In an unfounded and incitable article from the Associated Press (AP), the author stated that Iran was only 2 to 4 months away from having a nuclear warhead. This was based on no factual or worthwhile evidence whatsoever, and according to U.S. “intelligence” reports, is patently false.
This article was based on a report done by the Institute for Science and International Security. The problem is that the headline and claims by the AP were taken completely out of context. In other words, they grossly exaggerated the situation. In fact, the headline was meant to incite fear, even though that fear would be unwarranted. Given that most in this country only read the headlines, and rarely research the underlying reference material, the AP is stirring the pot so to speak, and in doing so, and without any hard evidence, is insinuating that Iran will have nuclear weapons within a few weeks. The indication is that not only will they have weapons, but that they will use them. This is a misleading and dangerous kind of “reporting.”
Even if all that was said in this ludicrous article were correct, Iran would be signing its own death warrant if it attempted to build or fire a nuclear weapon. The United States and Israel without provocation constantly threaten Iran with a nuclear attack, and both hold huge numbers of nuclear weapons. Should Iran attempt any attack of these countries, they would annihilate Iran in short order, so what incentive does Iran have to commit suicide?
I read the ISIS Report referenced by the AP, and it is a hypothetical document based on many factors. It does not state that Iran is going to quickly enrich its uranium to weapons grade, and in fact is titled “Iran’s Evolving Breakout Potential.” This report as I mentioned, is hypothetical, and is based upon “what if” scenarios. In other words, it should carry little if any weight concerning not only Iran’s capability to produce weapons grade uranium, but any intent by Iran to produce a nuclear weapon or use such a weapon in the future. Hypothetical research is not scientific fact. “If ifs and buts were candy, wouldn’t life be dandy?”
When logic is at all considered, and when factual evidence can be fully referenced, then one might take notice, and verify that evidence. But when hypothetical scenarios, and false speculation are all that exist, then skepticism is demanded. One short paragraph from page 4 of the 2012 ISIS report is enough to disregard the dangerously misleading AP article:
Although Iran’s breakout times are shortening, an Iranian breakout in the next year could not escape detection by the IAEA or the United States. Furthermore, the United States and its allies maintain the ability to respond forcefully to any Iranian decision to break out. During the next year or so, breakout times at Natanz and Fordow appear long enough to make an Iranian decision to break out risky. Therefore, ISIS assesses that Iran is unlikely to break out at Natanz or at Fordow in the near term, barring unforeseen developments such as a pre-emptive military strike.
Everything coming out of the mainstream press should be completely disregarded unless and until it can be factually verified, and without compromise. The agendas of government and its lackeys in the press are consistently entwined, and rarely do reports in the mainstream have any validity. The article mentioned here is no exception!