The NIE actually leaves us with more questions than it answers, which doesn't stop the left from jumping off the cliff without looking and cherry picking partial comments and assuming there is nothing to worry about regarding Iran.
Then never did learn to read a whole piece before leaping and I fear they never will.
The Text of the Key Judgments, A-H can be found here...sorry it took so long to get them up, but my laptop and I were having issues and I had to use another machine to get them published.
Many have parsed the findings already, so I will not redo it all, I will just show you some of what is being said:
Strata-Sphere:
Now look at the report’s conclusions and it has two flavors. First is whether Iran stepped down from developing nuclear weapons in 2003 (after we invaded Iraq [hint, hint]):We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program;
• We assess with high confidence that until fall 2003, Iranian military entities were working under government direction to develop nuclear weapons.
• We judge with high confidence that the halt lasted at least several years.
OK, we spooked them by taking out Saddam so damn fast they stood back for a while from building their bombs. But are they STILL suspended in their activities (given Ahmedinejad’s and the UN’s IAEA’s recent statements this is an important question!). Apparently we do not know!
Read the whole thing... no doubt Iran halted the program but quite a bit of doubt as to whether they restarted it in the recent years, then we have Iran's public statements which state very clearly they have and are continuing to do so.
Hot Air has more:
More: Cliff May, Victor Davis Hanson and Dan Riehl have more to say about the NIE. One thing I’ll add is just a reminder that our intel agencies missed the fall of the Berlin Wall and had no idea that Libya’s nuclear program was as advance as it was until Ghaddafi mailed it to us after we took out Saddam. He abandoned that program precisely because we took out Saddam, and that struck fear into him. There’s every reason to think that the Iraq invasion had the same (temporary) effect on the Iranians, but that the intervening years of our own divisions over Iraq and the broader war may have caused them to reconsider and unshelve the program. That’s an unknown unknown at this point.
The White House statement:
Today’s National Intelligence Estimate offers some positive news. It confirms that we were right to be worried about Iran seeking to develop nuclear weapons. It tells us that we have made progress in trying to ensure that this does not happen.
But the intelligence also tells us that the risk of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon remains a very serious problem. The estimate offers grounds for hope that the problem can be solved diplomatically — without the use of force — as the Administration has been trying to do. And it suggests that the President has the right strategy: intensified international pressure along with a willingness to negotiate a solution that serves Iranian interests while ensuring that the world will never have to face a nuclear armed Iran.
The bottom line is this: for that strategy to succeed, the international community has to turn up the pressure on Iran — with diplomatic isolation, United Nations sanctions, and with other financial pressure — and Iran has to decide it wants to negotiate a solution.
Even the NYT is very careful in their intro to hedge their bets with the word "probably":
Here is the text of a statement issued today by Stephen Hadley, President Bush’s national security adviser, concerning the new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran’s nuclear weapons program. The intelligence estimate says that, contrary to previous assessments, Iran halted the program in 2003 in response to international pressure and has probably not restarted it since then, though it has the capacity to do so.
Sweetness and Light adds a little realism to the mix:
And, for that matter, is the New York Times accurately portraying this latest National Intelligence Estimate?
Lest we forget, this wouldn’t be the first time The Times had purposefully misreported an NIE report for their own political ends.
Stop the ACLU:
The left, who never trusted our intelligence when it thought Iran were close to having the bomb, suddenly have newfound confidence to cheer! Of course, because underestimating Iran’s progress on a nuclear bomb is a much safer than keeping a cautious and skeptical eye on it. After all, the intelligence on Iraq’s WMDs turned out to be so accurate.
QandO makes this point:
Then there's this:Last month, Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the international Atomic Energy Agency, had reported that Iran was operating 3,000 uranium-enriching centrifuges, capable of producing fissile material for nuclear weapons.
But his report said that I.A.E.A. inspectors in Iran had been unable to determine whether the Iranian program sought only to generate electricity or also to build weapons.
When that report was issued I said I didn't trust ElBaradei as far as I could throw him, but I've come to the conclusion that I trust our intelligence apparatus even less.
Outside the Beltway points everyone to the unclassified NIE report itself:
You can read the unclassified report [PDF] at the The Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
Go through the whole report and take careful note of where they have high confidence, moderate confidence and low confidence, then make your judgments accordingly.
This way you aren't getting information "spin" from one side or the other, you are doing your own research an making your own determinations.
[Update] The Weekly Standard has five of those unanswered questions listed..go read and see if YOU see the answers in the report.
.
