BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Sep 08 - 03:22 PM

"None of them will ever use it unless they are simply at the final extremity of desperation, in my opinion, meaning: not until they are attacked in such a way as threatens their total defeat and annihilation."


Not according to what Iran has stated.


As for the neighbor analogy, in my neighborhood, we are NOT allowed to have WMD or threaten to destroy our neighbors. If we do, we get hauled off to jail.

So, we can haul Iran off to jail?????

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Sep 08 - 03:15 PM

Yes, well, it's very convenient to say that your neighbour is "crazy" if you want justification for breaking into his house and committing premeditated murder on him, BB.

"I had to do it. He was crazy and he was out to get me."

Hitler probably thought the Poles were crazy too.

Your assumption that Iranian and North Korean leaders are "crazy" is convenient for your policy because it allows you not to treat them as you would treat normal human beings, but to merely exterminate them like rats or other vermin. It justifies planned aggression on your part.

It sounds a lot like the justifications Hitler used to exterminate Jews and various other people to me, in that it is a closed circle that defies logic or moral responsibility.

Did you know that the leader of Korea has a little sign on his desk as a constant reminder? It says (in Korean), "It's about survival, stupid!"

They are well aware of the risks, and I'm sure the Iranians are also.

North Korea wanted the bomb so that it would not BE attacked by a larger nation. That is why smaller nations want the bomb. They want it as a deterrent, so that they can negotiate from some position of relative equality rather than live like a beaten dog on its knees waiting for the ax to fall. That is why Pakistan wanted it too. None of them will ever use it unless they are simply at the final extremity of desperation, in my opinion, meaning: not until they are attacked in such a way as threatens their total defeat and annihilation.

Only he who has overwhelming firepower can dare to use the bomb first. That means primarily: the USA, Israel (in its own region), and Russia. Perhaps China.

They are the people who feel (relatively) free to use the ultimate weapon if they want to, because they think they can get away with it...under certain limited circumstances, such as hitting a nation like Iran which doesn't have it yet. They think they can get away with it, because no one will dare initiate full scale hostilities with them on that level.

And if they want to do it...well, it's simple. Just accuse the Iranians or someone small power of being "crazy", and you have your justification to commit genocide, don't you? And who can ever prove afterward whether or not the Iranians were in fact "crazy"? Or whether they ever would have done what you say they were thinking of doing? The dead cannot testify in their own defence, can they?

I agree with you that once even one nuke is used by anyone, all bets are off. It could lead to a succession of unpredictable reactions among different nations, and that could spiral into a world war. Undoutedly. So could a conventional war with Iran that does not involve any nukes. It's all very dangerous.


It works exactly like civil law, Bruce. You cannot just go and kill your neighbour, say "He was crazy, that's why I did it. He was planning to kill me, you see..." and expect the judge and the police to see it your way. They will arrest you and charge you with murder. They will also probably think you are crazy, and with considerable justification! Your lawyer may try an insanity plea, in fact, when you go to trial.

Unfortunately, the world has no higher authoritative courts or police structure who are able to arrest the USA or Russia or Israel if they commit such an attack. They are, in effect, a law unto themselves, merely because they are militarily powerful and no one can stop them if they decide to act.

That is the problem in a nutshell. We live in a lawless world. It pretends to have rule of law between nations, but that's a fiction. Just as in the time of Greece or Rome, naked power rules the affairs of nations. They quote international law when it suits their plan. They ignore it when it doesn't...or they cynically pretend to be upholding it even as they violate it.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Sep 08 - 02:04 PM

LH,

I agree with one of your points:

" Israel has several hundred atomic weapons, and the means to deliver them to the target. "

The problem is that I disagree with the rest- it will be a nation like Iran, or North Korea, that thinks it can use a WMD on its enemies and get away with it. ( Yes, I know that they would have to be crazy, but they are)

This will cause retaliation, and then further retaliation ( as China realizes that it no longer has access to oil from the Middle East, or Russia decides to settle a few more accounts [after all, the US did nothing in Georgia, why should it react to a bomb on Chechnya?])

NO ONE will want it to become world-wide- but look at 1914 and tell me that nations will not miscalculate the reactions of other nations.

The US HAS gone to the UN, and the US HAS allowed the EU to negotiate with Iran- Care to show me the results that would justify the risk that has now increased from 15 years away from a nuclear bomb to one year away?

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Sep 08 - 01:51 PM

I don't think that any nation's "neutrality" is going to withstand the next major ( "World" ) war either, BB.

However, I think that the next major world war, if it happens, is going to have been caused by the USA, through the very kind of political attitudes that you yourself are tacitly supporting.

In other words, I think the USA is the author of its own misfortunes...just as Germany, Italy, and Japan were in the 30's and 40's.

And I think you are unwittingly assisting a propaganda effort that leads in a disastrous direction. I think you are unwittingly assisting people who are leading their country into committing outright aggression and destabilizing the entire world, and thereby risking another world war.

It has happened before, and it quite likely will happen again, only this time the USA is going to be the major perpetrator.

People just don't get it. They always think their own country must be "the good guy". Well, countries change roles back and forth as the decades and centuries go by. They all get to be the honest defender sometimes. They all get to be the lawless aggressor at other times. But their people never see them as the lawless agressor when that happens. They believe the home propaganda.

You are one who believes the home propaganda. You're on the wrong side this time, BB, in this great struggle of nations. You (as a collective political nation) are the perpetrators of this dangerous situation in the world, not the innocent victims of it. You are not the defenders of liberty and freedom. You are not the defenders of democracy. You are not the defenders of international law and justice. You are the great aggressor nation of this present era...and you persist in accusing other much smaller nations of your own crimes and your own criminal intentions. And then you attack them.

That is the same technique Hitler used, and his people believed him. It's the Big Lie. The majority of any populace will always believe their own government when it tells them that some other country is to blame for a war starting. Always. It's the easiest thing in the world to make them believe it.

That's how your government is fooling you. You have not BEEN attacked militarily by any other government or any other nation. You ARE the attackers of other governments and nations, and you constantly threaten further such attacks.

In your case, the threats are very real ones, and the world knows it. In Hitler's case also, the threats were very real ones, and the world knew it. When superpowers threaten, they are foreshadowing what they intend to do. They are preparing the public mindset to support military action. When small powers threaten, they are simply doing what a frightened dog does...they are barking as loudly as they can to keep their own spirits up and hopefully to dissuade a potential attacker from attacking. They're bluffing.

The USA, like Hitler, does not have to bluff. It possesses enough lethal power to carry out its threats, and it has repeatedly demonstrated the will to do so. Israel, likewise, does not have to bluff, and never does, because it possesses enough lethal power to carry out a threat. Iranians are the people who have the most reason to fear the near future, because they are being threatened by the superpower, and the superpower does not utter idle threats. Nor does Israel. Israel has several hundred atomic weapons, and the means to deliver them to the target.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Sep 08 - 01:28 PM

Oh, "A Canticle for Liebowitz" might also help...

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Sep 08 - 01:25 PM

LH,

I suggest that you read "On the Beach" , "Level Seven", and "Alas, Babylon".


Then remember that all were written 40 years ago, or so, and that biological weapons have made great "advances". I don't think that any nation's "neutrality" is going to withstand the next major ( "World" ) war.

Estimated causualties of GTW would be 140,000,000 Americans and 20,000,000 Canadians dead within 60 days... similar numbers ( actually, higher percentage for Europe) for the rest of the world.

And those are the OPTIMISTIC estimates.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Sep 08 - 01:06 PM

Lethal pastries, BB. It's all about lethal pastries. Watch the Sleeping Croissant! Be afraid. Very afraid. Yes, there are vicious foreigners out there plotting to destroy the land you love, and they do not rest. They toil night and day with but one thought: "Destroy America!" Some are swarthy and have facial hair, but others are pink and nicely shaven and they look like they came from a Hansel and Gretel story. Ah! Those are the ones to really watch out for. They have WMDs hidden, BB, and they mean to use them on YOU. Scranton, Schenectady, and Albuquerque (did I spell that right?) are in extreme peril. Why will no one listen????

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Sep 08 - 11:52 AM

Iran urged to end 'secretive' nuclear ways

Story Highlights
Six-year probe doesn't rule out possibility Iran is running secret nuclear programs

Europe urges Iran to fully cooperate with a U.N probe assessing its nuclear activities

U.N. Security Council has approved resolution critical of Iran

VIENNA, Austria (AP) -- A six-year probe has not ruled out the possibility that Iran may be running clandestine nuclear programs, the chief United Nations nuclear inspector said Monday, urging the country to end its secretive ways.

Mohamed ElBaradei, U.N. nuclear watchdog chief, warned of the dangers of a strike on Iran.

Europe also urged Iran to fully cooperate with a U.N probe that is trying to assess its past and current nuclear activities. An EU statement at the opening session of the International Atomic Energy Agency's 145-nation conference declared: "The international community cannot accept the prospect of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons."

Iran and ally Syria are among four nations seeking their region's nomination for a seat on the IAEA's decision-making 35-nation board.

