zenpundit.com » Blog Archive » DoubleTweet: Netanyahu, Obama and that little round bomb

DoubleTweet: Netanyahu, Obama and that little round bomb

[ by Charles Cameron — an image and its likeness ]

I know, it’s a day or two old, but Netanyahu / Obama is a ping-pong match with quite a bit of top spin to it, in which:

becomes this:


And the bomb? It’s a cartoon bomb of the kind you’d see in one of MAD magazine’s old Spy vs Spy pages — or in the headgear of a certain religious figure disrespectfully portrayed by Jyllands-Posten.

3 Responses to “DoubleTweet: Netanyahu, Obama and that little round bomb”

  1. Grurray Says:

    Just to set the record straight,
    the report about Mossad states they said, “Iran is “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons” and “doesn’t appear to be ready to enrich it [uranium] to higher levels.”
    But it doesn’t give the whole story
    “Writing that Iran had not begun the work needed to build any kind of nuclear weapon, the Mossad cable said the Islamic Republic’s scientists are “working to close gaps in areas that appear legitimate such as enrichment reactors”.

    Such activities, however, “will reduce the time required to produce weapons from the time the instruction is actually given”.”
    Netanyahu said Iran was one year away from the bomb which wasn’t exactly true. However, Iran would be one year away from making a bomb after the “instruction” which would be Khamenei’s order to proceed.
    It would be truthful to say instead that Iran is one order and one year away from the bomb. This new deal doesn’t affect anything except keeping the order off the lips of Khamenei- for now.

  2. Charles Cameron Says:

    Hi Grurray:
    As you know, I’m neither knowledgeable about nuclear weapons and their construction ansd use, nor an intel analyst with an inside scoop, but I have the impression Netanyahu may not be the most accurate predictor of Iranian bomb-making potential.
    According to this piece in The Intercept – not necessarily my favorite source:

    + in 1992, Netanyahu told the Knesset Iran was “three to five years” away from reaching nuclear weapons capability
    + in his 1995 book, Fighting Terrorism, he claimed Iran would have a nuclear weapon in “three to five years”
    + in 1996, Netanyahu told Congress, “If Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons, this could presage catastrophic consequences, not only for my country, and not only for the Middle East, but for all mankind .. the deadline for attaining this goal is getting extremely close”
    + in 2009 Netanyahu told a Congressional delegation Iran was “probably one or two years away” from weapons capability
    + later that year he told another US delegation, “Iran has the capability now to make one bomb .. they could wait and make several bombs in a year or two.”
    + in 2012 he said Iran was just “a few months away” from attaining nuclear capabilities
    + and at the UN the same year that “Iran would have the ability to construct a weapon within roughly one year.”

    I guess my questions are:

    + is the Intercept report accurate in regards to these various statements? — and,
    + do they just take us one skin of the onion deeper into a multi-layered truth? — and,
    + assuming there’s a Recording Angel with a 100% accuracy of knowledge and interpretation, would such an angel, considering this issue, come down on the side of Netanyahu, Obama, Khamenei, or none of the above?

    FWIW: I would rather get my news from such a Recording Angel than from either the Netanyahu or Obama camp, Rupert Murdoch or Ted Turner, etc — but as you know, there’s a lot of static..

  3. larrydunbar Says:

    ““will reduce the time required to produce weapons from the time the instruction is actually given”.””
    But it does seem to me that the Mossad has confidence that they will know when that “time” starts.
    I mean Iran may or may not want to split atoms, but it sounds to me that Mossad is willing to split the time between aim and fire.
    Why not give it to them?
    Am I giving Mossad more than they are due? They seem to be a very serious outfit, which someone, in bed with the House and Senate of the USA, I am less sure of.

Switch to our mobile site