Israel Tests on Worm Called Crucial in Iran Nuclear Delay

[TomClash]

Source: NYTimes

The Dimona complex in the Negev desert is famous as the heavily guarded heart of Israel’s never-acknowledged nuclear arms program, where neat rows of factories make atomic fuel for the arsenal.

Over the past two years, according to intelligence and military experts familiar with its operations, Dimona has taken on a new, equally secret role — as a critical testing ground in a joint American and Israeli effort to undermine Iran’s efforts to make a bomb of its own.

Behind Dimona’s barbed wire, the experts say, Israel has spun nuclear centrifuges virtually identical to Iran’s at Natanz, where Iranian scientists are struggling to enrich uranium. They say Dimona tested the effectiveness of the Stuxnet computer worm, a destructive program that appears to have wiped out roughly a fifth of Iran’s nuclear centrifuges and helped delay, though not destroy, Tehran’s ability to make its first nuclear arms.

“To check out the worm, you have to know the machines,” said an American expert on nuclear intelligence. “The reason the worm has been effective is that the Israelis tried it out.”

Read more: www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/world/middleeast/16stuxnet.html?hp

---

What a surprise.

[Scottybeamer70]

1. I wish

someone would explain to me why it is OK for Israel to have nuclear weapons in the
Middle East, and it's not all right for others to do so. We GIVE them 3 billion
every year.........wonder where they got all that technology? Pollard??

[Prometheus Bound]

2. It's okay for Israel because they didn't sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

It's sounds more than a bit silly, but that's the answer you'll get from some.

Of course, following that line of reasoning it would be ok for Iran to develop nuclear weapons if they only had not had the decency to sign the NPT. Of course Iran is adhering to the terms of the NPT but Western nations criticizing her are not.

[dipsydoodle]

3. What I don't understand

is what stops Iran pulling pulling out of the agreement until Israel agrees to sign.

[social_critic]

6. The Russians would have to stop helping them at Busher

If Iran gets out of the agreement, the Russians would have to stop helping them with the nuclear power plant. I've looked into this in detail from a legal standpoint, and the Iranians are right - they have the right to do what they are doing.

The US, being to a large extent guided by the Israel lobby when it comes to its Middle East policy (see "The Israel Lobby" by Waltz and Mearsheimer for details), has a wrong headed policy in this case. Iran, on the other hand, has no reason to step out of the NPT, because it keeps its legal case strong - even though it's evident legality doesn't count for much when it comes to the US and Israel.

There's a lot of misinformation and bad intelligence being passed around in the US and to US citizens on this matter - some of it outright lies passed on by "intelligence experts" who I happen to know are on the Mossad's payroll. Therefore, a lot of what you hear in the US is garbage, unreliable, and has no basis whatsoever.

Just remember the Iraqi WMD lies, how the US media cooperated to sell the lie to the American people, and how both Republicans and Democrats (including Mrs Clinton and Mr Biden) lined up behind Bush/Cheney et al to start the Iraq war. The case with Iran is identical - most of what you hear is lies, the logic is flawed, and what's being put first is whatever the ultra right wing regime in Israel wants.

But then, let's not be naive, nothing in this world is just, we never know the truth, and bad things happen to good people all the time.

[Behind the Aegis]

7. Really? Do tell.

"...some of it outright lies passed on by "intelligence experts" who I happen to know are on the Mossad's payroll."

Your post reads like nothing more than typical propaganda.

[Behind the Aegis]

5. It is not silly. It is a legitimate, logical answer.

Perhaps that is why you find it silly? It would explain your next statement. They can withdraw at anytime.

[Prometheus Bound]

8. But it would make no sense for them to withdraw from the treaty.

The promised benefits for signatories wishing to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes are appealing.

[Behind the Aegis]

11. Therefore, they shouldn't withdraw. However...

...it doesn't mean because Israel is not a signatory should have any bearing on their following the NPT. That fact seems to slip the minds of those who complain about Israel not being a signatory.

[TheMadMonk]

13. Yes it's a perfectly logical answer to publically abandon the ONLY thing...

...which gives them ANY insulation from Israel and the US and their stated intention to "neutralise" Iran as a power in the Middle East.

Not just abandon, but serve up a pretext to go forward, on a solid gold platter.

[Violet_Crumble]

20. It's a ridiculous and silly answer...

The example the poster gave when it comes to the sort of illogical 'reasoning' of those who argue that it's okay for Israel as Israel didn't sign the NPT. As they already explained very clearly why they found it silly, how about you explain why you don't find it a silly argument, espcially given the example of its use that was given with Iran as the example...

[bananas]

9. Iran is not adhering to the terms of the NPT, they are in violation of them

which is why there are UN sanctions on Iran.

[Prometheus Bound]

10. No they are not. And the sanctions are a violation of the treaty.

[bananas]

12. Are too.

[Prometheus Bound]

14. Nope.

[TomClash]

16. Of course if Pakistan acquires ICBMs israel will not object

Pakistan is not an NPT signatory either.

[golfguru]

4. Because Israeli leaders keep threatening to wipe Iran

off the map, whereas Iranian leaders never say such threats
to Israel. <sarc>

[azurnoir]

15. Apparently it is ok for

certain countries to engage in cyber-terrorism, something I find strange

[jakeXT]

17. k&r

[Still a Democrat]

18. Like most of the civilized world, I don't want Iran getting nuclear weapons

And if it can be prevented like this, sounds good to me.

[Alamuti Lotus]

19. the "civilized world" allegedly does not condone international terrorism

the kind of which "sounds good to you" and has achieved this result. I suppose "terror" is only wrong from certain sources;--these rules and exceptions are so hard to keep up with sometimes, but can be explained by that simple formula.

[Still a Democrat]

21. A comptuer worm bothers you more than Iran having nukes

Beats a military strike doesn't it?

[Kurska]

22. How is this terrorism in even the loosest of definitions?

No one was hurt and no one was terrorized. Frankly I don't even get how you can make that claim.

[conspirator]

23. Your reasoning is of a scared freeper: "Brown people cannot have bigger weapons than us"

See NK has those weapons and they will not use them unless provoked.
And their leaders are more batshit crazy than Iran's

[oberliner]

24. "Brown people" ?

Have you ever actually met any Iranians?