Iran is running to counteract a U.S. push to have Afghanistan or outsider Kazakhstan elected over Syria, which is under IAEA investigation for allegedly hiding a secret nuclear program, including a nearly completed plutonium producing reactor destroyed last year by Israel.

If the regional group does not agree on a candidate by the time the conference turns to the issue, there will likely be a vote -- an unusual turn because these meetings normally decide by consensus.

But chief U.N nuclear inspector Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the IAEA, focused on more overriding nuclear concerns about Iran -- its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment and alleged past plans to develop the bomb.

On Saturday, the U.N. Security Council approved a resolution critical of Iran's defiance on uranium enrichment, which can create both nuclear fuel and the fissile core of warheads.

Urging it to "implement all transparency measures ... required to build confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of its nuclear program," ElBaradei declared: "This will be good for Iran, good for the Middle East region and good for the world."

He also warned the session that his organization was increasingly stretched in trying to carry out responsibilities including nonproliferation and preventing terrorists from acquiring the bomb.

"All is not well with the IAEA," ElBaradei declared, appealing for more money and authority for his agency.

Speaking for the EU, Luc Chatel of France called on Iran to "open the doors of its facilities, to give access to persons and documents, and to answer all the questions posed by (IAEA) inspectors."

The annual meeting allows the agency's member countries to set policies that range from strengthening nonproliferation to carrying on medical and scientific research. But tensions between Islamic members and the West threaten to hamper decision-making.

A tradition of consensus has normally led all sides to bridge sometimes substantial differences and opt for compromise for most of the conference's 52-year history. A vote on any topic is unusual and considered a huge dent in the meeting's credibility.

But frustration among Muslim countries over Israel's refusal to put its nuclear program under international purview, and resistance from the Jewish state to Muslim pressure on the issue, threatens to force a vote for the third year running.

As in the past two years, Muslim IAEA members are expected to put forward a resolution urging all Mideast nations to refrain from testing or developing nuclear arms and urging nuclear weapons states "to refrain from any action" hindering a Mideast nuclear-free zone.

After losing the vote two consecutive years, Islamic nations are threatening to up the ante this year, warning they will call for a ballot on every item, no matter how uncontroversial, unless they get conference backing on the Israeli nuclear issue.

Arab members -- backed by Iran -- this year have again asked conference organizers to include an item on Israel, this time labeled "Israeli Nuclear Capabilities" instead of "Nuclear Threat," as in previous years. That is being protested by Israel.

Focusing on Israel by name "is substantially unwarranted and flawed," said a letter prepared for review by the conference from Israel Michaeli, the Jewish state's IAEA representative.

Sponsors of the item should instead "address the most pressing proliferation concerns in the Middle East," the letter said, an allusion to Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 26 Sep 08 - 08:33 AM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/25/iran.israelandthepalestinians1

"Olmert himself raised the possibility of an attack at a press conference during a visit to London last November, when he said sanctions were not enough to block Iran's nuclear programme.

"Economic sanctions are effective. They have an important impact already, but they are not sufficient. So there should be more. Up to where? Up until Iran will stop its nuclear programme," he said.

The revelation that Olmert was not merely sabre-rattling to try to frighten Iran but considered the option seriously enough to discuss it with Bush shows how concerned Israeli officials had become.

Bush's refusal to support an attack, and the strong suggestion he would not change his mind, is likely to end speculation that Washington might be preparing an "October surprise" before the US presidential election. Some analysts have argued that Bush would back an Israeli attack in an effort to help John McCain's campaign by creating an eve-of-poll security crisis. "

"Mark Regev, Olmert's spokesman, tonight reacted to the Guardian's story saying: "The need to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons is raised at every meeting between the prime minister and foreign leaders. Israel prefers a diplomatic solution to this issue but all options must remain on the table. Your unnamed European source attributed words to the prime minister that were not spoken in any working meeting with foreign guests". "

"A few days later, Israel's deputy prime minister, Shaul Mofaz, told the paper Yediot Ahronot: "If Iran continues its programme to develop nuclear weapons, we will attack it. The window of opportunity has closed. The sanctions are not effective. There will be no alternative but to attack Iran in order to stop the Iranian nuclear programme." "

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 26 Sep 08 - 08:30 AM

Iran students unveil book mocking Holocaust

Sep 26 07:19 AM US/Eastern

Iranians chanted "Death to Israel" as a group of Islamist students unveiled a book mocking the Holocaust in an annual parade on Friday to show solidarity with the Palestinians.
Featuring dozens of cartoons and sarcastic commentary, the book "Holocaust" was published by members of the Islamist Basij militia.

Education Minister Alireza Ali-Ahmadi was present in the capital's Palestine Square for the book's presentation during the annual Quds (Jerusalem) Day parade.

The cover shows a Jew with a crooked nose and dressed in traditional garb drawing outlines of dead bodies on the ground.

Inside, bearded Jews are shown leaving and re-entering a gas chamber with a counter that reads the number 5,999,999.

Another depicts Jewish prisoners entering a furnace in a Nazi extermination camp and leaving as gun-wielding terrorists from the other side.

Yet another shows a patient covered in an Israeli flag and on life support breathing Zyklon-B, the poisonous gas used in the extermination chambers.

Iran does not recognise the Jewish state and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has attracted international condemnation by repeatedly predicting Israel is doomed to disappear and branding the Holocaust a "myth."

The commentary inside the book includes anti-Semitic stereotypes and revisionist arguments, casting doubt on the massacre of Jews and mocking Holocaust survivors who claimed reparations after World War II.

One comment in a question-and-answer format reads:

"How did the Germans emit gas into chambers while there were no holes on the ceiling?" Answer: "Shut up, you criminal anti-Semite. How dare you ask this question?"

In 2006, Iran hosted a conference of Holocaust deniers and revisionists and a mass-circulating Iranian newspaper held a cartoon competition on the subject.

On Friday, tens of thousands of Iranians marched in Tehran, chanting "Death to Israel," declaring solidarity with the Palestinians and calling for Jerusalem and Israel to be handed to the Palestinians.

Demonstrators carried placards which read, "Israel will be destroyed, Palestine is Victorious" and "Holy war until victory," and they torched American and Israeli flags.

The protest follows a fresh verbal attack on Israel by Ahmadinejad.

In an address to the UN General Assembly in New York on Tuesday, he said "the Zionist regime is on a definite slope to collapse and there is no way for it to get out of the cesspool created by itself and its supporters."

Quds Day was started by the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, founder of the Islamic republic, who called on the world's Muslims to show solidarity with Palestinians on the last Friday of the fasting month of Ramadan.

A mother of six, Zahra Hedayat, 47, said: "It is important to support Palestinians to show the world that Israel is oppressive, and, God willing, one day Muslims will get Palestine back."

The demonstration was held under an official slogan: "The Islamic world will not recognise the fake Zionist regime under any circumstances and believes that this cancerous tumour will one day be wiped off the face of the earth."

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Sep 08 - 04:27 PM

Talkin' to yourself again, Bruce? ;-)

I've told you and told you and told you. It's Liechtenstein. They're next. Only one difference this time though...they're going to win.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 25 Sep 08 - 04:00 PM

Iran to launch satellite with own rocket to space

By NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press Writer
Thu Sep 25, 11:29 AM ET



TEHRAN, Iran - Iran plans to launch a satellite into space soon using an Iranian-made rocket, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said.

Iran has in the past launched satellites using rockets built by other nations, but this was the first announcement of such a launch with an all-Iranian made rocket.

Ahmadinejad said the rocket will have 16 engines and will take a satellite some 430 miles into space, according to a state television report Thursday.

The satellite will likely be a commercial one for communication or meteorological research purposes. Iran has never announced plans to launch military satellites.

But the country has long pursued the goal of developing a space program, generating unease among world leaders already concerned about its nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

The same technology used to put satellites into space can be used to deliver warheads, which will likely further raise concerns over Tehran's advances in rocketry, especially in Israel.

Earlier this month, Tehran announced that a joint research satellite built by Iran, China and Thailand, was sent into orbit by a Chinese-made rocket. At the time, Iranian officials said the three countries suffer from natural disasters and that the satellite would transmit photos to help deal with such crises.

Tehran sent its first commercial satellite into space on a Russian rocket in 2005. Last month, Iran tested a rocket which it hopes will one day carry an all-Iranian research satellite.

The remarks by the Iranian president came during his meeting with a group of Iranian expatriates in New York, where Ahmadinejad is attending the U.N. General Assembly.

There were no details about what type of satellite the rocket would carry, and Ahmadinejad gave no time frame for the plan.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Sep 08 - 11:55 AM

North Korea's Reverse

The framework for dismantling the world's most dangerous nuclear program is crumbling.

Thursday, September 25, 2008; Page A18

IN JUNE, the Bush administration's diplomacy with North Korea finally produced the video clip negotiators had long hoped for: that showing the demolition of the cooling tower at the Yongbyon nuclear reactor. Now, it appears that that picture, which suggested that North Korea's dismantling of its nuclear infrastructure was irreversible, may have been misleading. Yesterday, the secretive communist regime ejected U.N. nuclear inspectors from Yongbyon and announced that it planned to reactivate a reprocessing plant that produces plutonium for weapons. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, nuclear material may be brought back into the facility within a week.

