Yes, I've given up on wondering if the most recent reports of whether Iran is within X months of crossing the nuclear threshold is valid. All those predictions that have failed have worn me out.
But I did not learn that the failures of those predictions mean that the prospect of a nuclear Iran isn't a worry that will be a reality if not stopped.
Whatever the timeline, a nuclear Iran will be a disaster.
If Iran uses nuclear weapons, that's obviously a disaster.
If Iran uses nuclear weapons as a shield to escalate their support for terrorism, that's a lesser disaster.
If Iran uses nuclear weapons as a club to beat neighbors into submission out of fear, that's a lesser disaster.
And if Iran's possession of nuclear weapons sparks a regional scramble for nukes to counter Iran, that's a delayed much bigger disaster waiting to happen.
What we know for sure is that Iran won't be using nuclear weapons to deter America from invading them. If that was a worry, we'd have used this extra time when Iran does not have nuclear weapons to gear up and invade Iran. We have not.
The question is why hasn't Iran gone nuclear already? This is old technology that we mastered in 1945, after all.
But it isn't simple, apparently. Pakistan had problems. But they eventually built them--prompting India to reply in kind.
North Korea is having problems, but they are making progress toward nuclear weapons.
Iran is making progress, too.
Further, people are actively seeking to stop Iran. So Israel, America, and whoever else are seeking to undermine progress through covert means including cyber-war, assassination, and feeding bad information to their nuclear program.
And Iran needs all parts of the nuclear programs to cross the finish line at the same time. They want the ability to make nuclear bomb material by enriching uranium, they want a warhead design, and they want a long-range missile capable of carrying that nuclear warhead.
If some parts are lagging, it makes no sense to push ahead with the one that is most advanced first. So enrichment is often adjusted to slow down that part in order to get headlines that describe Iran's ability to go nuclear as delayed.
The same is true of Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium. Reduce that stock and suddenly Iran is further away by that measure.
Heck, reports during the Bush administration that Iran stopped work on nuclear warhead design could either mean they succeeded in that part or that they are so close that they could afford to suspend it to avoid crossing a red line. Those are more persuasive than thinking the mullahs decided safe and clean nuclear electricity motivates them to endure sanctions and isolation from the West on trade issues.
Yet even as the Iranians adjust those enrichment metrics, they increase their ability to rapidly enrich uranium by adding more and improved centrifuges.
So when the warhead design and missile parts of their nuclear weapons program are both ready, Iran can quickly enrich nuclear material to make the warheads before inspectors can discover the breakout attempt.
And if was an Iranian nutball, I'd have bought several warheads or nuclear missiles to deter attacks as Iran crosses the red line in three places at once (enrichment, warhead design, and long-range missiles).
So sure, get a chuckle about how wrong the worriers have been for so long about predicting when Iran would go nuclear. Yeah, funny stuff. Iran wants nuclear weapons so badly that they've pursued them for nearly thirty years despite immense problems that add to the cost to Iran. But rather than being grateful that Iran hasn't justified all those predictions of when Iran could go nuclear if all went well (from Iran's point of view), we can mock those worries.
And if you really believe that force is a last option should Iran not agree to a diplomatic solution, just how confident can we be that intelligence will pinpoint when Iran is about to cross that red line? What will make that warning a real trigger rather than one more warning that proved to be premature?
I mean, if you believe our president has an actual solid red line on this issue and that all options really are on the table (I fear that really means accepting Iranian nukes rather than hinting at a military option), you have to have some confidence that we know when we should attack, shouldn't you?
Add nuclear missiles in the hands of mad mullahs to the classic form of comedy--anvils and idiots.
UPDATE: This is what I'm talking about on the uranium stockpile manipulation:
The Islamic Republic's holding of uranium gas refined to a fissile concentration of 20 percent is closely watched by the West as it represents a relatively short technical step away from the level required for the core of an atomic bomb.
Israel, which has long warned it could use force to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons, has said its foe must not obtain enough of this higher-grade uranium for one warhead if processed further. Iran says its work is peaceful and that it is Israel's assumed nuclear arsenal that threatens peace. ...
Iran has over the past year in effect kept the amount of its 20 percent reserve well below Israel's so-called "red line" by converting a large part of the uranium gas into oxide to make fuel for a medical research reactor in Tehran.
"Iran does not want to provoke Israel to attack Iran. Especially now," said nuclear expert Mark Hibbs of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace think-tank.
And note, too, that the Iranians apparently don't believe Israel is incapable of striking and harming Iran's nuclear programs.
