ab2cmiller
Troublemaker in training
- Messages
- 11,453
- Reaction score
- 8,532
I'm on the fence. I started out strongly believing this was all a way to avoid FOIA. Now I'm not sure.
Foreign Policy
- Thread starter Whiskeyjack
- Start date
C
ColoradoIrish
Guest
If this was any other administration, would that opinion be swayed one way or the other.
I'll admit I'm definitely biased against them and fully believe they use signal to avoid FOIA. I also fully believe they use it quite regularly
BuaConstrictor
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,277
- Reaction score
- 1,920
Waltz all but admitted to that in the leaked messages.
C
ColoradoIrish
Guest
I've been busy today and haven't fully kept up with everything new that's come out
Another interesting thing that got lost due to dumbassgate was the current us threat assessment apparently states that Iran hasn’t seriously persued its nuclear weapons program since 2003.
“The IC continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamanei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003”.
US Intel Report Finds Iran "Not" Building Nuclear Weapon Despite Strategic Losses
“The IC continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamanei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003”.
US Intel Report Finds Iran "Not" Building Nuclear Weapon Despite Strategic Losses
BuaConstrictor
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,277
- Reaction score
- 1,920
It came out in the initial batch. One second....
References "the first PC" which I would believe is on this topic..and I doubt they just used Signal twice..only in relation to the Houthi strikes/situation.
So yeah, they use Signal a lot.
Ratcliffe even mentioned yesterday that they use Signal and tried blaming the previous administration for it because the practice was "passed down".
They use it a lot.
ab2cmiller
Troublemaker in training
- Messages
- 11,453
- Reaction score
- 8,532
"However, Gabbard added, “Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels and is unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons.”"
Translation = currently not building, but ready to start building at a drop of a hat.
Translation = currently not building, but ready to start building at a drop of a hat.
These guys are just shameless idiots.
Oh yeah? Since 2003. They’re gonna build a bunch of centrifuges and warheads at the “drop of an hat”? Sounds pretty ridiculous.
Iran being the bad actor in the region is the biggest bunch of bullshit propaganda.
They helped the US take down Al Queda and Isis. The Saudis in the other hand…
ab2cmiller
Troublemaker in training
- Messages
- 11,453
- Reaction score
- 8,532
What's the purpose of stockpiling enriched uranium?
“Enriched uranium is a critical component for both civil nuclear power generation and military nuclear weapons.”
Enriched uranium - Wikipedia
Honestly, considering the belligerence of Israel who has nuclear weapons obtaining nuclear weapons would be completely rational from a deterrence standpoint.
BuaConstrictor
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,277
- Reaction score
- 1,920
ab2cmiller
Troublemaker in training
- Messages
- 11,453
- Reaction score
- 8,532
So most nuclear power plants need enriched uranium to 3-5%.
Iran's sitting on a crap load of uranium enriched to 60%.
I ask again, what's the purpose?
Iran's sitting on a crap load of uranium enriched to 60%.
I ask again, what's the purpose?
BuaConstrictor
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,277
- Reaction score
- 1,920
“Enriched uranium is a critical component for both civil nuclear power generation and military nuclear weapons.”
Enriched uranium - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Honestly, considering the belligerence of Israel who has nuclear weapons obtaining nuclear weapons would be completely rational.
I would imagine to act as a possible deterrent to the demonstrated belligerence of the US and Israel.
Both countries have a solid track record of shooting first and making shit up later in the region.
Hilarious
TorontoGold
Mr. Dumb Moron
- Messages
- 7,358
- Reaction score
- 5,709
Haven't you heard of the Muslim invasion? Would be better to just wipe them out entirely! I mean, the DUI pick has a nice tattoo referencing the crusades!
I'm pretty sure you could find like 3-5 people on this board who would be a-ok with that happening.
GATTACA!
It's about to get gross
- Messages
- 15,105
- Reaction score
- 12,943
How is this preferable to using government issued devices with government controlled communication software?
ab2cmiller
Troublemaker in training
- Messages
- 11,453
- Reaction score
- 8,532
From what I understand, it’s certainty not preferable from a security perspective.
I really don’t have a good handle on this, but I believe “secure terminal equipment” are basically desktop phones.