This provocative action triggered a familiar discussion among experts about what North Korea might be up to. Is it trying to bluff the West and its partners in the "six-party" negotiations into making further concessions? Are hard-liners in the regime of Kim Jong Il trying to reverse its commitment to denuclearize in exchange for economic and political concessions? And is Mr. Kim himself still running the country? The reclusive dictator reportedly suffered a stroke in mid-August and has not been seen in public since.

As always, there are no sure answers to these questions. Yet it seems fairly clear that, even before Mr. Kim's apparent illness, the action-for-action framework signed with North Korea early last year was coming undone, despite the increasingly desperate efforts of the State Department to hold it together. A much-awaited declaration by Pyongyang of all its nuclear programs was accepted by the administration even though the declaration omitted several major elements that U.S. officials had insisted would be included, such as an explanation of work on uranium enrichment. The State Department suggested that such questions could be cleared up by a promised verification process. But Mr. Kim's negotiators promptly rejected U.S. verification proposals while insisting that the administration deliver on the promised removal of North Korea from the State Department's list of terrorism sponsors.

It could be that North Korea simply wants Washington to deliver its largely symbolic political concession before agreeing to a verification regime. But it's more likely that Pyongyang is fundamentally unwilling to accept the full disclosure of its arsenal -- and verification is a step that the Bush administration cannot afford to fudge. U.S. diplomacy should now shift toward reapplying economic pressure on the regime and persuading China and South Korea to adopt new sanctions of their own. Whoever is now in charge of North Korea must be made to understand that a reversal of the denuclearization process will result in the country's economic strangulation.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 10:04 AM

"Iran insists its nuclear activities are geared only toward generating power. But Israel says the Islamic Republic could have enough nuclear material to make its first bomb within a year. The U.S. estimates Tehran is at least two years away from that stage."


http://www.mail.com/Article.aspx?articlepath=APNews\General-World-News\20080923\UN-General-Assembly.xml&cat=world&subcat=&pageid




Good to know we can wait for the next administration before we worry about this...

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 07:35 AM

Washington Post:


Iran Slips Away

Even as its nuclear program accelerates, the impetus to stop it loses steam.

Tuesday, September 23, 2008; Page A20

AMID THE financial crisis and the worsening violence in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Iran's nuclear program and Western efforts to stop it have slipped down Washington's list of priorities. That's just what Tehran's ruling mullahs were hoping for. The government of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is still stonewalling international inspectors trying to investigate evidence that Iran has secretly worked on nuclear bomb and missile warhead technology. This summer, it rebuffed the latest Western effort to open negotiations -- one whose only precondition was that Iran agree to a six-week pause in adding centrifuges to the 3,800 it has already installed in a uranium enrichment plant. At the same time, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps has temporarily lowered its profile, supporting cease-fires by the militant groups it backs in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip and pulling back the "special groups" that were organizing deadly attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq.

The result, as Iran races toward accumulating enough uranium for a bomb, is that the sense of urgency about the threat it poses is lower here and in Europe than it was six months or a year ago. The board of the International Atomic Energy Agency gathered yesterday in Vienna to hear a stern report about Tehran's continuing refusal to answer key questions about the program. A six-member group of permanent U.N. Security Council members and Germany will meet this week in an attempt to demonstrate that it can still work together in spite of the growing rift between Russia and the West. But there seems to be little prospect that the Security Council will agree anytime soon on a fourth round of U.N. sanctions -- much less the tough measures that might command Tehran's attention.

What might those measures be? The two most important would be an arms embargo -- which would prevent Russia from supplying Iran with the advanced air defense systems it has reportedly promised -- and a ban on the export to Iran of gasoline and other refined products, which could cripple Iranian transport. But Bush administration officials appear to have all but given up hope that the Security Council would approve such tough action. Instead, they hope mainly for the symbolism of another unanimous resolution that will reinforce Iran's diplomatic isolation and justify unilateral U.S. or European measures, such as a recent attempt to curtail insurance for Iranian shipping.

There's no indication that such steps will change Iranian behavior soon -- nor is a military strike by the United States or Israel likely in the coming months. That means the next major initiative to stop an Iranian bomb will probably be a new effort by the next U.S. president to launch negotiations; Barack Obama has made it a centerpiece of his policy, and John McCain has said he's willing to support talks as well. Both also say they will work to stiffen sanctions. That, of course, is the strategy the United States and European governments have already been pursuing for several years -- without success. Why do the candidates believe they will succeed where the Bush administration has failed? That would be a good topic for Friday's foreign policy debate.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 06:33 AM

Sep 22, 2008 0:05 | Updated Sep 22, 2008 15:53
Military intelligence: Iran halfway to first nuclear bomb
By HERB KEINON

Iran is halfway to a nuclear bomb, and Hizbullah, Hamas and Syria are using this period of relative calm to significantly rearm, Brig.-Gen. Yossi Baidatz, the Military Intelligence's head of research, told the cabinet Sunday during a particularly gloomy briefing on the threats facing the country.

Baidatz said there was a growing gap between Iran's progress on the nuclear front and the West's determination to stop it. "Iran is concentrating on uranium enrichment, and is making progress," he said, noting that they have improved the function of their 4,000 centrifuges.

According to Baidatz, the Iranian centrifuges have so far produced between one-third to one-half of the enriched material needed to build a bomb.

"The time when they will have crossed the nuclear point-of-no-return is fast approaching," he said, though he stopped short of giving a firm deadline. Last week in the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, however, he put the date at 2011.

Baidatz said that neither the efforts of the International Atomic Energy Agency nor the US and European attempts to get a fourth round of sanctions through the UN Security council were slowing down the Iranian nuclear march.

"The Iranians are pleased that the gap is widening," Baidatz said. "Their confidence is growing with the thought that the international community is not strong enough to stop them," he added.

Baidatz said the Iranians were playing for time, and that time was working in their favor since the longer the process dragged on, the wider the rifts appearing among the countries in the West become. "Iran is in control of the technology and is moving with determination toward a nuclear bomb," he said.

In addition to their nuclear efforts, the Iranians were also deepening their influence in the region through cooperation with Syria and the Palestinian terrorist organizations, as well as being the main arms supplier to Hizbullah and a source of constant attacks on American troops in Iraq. All of this, he said, was part of Iran's efforts to stand at the head of the region's extremist front.

The region's moderates, he said, were limiting their opposition to "just rhetoric."

Baidatz also briefed the ministers on the situation in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority since the beginning of the "calm" in Gaza on June 19, some three months ago.

Baidatz said that while the cease-fire has - for the most part - held, the intelligence agencies were seeing some weakening of Hamas and Islamic Jihad's commitment to it. He said that the cease-fire had led to a significant drop in rocket fire on the western Negev, and that since the cease-fire went into effect, some 15 rockets and 13 mortars had been fired from Gaza into the Western Negev.

Nevertheless, he said that the terrorist organizations were still planning attacks from Gaza, and were recruiting terrorists to go from Gaza into the Sinai, and then back into Israel to carry out attacks or kidnap soldiers.

Regarding kidnapped soldier Gilad Schalit, Baidatz said that Hizbullah had stiffened its demands, believing that Schalit was an "asset," and that the price for his release would only increase. "They are not rushing for a solution, and are preventing a renewal of talks on the matter with Egypt." he said.

Hamas and the other terrorist organizations have taken advantage of the cease-fire to rearm and prepare for the next round of fighting, increasing training and continuing to smuggle in raw materials that allow it to increase its rocket arsenal. As a result of of the cease-fire, he said, the threat to the home front and the IDF had increased.

Baidatz said the smuggling from Egypt was continuing, although the Egyptians - with the help of US technology - were also showing better results in detecting the smuggling tunnels. At the same time, the Egyptians were still not dealing with the root of the problem, which was the need to go after Beduin smugglers in Sinai, he said.

Baidatz added that as time went on, Hamas was consolidating its political hold on Gaza, and that he didn't think the Egyptians had much chance of success in mediating an agreement between Hamas and Fatah.

Regarding Israel's negotiations with the PA, Baidatz said the Palestinian Authority was not willing to compromise on core issues, and was opposed to a partial agreement. He said the PA was holding firm to the position that nothing was agreed until everything was agreed, and were continuing to demand an end to all construction in the West Bank.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has recently tried to get the PA to agree to moving negotiations over Jerusalem to another framework, so it did not hold up attempts to come up with some kind of shelf agreement by the end of the year.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 22 Sep 08 - 12:04 PM

Chief inspector: Iran may be hiding secret nukes
Posted 5h 1m ago

VIENNA (AP) — The chief U.N nuclear inspector says Iran may be hiding secret nuclear activities.
Mohamed ElBaradei says it is impossible to guarantee that Iran is not hiding such activities unless it allows his inspectors much broader access and answers allegations that it hid past attempts to make nuclear arms.

ElBaradei is head of the International Atomic Energy Agency. He spoke Monday at the opening of the 35-nation IAEA board of governors.

