Wishful (Stupid) Liberal Thinking

One of the more interestingly misnamed blogs in all the blogsophere is Informed Comment by U of M history prof Juan Cole. I don't know who's informing this guy, but he uses that information to reach some curious conclusions. Here's an example from today:

Despite all the sloppy and inaccurate headlines about Iran "going nuclear," the fact is that all President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Tuesday was that it had enriched uranium to a measely 3.5 percent, using a bank of 180 centrifuges hooked up so that they "cascade."

The ability to slightly enrich uranium is not the same as the ability to build a bomb. For the latter, you need at least 80% enrichment, which in turn would require about 16,000 small centrifuges hooked up to cascade. Iran does not have 16,000 centrifuges. It seems to have 180. Iran is a good ten years away from having a bomb, and since its leaders, including Supreme Jurisprudent Ali Khamenei, say they do not want an atomic bomb because it is Islamically immoral, you have to wonder if they will ever have a bomb.

Now I admit, I really like his headline, "Iran can now make glowing Mickey Mouse watches." Very clever. But beyond that ...

While it needs to be considered rank Iranian propaganda, Iran's Atomic Energy Organization chief Gholamreza Aghazadeh has stated that Iran would roll out a 3,000-centrifuge system within the next year, and the regime has stated its commitment to have 50,000 centrifuges when all is said and done.

The Iranians have a 20-year history of clandestine acquisition and manufacturing, so to pooh-pooh their efforts is dangerous and scoffs at history. Everyone knows technological advances multiply nonlinearly, so no one would rationally get comfort from the fact that it's taken Iran 20 years to get this far. Ed at Captain's Quarters is probably closer to the truth about when Iran gets the bomb than Cole is. Ed predicts 2008 ... as in the year after next.

Cole opts for a 10-year window. Why did he pull this number out of the air? Could it be because it affords plenty of time for appeasement and the opportunity to elect the next Jimmy Carter/Bill Clinton to attack our military instead of theirs?

Bad as all that is, it's Nobel-level thought compared to Cole's statement that "because it is Islamically immoral, you have to wonder if they will ever have a bomb."

What unbelievable pap. Does he really think one of the most oil-rich nations on the planet is pursuing nuclear power so it can peacefully generate electricity?

Iran funds terror around the world, actively supporting the ruthless murder of innocents, yet finds room under its morality to think this is just a fine thing to do. The regime suppresses opposition at home by killing and torturing Muslims, and declares that acceptable to their morality. Their moral compass points True North when they promise to wipe Israel off the map, even though the Koran calls the Jews "people of the book" to be treated, if not well, at least better than being put at the receiving end of a nuke.

Fundamentally, Cole needs to ask himself what makes an atomic bomb Islamically immoral if it is used as an ultimate jihad weapon. Jihad is Islam's highest morality (personal jihad against the sin nature first, outward jihad for conversion or death second). They have reached us with the invitation to become Muslims; we have declined. They can either tax us or kill us. It's their option. Either is moral.

And this guy is paid by the taxpayers of Michigan to teach.

Tags: Iran, Nuke, Nuclear, Juan Cole, Informed Comment