Boy who cried wolf.

[Jim Bowen]

The idea of Israel being driven into the sea is pretty ludicrous, so perhaps if Israel was willing to forego their nuclear weapons then Iran would be willing to soley invest in atoms for peace.

Jim Bowen

 

[demon]

Jim Bowen:
"The idea of Israel being driven into the sea is pretty ludicrous"

A lot of posts around here boarder on the insane - and I don't mean that flippantly. Some here are like demented hamsters on a wheel, repeating the same topics over and over again - the dark forces of Islam about to overwhelm us; Israel, with its 200 nukes on the verge of being wiped out by stone-throwing Palestinians; Europe's moral and democratic decay because it wouldn`t support an illegal war etc etc etc.
I think it's disturbing to read - there's real paranoia here, a sense of people who are excessively fearful driving themselves mad.

 

[Mycroft]

Like I said, I'm highly suspicious.

But, you miss the point re cost. It doesn't matter how much oil they have, so long as there remains demand. Every barrel they consume is $X not earned on the global market. (Still, it may be cheaper than nuclear. I don't know.)

Natural gas is less easy to transport and thus less marketable. However, Iran is sitting on the worlds largest reserve that doesn't need to be moved very far to be used.

 

[a_unique_person]

Well, seeing as how they have oil right under their feet while they have to do all kinds of research to build a nuclear reactor, I suspect the oil is a lot cheaper.

And in any case, why do they need to do all this research? France has a highly-developed nuclear power system. Why don't they ask the French to come over and build a few reactors for them? The French are very good at it. It would have to be a lot less expensive than reinventing the wheel. Note: I know French-bashing is popular here, so this might be taken as being a facetious comment, but I'm in dead earnest.

Why does anyone do any nuclear research?

 

[Kopji]

I am disappointed at Powell today. He used to be such a voice of reason. He seems to have taken on the role of merely parroting a message fed him from higher up.

Once more, information that is unverified or of questionable provenance is promoted as if it were fact. If it's actually true or not is anyone's guess, and half the world probably no longer cares.

We need to rebuild credibility over intelligence, and this does not help that cause.

 

[Atlas]

I can't believe there are people who don't believe what Powell actually said.

"I have seen intelligence which would corroborate what this dissident group is saying," Powell told reporters Wednesday as he traveled to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Santiago, Chile. "And it should be of concern to all parties."

It's very likely there are intelligence reports on Iran's nuclear designs. It's obvious they want to have the Bomb. They purchased the information from Pakistan.

The question is only whether the inteligence that Powell is referring to accurately reflects reality. All he is saying is that people should be concerned. Maybe the place should be inspected or something so we could all sleep easier. What he said was measured and diplomatic, there is no reason not to believe him.

 

[kalen]

-Bush is in for 4 more years.

-Iran is in the gunsights.

-Let the games begin.

It doesn't matter what Iran is up to. The diatribe from the White House has begun. The war machine is revving up even harder. There's money to be made, y'know.

I'm glad I'm not living anywhere the US says is doing bad things.

 

[Kopji]

Secretary of State Colin L. Powell shared information with reporters Wednesday about Iran's nuclear program that was classified and based on an unvetted, single source who provided information that two U.S. officials said yesterday was highly significant if true but has not yet been verified.

...According to one official with access to the material, a "walk-in" source approached U.S intelligence earlier this month with more than 1,000 pages purported to be Iranian drawings and technical documents, including a nuclear warhead design and modifications enabling Iranian ballistic missiles to deliver an atomic strike.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6525369/

This is precisely what we don't need any more of.

 

[Atlas]

This is precisely what we don't need any more of.

Yah but if rogue nations are bent on developing nukes and people don't want them to they will try to tell somebody.

Nowdays who you going to tell, Europe? The UN?

Iran can put an end to everyone's concerns. Shoud they? If they don't should we all just shut up about it? Don't you think it serves any purpose to articulate the concerns we have? All nations do it. They all articulate their concerns about the US. Are we afraid that by questioning the Iranians, who have lied to us in the past, we'll offend them and then they really will build the Bomb they claim they are not interested in making?

 

[demon]

Atlas:
"I can't believe there are people who don't believe what Powell actually said."

That`s definitely sig material.

 

[Atlas]

Atlas:
"I can't believe there are people who don't believe what Powell actually said."

That`s definitely sig material.

There may be a bit of irony there if you pull it from the context it was offered in.

Would you ever do that??

No comment on the actual point of the post, huh? He was just giving a factual diplomatic answer on the situation as it is. Disagree?

 

[demon]

Atlas:
"He was just giving a factual diplomatic answer on the situation as it is. Disagree?"

Yes I do disagree.
He was giving a diplomatic answer, whether it was factual or not is another question. Knowing him I`d say it probably wasn`t.
When I hear Powell mention "intelligence" my ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ meter starts going off.

 

[SezMe]

Well you are sort of right. Russia and not France built some reactors in Iran few years ago. Here's a

Before that, the USA (yes, Uncle Sam) was cooperating with Iran to build nukes there. I worked on the program.