Iran is under three sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions for refusing to freeze uranium enrichment. While Tehran says it only wants to generate nuclear fuel, there is fear it could use the process to create the fissile core of nuclear warheads.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 22 Sep 08 - 09:21 AM

N. Korea seeks removal of nuke plant seals

Story Highlights
IAEA: N.Korea wants to carry out tests at the Yongbyon reprocessing plant

N.Koreans say this will "not involve nuclear material," agency said

N.Korea had agreed to abandon its atomic weapons program for energy aid

S.Korean news agency said N.Korea restoring reactor at Yongbyon

(CNN) -- North Korea has asked U.N. nuclear agency inspectors "to remove seals and surveillance equipment to enable them to carry out tests" at the Yongbyon reprocessing plant, the agency's director-general said.


A South Korean looks at the demolition of a cooling tower at the North's Yongbyon nuclear complex, June 27, 2008.

But Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said Monday that the North Koreans said this will "not involve nuclear material." The news comes amid fears that North Korea may want to resume its nuclear program.

ElBaradei said the agency has "continued to verify the shutdown of the nuclear facilities at Yongbyon and to implement the ad hoc monitoring and verification arrangement, with the cooperation of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea."

While not asked to take part in "disablement activities," the agency has observed and documented them.

He said agency inspectors have observed that "some equipment previously removed by the DPRK during the disablement process has been brought back. This has not changed the shutdown status of the nuclear facilities at Yongbyon.

"This morning, the DPRK authorities asked the agency's inspectors to remove seals and surveillance equipment to enable them to carry out tests at the reprocessing plant, which they say will not involve nuclear material."

He said he is hopeful that conditions can be developed for North Korea "to return to the Non-Proliferation Treaty at the earliest possible date and for the resumption by the agency of comprehensive safeguards."

Last week, a South Korean news agency reported that North Korea is restoring a reactor at Yongbyon nuclear complex and no longer wants to be removed from a U.S. list of countries that sponsor terrorism.

Don't Miss
Report: N. Korea conducted missile engine test
North Korea said to be rebuilding nuke plant
In depth: North Korea nuclear tension
Hyun Hak-Bong, a chief North Korean negotiator at six-nation talks, told reporters his country is "thoroughly preparing to restart" the reactor and that reporters would "know soon" when his country would do that, the Yonhap news agency said.

But a senior U.S. diplomat said the announcement could simply be a bargaining ploy in the long-running negotiations aimed at halting North Korea's nuclear program.

The United States had seen no indications North Korea is actually rebuilding its reactor, the diplomat said.

Diplomats have said some of the disabled parts have been moved around from storage since the latest impasse in the negotiations began, but the American diplomat believes that is a negotiating tactic.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Sep 08 - 12:33 PM

With Obama in the White house, we will be in a nuclear war within 6 months.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 19 Sep 08 - 12:29 PM

With McCain in the White House, it will be both and more.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Sep 08 - 12:24 PM

NKorea preparing to restore nuclear reactor

By HYUNG-JIN KIM, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 53 minutes ago



PANMUNJOM, Korea - North Korea said Friday it is making "thorough preparations" to restart its nuclear reactor, accusing the United States of failing to fulfill its obligations under an international disarmament-for-aid agreement.

It was the first time the communist nation has confirmed a reversal of steps taken since last year to disable its nuclear program because of Washington's refusal to quickly remove it from a U.S. terrorism blacklist.

"We are making thorough preparations for restoration" of the Yongbyon nuclear complex, Foreign Ministry Deputy Director-General Hyun Hak Bong told reporters.

The Foreign Ministry said North Korea no longer wanted to be taken off the blacklist.

"Now that the United States' true colors have been brought to light, (North Korea) no longer wishes to be delisted as a 'state sponsor of terrorism' — and does not expect such a thing to happen," said a ministry statement carried by the country's official news agency, KCNA.

North Korea "will go its own way," it said.

Under the landmark 2007 pact — involving the two Koreas, the U.S., China, Russia and Japan — North Korea pledged to disable its nuclear program as a step toward its eventual dismantlement in exchange for diplomatic concessions and energy aid equivalent to 1 million tons of oil.

North Korea began disabling the Yongbyon complex last year, and the process was 90 percent complete, with eight of 11 key steps carried out "perfectly and flawlessly," Hyun said.

In late June, North Korea submitted a long-delayed declaration of its nuclear activities and destroyed the cooling tower of its reactor at Yongbyon in a show of its commitment to denuclearization.

But the accord ran aground in mid-August when Washington refused to take North Korea off its list of states that sponsor terrorism, saying the North first must accept a plan to verify its nuclear declaration.

North Korea responded by halting the disabling process and is now "proceeding with work to restore (Yongbyon) to its original status," Hyun said. He did not say when complex might begin operating again.

Hyun spoke in the border village of Panmunjom before talks Friday with South Korean officials on sending energy aid to the North as part of the six-nation disarmament deal. The talks concluded late Friday afternoon.

Hyun warned Washington not to press the verification issue, saying verification was never part of the disarmament deal.

"The U.S. is insisting that we accept unilateral demands that had not been agreed upon. They want to go anywhere at any time to collect samples and carry out examinations with measuring equipment," he said. "That means they intend to force an inspection."

He said forcing North Korea to comply with such an inspection would exacerbate tensions.

The White House had no immediate reaction early Friday.

South Korean and U.S. officials say it would take at least a year for North Korea to restart the reactor if it is completely disabled.

South Korean officials urged the North during the talks at the border to resume disabling its nuclear facilities, saying energy aid is linked to that process, according to a South Korean official who spoke on condition of anonymity in line with government policy.

Friday's talks — proposed by the North — indicate it does not want to completely scuttle the six-party negotiations, analysts said.

"The North is sending a message that it wants to maintain the six-party talks," said Koh Yu-hwan, a North Korea expert at Seoul's Dongguk University. "The North also wants to get the remaining energy aid with winter drawing closer."

Seoul's delegate at the talks, Hwang Joon-kook, assured North Korea that it would receive the remaining energy aid it was promised.

But South Korea's foreign minister said North Korea's intentions remained unclear.

"It's still uncertain whether the North's measures are aimed at reversing the whole situation to the pre-disablement level" or are a negotiating tactic, Yu Myung-hwan told reporters in Seoul.

The tensions come amid reports that North Korean leader Kim Jong Il has suffered a stroke. Kim, 66, has not been seen in public for more than a month and has missed two major public events: a military parade marking North Korea's 60th birthday and the Korean Thanksgiving holiday.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 15 Sep 08 - 12:23 PM

Iran stalls probe into alleged atom bomb research:

IAEA By Mark Heinrich
Mon Sep 15, 8:12 AM ET



VIENNA (Reuters) - A U.N. inquiry into intelligence allegations of secret atom bomb research in Iran has reached a standstill because of Iranian non-cooperation, an International Atomic Energy Agency report said on Monday.

"We have arrived at a gridlock," said a senior U.N. official familiar with the latest report, which urged Iran to take the intelligence allegations seriously to defuse suspicions its nuclear work is not entirely peaceful.

The confidential report also said Iran had raised the number of centrifuges enriching uranium to 3,820, compared with 3,300 in May, with over 2,000 more being installed.

But Iran seemed some way from refining enough uranium to build a nuclear weapon, if it chose, the report indicated.

Iran had stockpiled 480 kg (1,050 pounds) of low-enriched uranium so far. It would need 15,000 kg (33,000) to convert into high-enriched uranium for fuelling an atom bomb, said U.N. officials who spoke on condition of anonymity.

"That would be a significant quantity, one unit of HEU, and would take on the order of two years," said one official.

In its last report in May, the IAEA said Iran appeared to be withholding information needed to explain intelligence that it had linked projects to process uranium, test high explosives and modify a missile cone in a way suitable for a nuclear warhead.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 29 Aug 08 - 10:10 PM

Iran confirms nuclear component production

Story Highlights
Spinning centrifuges are used to separate uranium atoms to produce uranium

Uranium is concentrated enough for a nuclear weapon's fission chain reaction

West believes Iran's nuclear program intended to develop nuclear weapons
   
(CNN) -- Iran's deputy foreign minister said Friday that almost 4,000 uranium-enriching centrifuges are now operating at the country's Natanz enrichment facility, the national IRNA news agency reported.

Spinning centrifuges are used to separate uranium atoms to produce uranium concentrated enough for a nuclear weapon's fission chain reaction.

Ali-Reza Sheikh Attar told Iranian TV that another 3,000 centrifuges are being installed, IRNA said.

Iran announced nearly a year ago, in September 2007, that it had more than 3,000 active centrifuges. In April, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad promised to install 6,000 more over the coming year.

The United States and other Western nations believe Iran's nuclear program is intended to develop nuclear weapons, but Iran insists it is only for peaceful purposes.

The United Nations already has three sanctions resolutions against Iran for failing to suspend the program. Attar said Thursday the sanctions are "futile and ineffective," IRNA reported.

"Had Westerners become certain that the resolutions would bring us down to our knees, they would have definitely intensified (the sanctions)," IRNA quoted Attar as saying.

The five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany -- a group called P5+1 -- offered a package of economic and other incentives to Iran in July if it suspended its nuclear enrichment program.