So if you are using Signal, you are choosing convenience (everyone can participate regardless of where they are) and sacrificing some amount of security. The references to “high side” in the transcript shows they are cognizant that some items couldn’t be shared via Signal.
Many/most security experts believe some of what was shared as far as strike times shouldn’t have been shared on Signal. They should own that and implement changes to eliminate it from happening in the future.
NDVirginia19
Rally
- Messages
- 4,435
- Reaction score
- 5,141
If you have enriched uranium, you have centrifuges. Thats how you enrich uranium
NDVirginia19
Rally
- Messages
- 4,435
- Reaction score
- 5,141
Umm. Have you ever used government controlled communication equipment?
It is certainly considerably more burdensome to get your SIPR computer out and connect. That being said these guys are almost all senate confirmed appointees who have “a guy” to set that up for them. And there was nothing time sensitive enough where they really needed input on the decision making chain for this. Hegseth stated they might do this strike and gave them an update and other nsc members gave feedback. I think an extremely appropriate use of this signal chat would have been Hegseth using signal to quickly get out to the team “sent you guys something important on the high side regarding our Middle East posture. Please take a look when you can”
- Messages
- 44,585
- Reaction score
- 20,038
Spot on.
I've been in technology longer than most of you have been alive. I've seen the stupid stuff people do. The convenience factor played a major role in IMO. I'm not defending any of this, but I think this was just a screwup with no intention of trying to hide anything. I would guess everyone on here has added someone to a group email or text inadvertently at one time or another and everyone who received the message probably didn't look through all of the names that were on the distribution list. Unless someone added the reporters name after the fact, whomever created it originally should be held accountable and this used as a teaching moment.
BuaConstrictor
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,277
- Reaction score
- 1,920
I'm glad that senior level cabinet officials should be held to the same standard as the membership of Irish Envy. Good to know that after all the talk of the "adults are back in charge" that we should just treat them like children.
And enriched uranium can be used for all kinds of domestic purposes.
“Enriched uranium is a critical component for both civil nuclear power generation and military nuclear weapons.”
Enriched uranium - Wikipedia
Again based on an honest assessment, Iran is pretty low on the totem poll of belligerent, bad actors in the Middle East. I haven’t seen any good arguments as to why we should not be diplomatically engaged with them at present.
The craziest part of all this is that much of the Middle East disinformation that right wingers love to reference is typically based on reporting done by the New York Times. The America news outlet that is even more pro Israel than the Israeli press and helped cook up the justification for invading Iraq.
Last edited:
BuaConstrictor
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,277
- Reaction score
- 1,920
I agree with some of what you are saying re: Iran not being the nuclear/world power bogeyman the general US citizen thinks it is, but I also disagree with the above. At least viewing it from a US foreign policy perspective, and in some instances from a broader moral moral and ethical stand point, Iran is a bad actor. They fund/support a lot of objectionably terrible groups of people.
Appreciate the response. I understand the moral and ethical arguments and agree completely. I also find any type of theocracy reprehensible.
Personally I would currently rate Iran below Israel, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan at this point and prior to Hussains removal below Iraq as well in terms of threats to stability in the region.
We engage with the shit bag theocracy that is Saudi Arabia not sure why we can’t with Iran, which is actually more progressive and democratic.
Anyhow, I’d recommend the podcast Breaking Points for anyone looking for good journalism from multiple perspectives.
BuaConstrictor
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,277
- Reaction score
- 1,920
I'd rate them above Pakistan, but not by much. Part of what concerns me most with Iran is there seems to be some instability in their own government as some hard liners try and re-take control and claw back against any of those progressive or democratic movements..... and some large of amounts of dissent in their own population. Things seem to be a bit untenable there.
Obviously what drives a certain amount of our animus with Iran is their support of anti-Israel terrorist groups and with Israel being an ally of ours that is going to make any real diplomatic ties difficult.
Saudi Arabia conversely has become less aggressive in regards to anti-Israel feelings and policy...SA has also been fighting a proxy war with Iran for what..decades at this point? As with all things, it's an entangled mess.
C
ColoradoIrish
Guest
Hopefully we get some answers