Politirant Political Forum

You're probably right. Obama has been more willing to use the military than I thought he would be but I don't understand the reasoning for his recent deployments (Libya and Central Africa). Like a lot of problems it seems this one is being kicked down the road for someone else to deal with.

But as the computer model ran forward in time, through 2009 and into 2010, positions shifted. American and Israeli national-security players grudgingly accepted that they could tolerate Iran having some civilian nuclear-energy capacity. Ahmadinejad, Khamenei and the religious radicals wavered; then, as the model reached our present day, their power — another variable in Bueno de Mesquita’s model — sagged significantly.

Amid the thousands of rows on the spreadsheet, there’s one called Forecast. It consists of a single number that represents the most likely consensus of all the players. It begins at 160 — bomb-making territory — but by next year settles at 118, where it doesn’t move much. “That’s the outcome,” Bueno de Mesquita said confidently, tapping the screen.

What does 118 mean? It means that Iran won’t make a nuclear bomb. By early 2010, according to the forecast, Iran will be at the brink of developing one, but then it will stop and go no further. If this computer model is right, all the dire portents we’ve seen in recent months — the brutal crackdown on protesters, the dubious confessions, Khamenei’s accusations of American subterfuge — are masking a tectonic shift. The moderates are winning, even if we cannot see that yet.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/magazine/16Bruce-t.html?pagewanted=all

This just pisses me off. The CIA needs real intel, not some joker with a computer. Iran will get to the brink of building a bomb and then stop. What?  The U.S. will be ok with Iran have nuclear power plants (and thus the waste needed for a dirty bomb). What? I mean I know this was back in 2009 but he was only predicting a year into the future. Wouldn't surprise me if he's exaggerating his importance to the CIA either...a lot of loons say they've worked for the CIA but then because it's 'classified'  it can't be confirmed. The NYT wouldn't be the first paper suckered in to a story like that.

Oh I know they use computers. They spend money on everything, a lot of it is waste IMO.

Let me ask you this, looking at that computer simulation would you have believed what it predicted? Considering that the predictions were made in mid 2009 about early 2010? Doesn't it seem ridiculous to you that Iran would get to the brink of building a bomb and then decide to stop?

Unfortunately GW engaged us in a frivolous war in Iraq that completely exhausted our resources, trashed our global credibility which makes it virtually impossible to deal with the real threats that is Iran (and N. Korea).

... just like I said years ago.

So we sit here in our folly and watch the real enemy progress.

son that is ridiculous bs......