Iran failed to meet the group's deadline to accept the offer, leading the P5+1 to discuss further sanctions against Iran, a State Department spokesman said this month.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Aug 08 - 04:34 PM

Obama would step up pressure on Iran over nukes

By BETH FOUHY, Associated Press Writer
8 minutes ago



DAVENPORT, Iowa - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama pledged Monday that he would step up diplomatic pressure to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons before Israel feels that "its back is against the wall" and might take military action.

Campaigning In Iowa on his way to the Democratic convention in Denver, Obama was asked about rumors that Israel had a "green lighted" an attack on Iran before the presidential election in November. Obama refused to comment on the rumors but acknowledged that Israel feels threatened.

"I will tell you having visited Israel just a month and a half ago, their general attitude is, 'We will not allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon,'" Obama said. "My job as president would be to try to make sure we are tightening the screws diplomatically on Iran, that we mobilize the world community to go after Iran's nuclear program in a serious way. ... We have to do it before Israel feels its back is against the wall."

Obama was referring to the possibility that Israel might try to destroy one or more of Iran's known nuclear facilities out of fear that any weapon that emerged would be used against the Jewish state. Israel would presumably launch an air strike only as a last resort and after the United States had decided against launching its own action. President Bush has always left a military option on the table but there is little time and less political support for a unilateral U.S. strike before Bush leaves office.

Iran denies it is seeking a bomb and insists it has the right to develop nuclear expertise to produce energy. Iran has all but ignored punitive sanctions levied by the United Nations, the United States and Europe and rapidly increased the pace of its nuclear development.

The Bush administration reversed course two years ago and agreed to join European diplomatic talks with Iran that are meant to roll back its nuclear program. Iran refused to meet a precondition that it shelve its enrichment of uranium during talks, and the U.S. offer went nowhere. Obama has said he would meet Iran's leaders for talks without precondition if he determined it would help.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Jul 08 - 11:32 AM

I have one word for y'all.

Just one word.

























Liechtenstein.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 08 - 11:22 AM

I guess Korea must be next, since we have recently learned from Senator McCain that Iran doesn't exist.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 23 Jul 08 - 09:13 AM

Rice presses North Korea on nuclear program
By MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writer
50 minutes ago



SINGAPORE - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice urged North Korea to accept terms to verify the dismantling of its nuclear weapons program, as the two countries ended a four-year hiatus in cabinet-level talks on Wednesday.

Rice told North Korean Foreign Minister Pak Ui Chun that his nation must move quickly to prove it has told the truth about its past atomic activities if it wants to improve ties with the United States, its immediate neighbors and end its international isolation.

"We didn't get into specific timetables, but the spirit was good because people believe we have made progress," she told reporters after the meeting on the sidelines of an Asian security forum in Singapore.

"There is also a sense of urgency about moving forward and a sense that we can't afford to have another hiatus," Rice said of her talks with Pak and the foreign ministers of the other four nations — China, Japan, Russia and South Korea — involved in the effort.

In a brief one-on-one exchange at the end of the 80-minute meeting, she reminded Pak of the importance the United States places on the process and also on North Korea resolving the issue of Japanese citizens it abducted in the 1980s, a senior U.S. official said.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity to describe a private diplomatic exchange.

Rice said there had been "no surprises" at the gathering, which had been characterized as informal and informational, and agreed with her counterparts that all six parties to the talks had reaffirmed their commitment to the ultimate goal of denuclearizing North Korea.

"I think this is quite significant," said Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi. "It shows the six parties have the political will to move forward with the ... process."

Yang said the group had made "major headway" in obtaining verifiable accounting of North Korea's nuclear program and others said they believed the meeting would boost the effort ahead a formal ministerial meeting to be held at an as-yet-unscheduled date in Beijing.

"Although it was not an official meeting, I think it was a good opportunity to show that the six-party process is maturing," said South Korean Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan. "I think (it) will give a political impetus for further six-party talks."

Diplomats had expected Pak to present at least an initial response to the four-page proposed "verification protocol" that was given to North Korea this month after it delivered a declaration containing details of its nuclear program in June.

But just hours before the talks began, North Korea insisted it had met its commitments and said Washington must completely abandon its "hostile policies" toward the regime if the denuclearization process is to succeed.

"What is important in the next stage is that these measures should lead to a complete abandonment of hostile (U.S.) policies toward our republic," North Korean spokesman Ri Tong Il told reporters. Pyongyang maintains that Washington is intent on North Korea's destruction.

However, he also said that Pyongyang hoped the meeting would build momentum toward ending the declaration and verification stage and move toward a formal end to the 1950-53 Korean War, which closed with an armistice rather than a peace treaty.

Rice said there had been "a lot of discussion" about the proposal, which calls for intrusive inspections, interviews with scientists and a role for the U.N. nuclear watchdog, but would not say if the North had moved beyond preliminary objections to some of elements.

However, she insisted that the meeting "was actually very good."

"It wasn't a standoff with people just stating their positions ... it was interactive," she said.

Wednesday's meeting marked the first time since 2004 that the top diplomats from the United States and North Korea have met face-to-face.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 10 Jul 08 - 10:50 PM

The Israelis are likely to do Bush's dirty work for him.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Amos
Date: 10 Jul 08 - 01:26 PM

Good luck on those possums and 'dillos, BWL. Hope you're starting a breeding program so you won't run out.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Jul 08 - 01:23 PM

NKorea nuclear talks resume, focus on verification

By KWANG-TAE KIM, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 29 minutes ago



BEIJING - Negotiators resumed talks Thursday on North Korea's nuclear disarmament, looking to lay out a program for what could be a lengthy attempt to verify the country's declaration of its atomic materials.

The latest round of six-nation talks comes after North Korea handed over the much-delayed list late last month and then blew up a cooling tower for its main nuclear reactor to demonstrate its commitment.

"I want to emphasize that all of us gathered here share the same strategic objectives," China's nuclear envoy, Wu Dawei, said at the start of the talks. "The ultimate objective is the realization of a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula."

Wu said that steps forward, including the recent declaration, meant the hard work was paying off.

"All these successes have led us to believe that if we work together, stick to the guidelines and concepts, honor our commitments, the strategic goals will undoubtedly be realized," he said.

After the parties adjourned for the day, South Korean envoy Kim Sook said they met in a "serious and businesslike atmosphere."

Negotiators touched on the four topics that will be addressed during the talks, but the most discussion was on the top item — establishing a verification and monitoring mechanism, Kim said.

The other topics are the completion of energy aid promised to North Korea, details of a meeting for the foreign ministers of the six countries, and future steps in the disarmament process.

Negotiators planned to resume Friday morning, with a separate working group meeting on the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula planned if the verification talks make progress, Kim said.

Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill told reporters earlier that after agreeing on the verification process, the verification itself "will take several weeks or even months, actually."

Some basic agreements on the process include interviews with North Korean officials and site visits, Hill said. "There are a lot of details that need to be fleshed out," he said.

In response to North Korea's declaration, the United States announced it would remove the North from a list of state sponsors of terrorism and relax some economic sanctions against the communist nation.

The exchanges paved the way for the resumption of the six-nation meetings in Beijing after a nine-month lull. The talks also include South Korea, Japan and Russia.

The nuclear standoff began in late 2002 when the U.S. accused the North of seeking to secretly enrich uranium in violation of a 1994 disarmament deal.

The architect of Pakistan's nuclear program, Abdul Qadeer Khan, told The Associated Press last week that he recalled uranium enrichment equipment being sent from Pakistan to North Korea in 2000.

The United States had previously insisted that North Korea detail its alleged uranium enrichment program as well as nuclear cooperation with Syria in the declaration.

But Washington has apparently backed down from that demand, drawing criticism from American conservatives who say the Bush administration is going too far to strike a deal with the North before leaving office next year.

On Thursday, North Korea accused U.S. conservatives of trying to "scuttle the denuclearization process on the Korean peninsula."

"What should not be overlooked is that the U.S. conservative hard-liners have seriously misinterpreted (North Korea's) willingness and efforts for denuclearization in order to serve their interests," the North's official Korean Central News Agency said in a commentary.

"This proves what extent of their hostile policy toward (North Korea) has reached," it said.

North Korea's nuclear declaration, which was delivered six months later than the country promised, is said to only give the overall figure for how much plutonium was produced at its main Yongbyon nuclear complex — but no details of bombs that may have been made.

Experts believe the North has produced as much as 110 pounds of weapons-grade plutonium, enough for up to 10 nuclear bombs.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Jul 08 - 12:21 AM

Maybe both the Bush administration and the Iranian government are ratcheting up the rhetoric in order to artificially inflate the price of oil. The Bush administration on behalf of their cronies in the oil industry, and the Iranian govt. because they are also benefiting from high oil prices. It definitely wouldn't surprise me if this was the case.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 09:27 PM

If Mr. Bush would like to see US gas prices at $10.00 per gallon, long lines at gas pumps, millions of people unable to get to work because they either can't get or can't afford gas for their cars, empty grocery shelves because truckers can't afford diesel fuel, and thousands of angry people in the streets performing acts of civil unrest that make those of the late '60s look like something from "Mary Poppins" then, by all means, he should attack Iran. It would give him a great opportunity to declare a state of emergency, suspend the Constitution, call off the upcoming elections, throw millions of us into those waiting-to-be-filled detainment camps out in the desert, and declare himself "President Until Things Get Back to Normal" which, of course, they never will.