Mind you, the program never came to fruition, but the intent was there. Makes for interesting speculation on what the mideast would look like had we carried the program to a successful conclusion.

 

[Atlas]

Atlas:
"He was just giving a factual diplomatic answer on the situation as it is. Disagree?"

Yes I do disagree.
He was giving a diplomatic answer, whether it was factual or not is another question. Knowing him I`d say it probably wasn`t.
When I hear Powell mention "intelligence" my bull(censored) meter starts going off.

That's a fair response.

I think he probably knows that many will see it that way. It may have been a signal that the "intelligence" was not strong. But his point was that we should be concerned and vigilant about the Iranians and their nuclear ambitions. We got burned believing N Korea. Iran seems to be following that model.

I'd like to think El Baradei was playing hardball with them but I distrust him for his campaign ploy.

The situation is very troubling.

Iran did sign the nuclear non proliferation treaty and have sought nuclear weapon technology.
The US is not trusted as a fair arbiter because of it's war next door in Iraq.
The UN has disgraced itself with the Oil for food scandal.
Britain is seen as marching lock step with the Americans.
France is being France.
The world is afraid things are spinning out of control.

I do see Iran as an exporter of terror. I think they operate with Syria funding Hizbollah in Lebanon. It won't be a good thing if they do develop a Bomb. I hope the Security Council members pressure them to open up their nuclear program more.

 

[demon]

Yes, you have some points there Atlas.
I don`t think it would be a good thing if they develop the bomb either but I can see their logic as to why they might feel they need one.
If we are going to be even handed about this, I`d say that Israel should also be open to inspection.

"The situation is very troubling."

Can`t argue with that.

 

[Atlas]

... I don`t think it would be a good thing if they develop the bomb either but I can see their logic as to why they might feel they need one.

In the cold war the policy between the superpowers was MAD (mutually assured destruction) and we were in a strange way comforted that the policy rendered the weapons defensive use only.

Even with Israel you get the feeling that it's a defensive weapon that they will employ only in an extreme attack against them.

But with N Korea you get the feeling they'd like to sell them on the open market.

There is always the India/Pakistan antagonism that can escalate again. Last time sounded like they were ready to go nuclear over Kashmir.

If Iran gets the Bomb I worry that they would use it offensively if that's what Allah wanted.

The US is considering a bunker buster nuke.

The Russians have a new kind of nuke that gives them a special capability.

And of course there are some of those old Soviet suitcase bombs that al Queda wants to sneak into the US across our Mexican border.

Iraq and Libya won't be pursuing nukes for awhile. But that's really the only good news. If the governments in N Korea and Iran could be changed for something new and improved I think then world would be alot safer.

 

[richardm]

I can't believe there are people who don't believe what Powell actually said.

But he said similar things about Iraq, and they turned out to be wrong. So when he now stands up and says these things about Iran, there's bound to be a good degree of skepticism about.

Certainly, the standard of evidence is going to have to be a lot better than it was last time if the UK is going to join you in any Iranian jaunts, because if Blair gets on his hind legs in Parliament and starts talking about "Intelligence" he's going to be jeered out of the building.

 

[Matabiri]

In the cold war the policy between the superpowers was MAD (mutually assured destruction) and we were in a strange way comforted that the policy rendered the weapons defensive use only.

Even with Israel you get the feeling that it's a defensive weapon that they will employ only in an extreme attack against them.

But with N Korea you get the feeling they'd like to sell them on the open market.

At the risk of sounding slightly insane, is this really such a scary idea, provided they only sell to other states? Any state with nuclear weapons, provided such weapons are widespread enough, gets sucked into the MAD situation, and I don't believe anyone - with a home to lose - is actually crazy enough, even Kim Il or Iran, to fire first.

The problem with this situation, as you say, is the possibility of small nukes getting into the hands of factions of no fixed abode - although if connections between, say, Iran and such terrorists were demonstrated, once again Iran would be crazy to try. Although the more states have the technology, the less easy it is to tie down a link to one particular state.

The situation is very troubling.

Indeed.

 

[a_unique_person]

The US is not trusted as a fair arbiter because of it's war next door in Iraq.

Which is one more reason for the US to have not invaded Iraq under false pretences. Now, if I could trust the Bush on Iran, maybe I would be glad to see the prospect of nuclear proliferation being contained, but I can't trust them. I didn't trust them before the Iraq war, and my mistrust has been confirmed totally.

 

[c0rbin]

Those pictures would be equivalent if they were either of a wall built within the United States to separate, say, the blue states from the red states or if they were built in Mexico to allow United States citizens to settle in parts of Mexico and not be subject to attack from Mexicans who were cross at losing their land.

It is understandable that you don't, but perhaps you should "remember the Alamo."

That wall would have been built in Mexico about 180 years ago.

Back then, aquiring property by arms was considered crickett. You Brits had a better way, IMO...more of a "rent with an option to buy" approach to imperialism, invade a country, install a proper govenor, work the locals to death, then pull out when profits no longer justify expenses.