggoat :I just thought I would pass on what the prophets have said . I thought it was interesting how all this is comming together the way it was written over 300 years ago .

[tommancuso]

"Liberals do not deserve freedom, they became comfortable with it. I think they might need to bleed a bit to understand the cost of it."

Ironic, isn't it? Here lately, Liberalism has been equated to hatred, un-Americanism, cowardice, tree hugging and bed wetting. Yet virtually all the freedoms we enjoy were won for us by the Liberals. Do you suppose the Bill of Rights (including the Second Amendment) was a Conservative idea? Republican, Self-Righteous, Religious Wackos repeatedly bash the "Liberal Media". I have trouble finding them - all the talk shows are right-wing. Liberals are blamed for the problems in Iraq, Iran and the US.

Perhaps if the Chicken Hawks (Cheney, Bush, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and all the others who never saw combat) had to volunteer to bleed first, we liberals could learn the cost of freedom.

RA 18562251

[grazinggoat]

...in 2015 WITH a united attack on IRAN from the sea and land .Are you ready for WORLD WAR 3 .
Posted by wolf563 at 02:47 PM : Apr 27, 2007

-Wolf563: What have you been grazing today? Don't go into the mushrooms side of the green field.

[grazinggoat]

singinrick,

Re: "We're headin' towards Armageddon, in my opinion."

Only in your twisted blood drenched dreams, 'singinrick'.
If it should come about, I hope that you are nearby. You'll know me if you see me. I will be the one pointing at you and laughing as you are "left behind".
Posted by feelfree1 at 01:10 AM : Apr 27, 2007

-Thank you feelfree1 for this refreshing posting I LMAO when I read it.

-With and inspite all my optimism and love of life, I'm getting really depressed by those twisted-minds and corrupt people such as sickRick and the rest of them. They personify the death knights who are looking to destroy this beautiful planet. They 'enjoy' not to say rejoice the vision of destruction scenes and death.