If it happens, ya'll have fun. I'll stay here in the woods and eat possums and armadillos while the rest of you starve.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 05:28 PM

Analysis: US and Iran appear on collision course

By MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writer
31 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - The United States and Iran appear on a collision course in the Middle East, firing off mixed messages that are raising world tension and roiling oil markets amid fears that an eventual confrontation may be military.

Both insist war is not imminent, but their sharp words and provocative actions are stoking uncertainty as Washington and Tehran joust for strategic supremacy in the oil-rich region where American might — along with that of its top ally in the area, Israel — has long been dominant.

Concern spiked on Wednesday when Iran test-fired nine long- and medium-range missiles during war games in the Strait of Hormuz, aiming to show it can retaliate against any U.S. or Israeli attack. The display followed a joint military exercise by Israel and Greece last month in the Mediterranean that many saw as a warning to Iran.

The Iranian missile tests drew a quick response from Washington, which said the launches were further reason not to trust a country that it already accuses of fomenting instability in Iraq, supporting Israel's foes and attempting to build nuclear weapons. The testing sent oil prices higher before they calmed down later in the day.

This despite the fact that leaders on both sides — President Bush and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — had just this week tried to tamp down speculation that the use of force is inevitable.

As he nears the end of his presidency, Bush says repeatedly that diplomacy is his preferred option to deal with any threat posed by Iran's nuclear program, although he has just as often refused to take the military option off the table. Ahmadinejad, who has often spoken of wiping Israel off the map, this week dismissed talk of war as a "funny joke."

"I assure you that there won't be any war in the future," Ahmadinejad said Tuesday during a visit to Malaysia.

Shortly after Wednesday's missile tests, the White House didn't fling out any dire new warnings to Iran but settled for saying the testing was "completely inconsistent with Iran's obligations to the world" and served to further isolate the country.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stood clear of discussing possible military responses, arguing that the tests instead were proof that a proposed missile shield for Europe, a system that has drawn vehement opposition from Russia, is vital to defending U.S. interests and allies.

At a Pentagon news conference, Gates allowed that there had been a "lot of signaling going on" in the escalation of rhetoric between Iran, Israel and the U.S., but he added he does not think confrontation is closer.

So why does speculation about conflict continue to grow?

A main reason may be that neither side appears able to judge the other's true intent.

U.S. officials say they can't discern Iran's motivations, citing the closed nature of the regime and ostensible differences between the country's hardline Islamic religious leaders, its Revolutionary Guards and moderates. Some Iranian leaders may want peace, but not others, they say.

While Ahmadinejad tones down his rhetoric, others in Tehran have stepped up warnings of retaliation if the Americans — or Israelis — launch military action against Iran's nuclear sites. They threaten to hit Israel and U.S. regional bases with missiles and stop oil traffic through the vital Gulf region.

Wednesday's launches "demonstrate our resolve and might against enemies who in recent weeks have threatened Iran with harsh language," said Gen. Hossein Salami, the Revolutionary Guard's air force commander, according to state media. "Our hands are always on the trigger and our missiles are ready for launch," he was quoted as saying.

At the same time, the Iranian leadership may face a similar quandary in judging U.S. intentions. While Bush, Gates and Rice are stressing diplomacy, other, more hawkish, elements of the administration, notably Vice President Dick Cheney, are using more bellicose language similar to that of Israeli officials who have been more outspoken about the possible use of force.

And, with Bush's second term waning, Iran's calculations are also likely to be guided by what it thinks the policies of the next U.S. president will be.

The Republican and Democratic candidates, John McCain and Barack Obama, both agree Iran is a threat. But they differ on how to deal with it.

Obama said the tests underscored the need for direct diplomacy with Tehran, while McCain's response mirrored that of the Bush administration and focused on tougher sanctions against Iran.

Some analysts believe Bush will act militarily against Iran before he leaves office in six months and that if he doesn't, McCain will, if he is elected.

John Pike, the director of GlobalSecurity.org, a defense, security and space intelligence consultancy, is one.

"Bombing is either going to be the last thing Mr. Bush does or the first thing Mr. McCain does," he said.

___

EDITOR'S NOTE: Matthew Lee covers U.S. foreign policy for the Associated Press and has reported on diplomacy and international affairs for 14 years.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,Above 49
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 02:19 PM

you gotta love how bruce (up coming pun alert) liberally quotes from CNN, either he has shares or his politcal bias is showing. I know which one I'd bet on.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 02:17 PM

Amos,

"Question: DO you think Iran should have the freedom to develop nuclear-powered electrical-generating capabiltiies?"

ANSWER: Yes, within the controls ( That the other signitories of the NPT have to comply with) that Iran has refused to accept.




Question: Do you think that Iran should have the freedom to develop WMD in violation of the NPT that they signed in order to get that nuclear power?

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Amos
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 02:14 PM

Bruce:

Question: DO you think Iran should have the freedom to develop nuclear-powered electrical-generating capabiltiies?

The sad fact is that this administration has no understanding of how to deal with a tribal nation, nor any understanding of how they account face, machismo, and other such important cultural vectors; hence, no way to communicate. The bullyrag approach will simply force them to act more macho, according tot heir cultural boases. Ignoring that is as stupid as poking a stick into a wasp-nest. It's just stupid tactics.

There is probably some clear differential diagnostic between the two paths of nuclear technolgoy that could be used to make it clear which way they are going.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 01:59 PM

Leading diplomat calls Iran a top concern for U.S.

Story Highlights
NEW: Diplomat refuses to comment on report of increased covert operations in Iran

U.S. Undersecretary of State William Burns testifies on Iran before House panel

Burns appears hours after Iran test-fires a long-range missile

U.S. calls on Iran to refrain from further missile tests to help build trust

   
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Iran is as serious a problem as any the U.S. faces today, top State Department official William Burns said Wednesday, hours after the Islamic republic test-fired a long-range missile.

Burns, the undersecretary of state for political affairs, made the comments testifying before the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

The committee's chairman, Rep. Howard Berman, D-California, said in his opening statement, "Stopping Iran's nuclear quest is our most urgent strategic challenge."

But Burns, the highest-ranking career diplomat at the State Department, said the United States should not overestimate the threat Iran poses, saying the country's economy is weak and it is diplomatically isolated.

"Iran is not 10 feet tall, nor is it even the dominant regional actor," he said. "Because of its behavior, it can't count on any friends except for Cuba, Venezuela and Belarus."

He added, "And the world's leading financial institutions have largely stopped dealing with Iran, and especially Iranian banks, in any currency. They do not want to risk unwittingly facilitating the regime's proliferation or terrorism activities."

Burns said the United States is trying to work with other countries to press Tehran to stop its nuclear program and end support for militant groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah.

He said Washington is having mixed results.

He said Russia, which helped Iran build a nuclear reactor, "has moved to clamp down" on Tehran, though it has not unequivocally taken Washington's side.

China "has been frustratingly slow" to support the United States against Iran, he said.

Burns wouldn't comment when questioned about a magazine report this month suggesting President Bush had sought $400 million for covert operations inside Iran.

"I'm very well aware of the story, and I can't comment on sensitive intelligence matters," he said.

The White House reacted strongly to Wednesday's test-firing by the Iranians, calling it "a violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions and completely inconsistent with Iran's obligations to the world."

National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said: "They should also refrain from further missile tests if they truly seek to gain the trust of the world. The Iranians should stop the development of ballistic missiles, which could be used as a delivery vehicle for a potential nuclear weapon, immediately."

He added that the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany "are committed to a diplomatic path and have offered Iran a generous package of incentives if they will suspend their uranium enrichment activities."

Iran maintains it is pursuing nuclear power for civilian use, not to build nuclear weapons.

Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, said the tests "demonstrate again the dangers it [Iran] poses to its neighbors and to the wider region, especially Israel."

"Ballistic missile testing coupled with Iran's continued refusal to cease its nuclear activities should unite the international community in efforts to counter Iran's dangerous ambitions," he added.

McCain supports working with Europe and regional allies to deal with Iran, not "unilateral concessions."

His expected Democratic opponent, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, said, "We need to change our policy to deal aggressively with the threat posed by the Iranian regime. Through its nuclear program, missile capability, meddling in Iraq, support for terrorism and threats against Israel, Iran now poses the greatest strategic challenge to the United States in the region in a generation."

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 12:50 PM

Iranian shelling reported in northern Iraq

Story Highlights
Shelling hit border villages in Qandil mountains area in Sulaimaniya province

Authorities: Party of Free Life of Kurdistan is based in the region

Kurdish region a contiguous area that spread across Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey


By CNN's Mohammed Tawfeeq
   
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iranian artillery shells rained down on villages in northern Iraq Wednesday where Kurdish rebels were thought to be operating.

A security official with Iraq's Kurdish Regional Government in Sulaimaniya confirmed the information.

