The American Pundit

The think tank in question is the International Institute for Strategic Studies. You know, the same IISS that has Dennis Blair, Barack Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, on its council. So I don’t see the Obama Administration discounting this report anytime soon.

Anyway, the IISS has actually been saying that Iran would be obtaining nuclear weapons for years. In 2006 it said that weapons were “inevitable”. In 2007 the IISS warned of Iran obtaining them within two years. Later that year it said that Iran was developing its own nuclear black market. And so here we are today.

Iran will have enough enriched uranium to make a single nuclear weapon later this year, the prestigious International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) predicts…

However, the survey reports doubts over US Intelligence estimates that Iran halted its work on nuclear weapons six years ago.

This points to Tehran’s continued development of long-range ballistic missiles able to reach targets in Israel and beyond.

The IISS recommends a mixture of carrot and stick as the best international response.

The “US Intelligence estimates” would be a reference to the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate that was used by the left and the media (but I repeat myself) to bash Bush over the head for lying, or sabre-rattling, or whatever other accusation was seen fit to attack the former president with.

My last post pointed out that Barack Obama’s first interview as president was given to Al-Arabiya, a network not exactly known for its pro-west tendencies. What did President Obama have to say in that interview regarding Iran’s nuclear program?

Q Will the United States ever live with a nuclear Iran? And if not, how far are you going in the direction of preventing it?

THE PRESIDENT: You know, I said during the campaign that it is very important for us to make sure that we are using all the tools of U.S. power, including diplomacy, in our relationship with Iran.

Now, the Iranian people are a great people, and Persian civilization is a great civilization. Iran has acted in ways that’s not conducive to peace and prosperity in the region: their threats against Israel; their pursuit of a nuclear weapon which could potentially set off an arms race in the region that would make everybody less safe; their support of terrorist organizations in the past — none of these things have been helpful.

But I do think that it is important for us to be willing to talk to Iran, to express very clearly where our differences are, but where there are potential avenues for progress. And we will over the next several months be laying out our general framework and approach. And as I said during my inauguration speech, if countries like Iran are willing to unclench their fist, they will find an extended hand from us.

So, uh, how about an answer to the question? President Obama seems to have stayed away from saying that a nuclear Iran is unacceptable. Would that be because he knows the Islamic Republic will obtain one and he’s not willing to anything that would actually, you know, stop it from doing so? Saying a nuclear Iran isn’t acceptable probably isn’t a good idea if you fully-intend on living with it.