Israel: Iran slowing nuclear program, won’t have bomb before 2015

[bananas]

Source: McClatchy Newspapers

Israeli intelligence officials now estimate that Iran won’t be able to build a nuclear weapon before 2015 or 2016, pushing back by several years previous assessments of Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Intelligence briefings given to McClatchy over the last two months have confirmed that various officials across Israel’s military and political echelons now think it’s unrealistic that Iran could develop a nuclear weapons arsenal before 2015. Others pushed the date back even further, to the winter of 2016.

"Previous assessments were built on a set of data that has since shifted," said one Israeli intelligence officer, who spoke to McClatchy only on the condition that he not be identified. He said that in addition to a series of "mishaps" that interrupted work at Iran’s nuclear facilities, Iranian officials appeared to have slowed the program on their own.

"We can’t attribute the delays in Iran’s nuclear program to accidents and sabotage alone," he said. "There has not been the run towards a nuclear bomb that some people feared. There is a deliberate slowing on their end."

<snip>

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/01/28/v-fullstory/3205199/israel-iran-slowing-nuclear-program.html

[TwilightGardener]

1. Wonder if there's any credibility to reports of an explosion at an Iran nuke facility?

That sounds sabotage-y, if true.

[bananas]

9. Don't know, both articles were written by the same reporter

Sheera Frenkel wrote both the McClatchy and London Times articles.

Link to the London Times article: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014382872
"Iranian uranium-enriching facility 'is damaged by explosion'"

[TwilightGardener]

11. Didn't see that you posted that earlier, thanks--that's the first

credible source I've seen reporting it.

[bunnies]

2. Well whaddaya know.

[Arctic Dave]

3. And Israel stills has nukes now.

Although they shouldn't. They don't have the mental stability for such a weapon.

[cstanleytech]

4. So what? They havent used them against anyone and I trust them with nukes

far more than I trust Iran if they ever manage to get them and for me thats saying alot as I am not a fan of Israel because of alot of the decisions the Israeli government has made.

[Arctic Dave]

7. I don't trust either one.

Both have unstable people leading them.

[cstanleytech]

15. That we both can agree on. nt

[Purveyor]

5. They are slowing their 'nuclear program' because once NKorea demonstrates their nukes are

viable (note pending NK underground nuke test), Iran will be their first customer.

Just saying...

[cstanleytech]

6. *shrug* Or maybe sanity is rearing its ugly head

and Iran realizes that they dont need nukes when they have oil? Would be nice if that was actually whats happening as a sane Iran would be such a nice thing to hear about.

[Purveyor]

8. Iraq has oil too and look what a mess we made of that place. I don't blame Iran one iota for

wanting 'the bomb' as long as selected others are allowed them.

[cstanleytech]

16. Different circumstances.

Iraq was due to a combination imo of Bush wanting to show his father that he could do the job he couldnt do and complete and utter stupidity on the part of Bush and of Saddam for playing stupid games that allowed for it to happen.
Iran on the other hand is ruled by a bunch of religious nutjobs who have a history of taking civilians hostage and ruthlessly have suppressed their people for most of the past 30 +/- years and I say most because there was a point about 10 - 15 years ago when they seemed to be reforming and behaving in a more rational manner which I was saddened to see end.

[killbotfactory]

10. election season is over, time to tone down the rhetoric. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. ^^^^this^^^^

[krispos42]

12. Iran is always 2-4 years from a nuclear bomb.

They seem to have been there for my entire lifetime!

[Auntie Bush]

14. Conveniently pushed up date in order to effect the 2016 elections...how Bibish!