The early-morning shelling hit border villages in Qandil mountains area in Sulaimaniya province and there were no reports of casualties.

Authorities say the Party of Free Life of Kurdistan is based in the region.

It is is part of an alliance of Kurdish rebel groups that includes the Kurdistan Workers' Party, which conducts attacks against Turkey from northern Iraq.

The Kurdish region is a contiguous area that spread across Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey and the Kurdish rebels in those regions are fighting for an independent Kurdish state.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 09:01 AM

Iran test-fires missiles in Persian Gulf

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer
27 minutes ago



TEHRAN, Iran - Iran test-fired nine long- and medium-range missiles Wednesday during war games that officials said aimed to show the country can retaliate against any U.S. and Israeli attack, state television reported.

Gen. Hossein Salami, the air force commander of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards, said the exercise would "demonstrate our resolve and might against enemies who in recent weeks have threatened Iran with harsh language," the TV report said.

Wednesday's war games were being conducted at the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway through which about 40 percent of the world's oil passes. Iran has threatened to shut down traffic in the strait if attacked.

The report showed footage of at least three missiles firing simultaneously, and said the barrage included a new version of the Shahab-3 missile, which officials have said has a range of 1,250 miles and is armed with a 1-ton conventional warhead.

That would put Israel, Turkey, the Arabian peninsula, Afghanistan and Pakistan within striking distance.

"Our hands are always on the trigger and our missiles are ready for launch," the official IRNA news agency quoted Salami as saying Wednesday.

The report comes less than a day after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad dismissed fears that Israel and the United States could be preparing to attack his country, calling the possibility a "funny joke."

"I assure you that there won't be any war in the future," Ahmadinejad told a news conference Tuesday during a visit to Malaysia for a summit of developing Muslim nations.

But even as Ahmadinejad and other Iranian officials have dismissed the possibility of attack, Tehran has stepped up its warnings of retaliation if the Americans — or Israelis — do launch military action, including threats to hit Israel and U.S. Gulf bases with missiles and stop oil traffic through the vital Gulf region.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called Wednesday's tests "evidence that the missile threat is not an imaginary one."

"Those who say that there is no Iranian missile threat against which we should build a missile defense system perhaps ought to talk to the Iranians about their claims," Rice said while traveling in Sofia, Bulgaria.

A White House spokesman called the tests "completely inconsistent with Iran's obligations to the world."

"The Iranian regime only furthers the isolation of the Iranian people from the international community when it engages in this sort of activity," said Gordon Johndroe, spokesman for the National Security Council.

"They should also refrain from further missile tests if they truly seek to gain the trust of the world," he added, speaking from Japan where President Bush is attending the Group of Eight summit.

In late June, Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff, who was then the commander of the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet, said any attempt by Iran to seal off the Strait of Hormuz would be viewed as an act of war. The U.S. 5th Fleet is based in Bahrain, across the Gulf from Iran.

Israel's military sent warplanes over the eastern Mediterranean for a large military exercise in June that U.S. officials described as a possible rehearsal for a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, which the West fears are aimed at producing atomic weapons.

Iran says its nuclear program is geared only toward generating electricity, not weapons.

The Israeli exercise was widely interpreted as a show of force as well as a practice on skills needed to execute a long-range strike mission.

Shaul Mofaz, an Israeli Cabinet minister, set off an international uproar last month by saying in a published interview that Israel would have "no choice" but to attack Iran if it doesn't halt its nuclear program. Mofaz is a former military chief and defense minister, and has been Israel's representative in a strategic dialogue on Iran with U.S. officials.

On Wednesday, Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev said Israel "does not desire hostility and conflict with Iran."

"But it is clear that the Iranian nuclear program and the Iranian ballistic missile program is a matter of grave concern," Regev said.

The Guards and Iran's regular army routinely hold exercises two or three times a year.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Jul 08 - 12:47 PM

Iranian president says no war with US, Israel

By VIJAY JOSHI, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 39 minutes ago



KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Tuesday that he sees no possibility of a war between his country and the United States or Israel.

He also predicted Israel would collapse without Iranian action.

"I assure you that there won't be any war in the future," Ahmadinejad told a news conference during a visit to Malaysia for a summit of developing Muslim nations.

The Israelis "are a complex political group, but you should know this regime will be eventually destroyed and there is no need of any measure by Iranian people," he said when asked to comment on whether he has called for the destruction of Israel.

Ahmadinejad's comments came a day after Iran's Revolutionary Guards said in a statement that the country was holding a military drill involving "missile squads" and warned that the country would retaliate against any military strike by targeting Tel Aviv and U.S. warships in the Gulf.

Iranian officials have been issuing a mix of conciliatory and bellicose statements in recent weeks about the possibility of a clash with the U.S. and Israel.

Ahmadinejad has in the past called for Israel's elimination. But his exact remarks have been disputed. Some translators say he called for Israel to be "wiped off the map," but others say that would be better translated as "vanish from the pages of time" — implying Israel would disappear on its own rather than be destroyed.

Ahmadinejad also said Tuesday that the next U.S. administration "would need at least 30 years in order to compensate, renovate and innovate the damages done by Mr. Bush."

"Today, the government of the United States is on the threshold of bankruptcy — from political to economic," Ahmadinejad said.

"The greatest threat in the Middle East and the whole world ... is the United States' intervention in other countries," Ahmadinejad said.

He urged Washington to heal its image by "relying on (the) basis of justice, humanitarian acts and respect for human beings."

For months, Ahmadinejad and other Iranian officials have said they don't believe the U.S. will attack because of its difficulties in Iraq, domestic worries and concerns over the fallout in the region. At the same time, Tehran has stepped up its warnings of retaliation if the Americans — or Israelis — do attack it, including threats to hit Israel and U.S. Gulf bases with missiles and stop oil traffic through the vital Gulf region.

The Web site of the elite Iranian force posted a statement late Monday quoting guard official Ali Shirazi as saying that Iran would retaliate against any military strike by targeting Tel Aviv and U.S. warships in the Gulf.

"The Zionist regime is pushing the White House to prepare for a military strike on Iran," Shirazi was quoted as saying.

"If such a stupidity is done by them, Tel Aviv and the U.S. naval fleet in the Persian Gulf will be the first targets which will be set on fire in Iran's crushing response."

Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev would not comment on Shirazi's warning other than to say "his words speak for themselves."

State Department spokesman Gonzalo Gallegos said such statements by Iran were "unfortunately...not out of the norm."

"We continue to stress our desire to resolve this issue diplomatically," Gallegos added.

Israel's military sent warplanes over the eastern Mediterranean for a large military exercise in June that U.S. officials described as a possible rehearsal for a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, which the West fears are aimed at producing atomic weapons.

The U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet, headquartered in the Persian Gulf nation of Bahrain, is responsible for patrolling the Gulf, the Suez Canal and parts of the Indian Ocean.

Shirazi is a cleric who represents supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the guards' naval force. Khamenei has the final say over all state matters.

The Guards' Web site also announced that forces were carrying out a military drill involving "missile squads," but did not say where it was taking place.

Iran's guards and national army hold regular exercises two or three times a year, but the statement did not say whether this drill was one of them or if it was a special exercise.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 11:30 AM

Washington Post:


Coalition Of the Ineffectual

By Richard Perle
Thursday, June 26, 2008; Page A19

"A successful multilateral coalition" is how Condoleezza Rice described those countries, "united in confronting Iran," on which the administration's Iran policy critically depends.

"A complete failure" is Barack Obama's description of the Bush administration's Iran policy.

They are both right. The secretary of state, whose born-again multilateralism has redeemed her standing at the State Department and among our allies, can rightly claim to have forged a coalition on Iran. But Obama (whose enthusiasm for multilateralism is at least as fervent) can rightly claim that Rice's coalition has failed to slow, much less halt, Iran's unrelenting nuclear weapons program or diminish its support for terrorist groups.

The coalition that Rice thinks a success, and Obama a failure, is, at best, a "do nothing decisive" group, with at least half its members -- Germany, Russia and China -- maneuvering for self-serving advantage in their dealings with the mullahs in Iran. Russia continues to assist Iran's nuclear program while selling Iran advanced weapons. China is prowling for oil deals and selling advanced weapons. German businessmen fill the lobbies of Iranian hotels (one can't be sure what they're selling). The Russians and the Chinese have made it clear that they will not support sanctions that are severe enough to exert any real influence, and while Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, has been outspoken in her disparagement of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, her words -- like our president's -- fly up, while her (and his) government's thoughts remain below.


For their part, the Iranians, undeterred by Rice's "successful multilateral coalition," are relentlessly building a nuclear weapons program while supporting terrorism and subversion in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Israel. The mullahs took only scornful notice of President Bush's appeals to an even larger coalition, "the world," when he said, on May 18, "To allow the world's leading sponsor of terror to gain the world's deadliest weapon would be an unforgivable betrayal of future generations. For the sake of peace, the world must not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon." But allow it does.

