quote: WSJ: Scholar Warns Iran's Ahmadinejad May Have 'Cataclysmic Events' In Mind For August 22 Tue Aug 08 2006 10:22:35 ET
In a WALL STREET JOURNAL op-ed Tuesday, Princeton's Bernard Lewis writes: "There is a radical difference between the Islamic Republic of Iran and other governments with nuclear weapons. This difference is expressed in what can only be described as the apocalyptic worldview of Iran's present rulers."
"In Islam as in Judaism and Christianity, there are certain beliefs concerning the cosmic struggle at the end of time -- Gog and Magog, anti-Christ, Armageddon, and for Shiite Muslims, the long awaited return of the Hidden Imam, ending in the final victory of the forces of good over evil, however these may be defined."
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad "and his followers clearly believe that this time is now, and that the terminal struggle has already begun and is indeed well advanced. It may even have a date, indicated by several references by the Iranian president to giving his final answer to the US about nuclear development by Aug. 22," which this year corresponds "to the 27th day of the month of Rajab of the year 1427. This, by tradition, is the night when many Muslims commemorate the night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq, first to 'the farthest mosque,' usually identified with Jerusalem, and then to heaven and back (c.f., Koran XVII.1).
"This might well be deemed an appropriate date for the apocalyptic ending of Israel and if necessary of the world. It is far from certain that Mr. Ahmadinejad plans any such cataclysmic events precisely for Aug. 22. But it would be wise to bear the possibility in mind."
posted
Iran is nowhere near developing a nuclear weapon. There's a slight possibility they might have acquired a nuke from somewhere (most likely NK), but if anything is planned, it is extremely unlikely it involves nukes.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
They don't need a nuclear weapon to cause serious trouble. Their conventional capabilities are well documented and nothing to laugh at.
Posts: 1156 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: Iran is nowhere near developing a nuclear weapon. There's a slight possibility they might have acquired a nuke from somewhere (most likely NK), but if anything is planned, it is extremely unlikely it involves nukes.
AQ Kahn was certainly contacted by Iran about Nuclear Weapon designs and to what extent he complied is not common knowledge. I think underestimating Iran's capabilities would be a mistake. Since we already made that mistake with North Korea, and we are already trying to deal with them now working on developing longer range missile technology, it would be idiotic to waltz into, "Fool me twice, shame on me," territory.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
We didn't underestimate NK's ability to construct nukes at all, just their willingness to transgress against treaties and international norms. We had an excellent idea of their capabilities to construct nukes, they specifically motivated some of our treaty terms with them, such as the sealing of all weapons grade plutonium that had been produced. We have a similarly excellent idea of Iran's capabilities, particularly as we have an extensive accounting from one of the countries that dealt with AQ Khan and as much of an accounting as is possible from inside Pakistan (which was complicit, but turned on him once discovered) of what AQ Khan offered countries.
Iran's been trumpeting what they have from the rooftops, and even been over-trumpeting, as far as we can tell. Foreign policy analysts generally think Iran is overstating their capabilities. However, even if Iran is significantly more advanced than we think, they are still far from a nuke. The principle limiter is nuclear material, and that is one of the easiest quantities to track because the output of various sorts of nuclear plants are well known, and for most of their operation we know where that output was going, since only recently has Iran decided to take its plants out of international monitoring.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