There are lessons here. Soon after taking office, President Bush rejected several previously negotiated international agreements, including the Kyoto treaty, the treaty establishing the International Criminal Court, a protocol to the biological weapons convention and, in 2002, the treaty banning ballistic missile defenses. The reaction was angry and immediate: The United States, critics charged, had abandoned the multilateralism of the Clinton years for a high-handed "unilateral" approach that alienated our allies and undermined the alliances on which our security was said to depend.

This idea became a centerpiece of John Kerry's presidential campaign. He called for "a bold, progressive internationalism that stands in stark contrast to the too often belligerent and myopic unilateralism of the Bush administration," the conventional wisdom echoed by countless politicians, commentators and opinion polls these past seven and a half years. We are certain to hear more of the same in this year's presidential election.

Most often, "multilateral" has referred to policies that were either established in multilateral agreements or blessed by the United Nations, our European allies or both. Left implicit among those preaching multilateralism was the idea that a multilateral solution was always available, if only the administration had been willing to adopt it. It has often been said, wrongly, that the Bush administration opposed working with allies and preferred to go it alone. But a preference for going it alone never was the problem.

The problem, rather, is a dangerous confusion between ends and means, and it is a confusion shared by Condi Rice and Barack Obama. Coalitions, even successful multilateral ones, are instruments, tools, means to an end. They are important and useful, sometimes essential, but they are not, and must not be seen as, ends in themselves. Confusion on this point can lead to claims of success when failure is staring you in the face.

How else should we judge progress as we seek to end Iran's drive for nuclear weapons and its support for terrorism? We have a multilateral coalition. It is "united." But it has not, and almost certainly will not, do the thing for which it has arduously been put together.

Building multilateral coalitions entails compromise: to entice countries to join, to keep them on board, to order priorities, to achieve consensus on an action plan. Sometimes the compromises are worth it because the coalition goes on to achieve an objective that we could not possibly have achieved alone. Sometimes they are not, as when members are unwilling or unable to take effective measures and our own freedom of action is encumbered -- or worse, when satisfaction at having created a multilateral coalition becomes a substitute for achieving our objective. That is the case as the united multilateral coalition "confronts" Iran.

One can argue whether we alone can prevent an "unforgivable betrayal of future generations," as President Bush has put it. But the way to develop strategy for doing that begins by recognizing that the multilateral approach is failing. Seven and a half years after denouncing Iran's nuclear weapons program, a hapless president and his coalition can only look on while the Iranians rush to the finish line.

Art for art's sake is beautiful. Multilateralism for its own sake is not.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 10:05 AM

Well taking a look at the list presented to GWB by the intelligence agencies of the United States of America way back in December 2001 they had pegged Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya, Syria. Out of that lot Iraq no longer poses any threat, neither does North Korea or Libya who both voluntarily abandoned their nuclear weapons programmes. Syria is currently under investigation, but it is believed that that problem was scotched by Israeli intervention. That only leaves Iran, and the spotlight of the world has them firmly fixed in its beam. 80% outright success rate, not bad considering, well done the USA.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Jun 08 - 07:12 PM

Iran: time running out for the next unilaterally chosen and unprovoked American war of aggression, launched to attack someone else on the feeble and illegal excuse that that someone else might someday attack someone else...

The self-defence technique of Lapp-Goch, in other words, once advertised as a joke by National Lampoon, but based on solid past precedents set by Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan and Fascist Italy in WWII, now embraced by Britain and America to SAVE the world! Praise the Lord!

;-)

And for the umpteenth time.....it's LIECHTENSTEIN!!! Keep your eyes on "the Sleeping Croissant"!

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Jun 08 - 05:04 PM

Iran: Time running out over nuke issue

Story Highlights
Iran's parliament speaker warns of countries making moves on Iran

Ali Larijani says any provocation would would "cost them heavily"

Larijani slams EU sanctions against Iran

   
(CNN) -- Iran's powerful speaker of parliament warned other countries Wednesday not to provoke Iran and cautioned against moves that would "cost them heavily."

Ali Larijani also recommended that Western nations consider the recent comments from U.N. nuclear watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei, who said Saturday that a strike on Iran would turn the Middle East into a "ball of fire."

"We advise you to take Mr. ElBaradei's warnings seriously and not to be after provoking Iran. In that case, you will face our predestined action, and returning to interaction will become impossible for you," Larijani said in parliament in Tehran.

The comments come amid concern in the West that Iran is intent on developing nuclear weapons. Iran insists that it wants to pursue nuclear power for energy purposes.

Israel also has warned about Iran's nuclear aspirations and in recent days conducted a large-scale military exercise in the Mediterranean. One U.S. military official said the exercise was in part a message to Iran that Israel has the capability to attack its nuclear program.

ElBaradei indicated that any strike would make Iran less willing to work with the West over its nuclear enrichment program.

At present, Larijani said Wednesday, "a little time was left for having interaction with Iran" regarding the program, according to Iran's Islamic Republic News Agency.

But Larijani, once Iran's chief nuclear envoy, slammed the European Union for its new sanctions against Iran, strictures issued even as the EU plans talks with Iran over an incentives package it hopes would convince Iran that it should halt uranium enrichment.

The EU sanctions adopted Monday include an asset freeze on Iran's Bank Melli and visa bans on some senior officials.

"If you are going to negotiate with Iran over the package of proposals, then why have you chosen confrontation before that?" Larijani asked.

He also issued a warning to the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany, which have been engaged in the Iranian nuclear issue.

"If we feel that you are making decisions unilaterally and are using negotiations as an instrument to justify your illegal actions, be certain that the process will change," he said. "This is the path you have chosen to step in, and the responsibility of consequences will be yours."

IRNA quoted him as warning other countries against moves that would "cost them heavily."

"Do not add to the cost you should pay with making wrong assessments," Larijani was quoted as saying.

Iranian and Western analysts believe that an Israeli strike against Iran is not possible without American approval and logistical assistance. Iranians have said they would hold the United States responsible for any attacks by Israel.

Also Wednesday, an Iranian military official issued a warning against any provocative actions. The United States has said it wants to deal with the Iranian nuclear issue diplomatically but has left all options on the table.

Maj. Gen. Seyed Mohammad Hejazi, deputy commander of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, "suggested" that American leaders "be careful lest they face a new catastrophe."

"Our last word is that if you want to head toward Iran, be sure to bring with you a walking stick and a pair of artificial legs, because if you do come to Iran, you will no longer have legs to go back home with," Hejazi said.

The Israeli military, responding to questions about this week's military exercise, said its air force regularly trains for various missions so it will be able to confront and meet the challenges posed by the threats facing Israel.

In 1981, Israel attacked and destroyed the Osirak nuclear facility in Iraq, and in September it attacked a target in Syria that the United States believes was a nuclear reactor.

Israel and Iran long have been arch-enemies. Israel has long felt threatened by Iran's hard-line Islamic regime, and the Islamic Republic rails against the very existence of the Jewish state. The Iranian regime for years has criticized Israel's policies in the Palestinian territories.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 May 08 - 04:27 PM

Well, BB, anything is technically legal within a given society if its lawmakers say it is, right? The question is, is it legal elsewhere, beyond their reach? What Germany was doing to the Jews (and other victims of Nazi policy) was not legal elsewhere, beyond the reach of Nazi control. Not in the least! What the USA has been doing to Iraq and to its prisoners in Guantanamo and other places is not legal elsewhere either. It is violation of international law. It's also violation of the principles embodied in your own Constitution.

It will eventually become a matter for war crimes trials if, as Germany did, the USA loses a great war. If not, well then the USA will escape its responsibilities in that regard, because only the losers of great wars pay for their crimes. The winners walk away scot free.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 May 08 - 04:10 PM

No, Teribus, I merely selected a few notable examples out of many, many notable examples of past imperialism. Period. I did not pick them particularly to reference the USA. After all, I included the Soviets and the French, didn't I? The USA is doing very well by itself (in partnership with the UK) and needs no help from me in ditinguishing it as the world's most aggressive and dangerous presently dominating imperialist power...the one that launches unprovoked invasions over spurious justifications.

You added a few more examples of past aggressive imperialism like Genghis Khan, etc. Great. I agree 100% with your examples. I'm sure that we could waste a great deal of further time naming ALL the additional examples of past imperialism that neither one of us has yet quoted. How about the Aztecs? Or the Iroquois? Or the Egyptians? Or the Belgians? Or the Portuguese? Or the Dutch? Or the Sassanids? Or the Magyars? Or the Moors? Or the ancient Israelites when they left Sinai and went into "the promised land"? Or the Babylonians? Or the Assyrians? Really, one can go on forever with that sort of thing.

My concern is strictly with the presently ruling imperial order....which is a coalition of the USA/UK/Canada/Australia (the last 2 are just junior partners, mind you, but they're definitely part of it).

You are a UK loyalist, and you can't believe that your guys could be in the wrong this time. (shrug) Why should that surprise me? You're a typical soldier in that respect. There's nothing unusual about it, and I don't expect anything to change your loyalist attitude one iota.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 May 08 - 04:02 PM

Sorry, LH, but when the UN refuses to act in cases such as Cambodia ( 2 million killed), Rwanda ( 800,000 killed), Bosnia, Darfur, Burma, etc, IMO the acts of an "Imperial" power have greater moral value than the "legal" acceptance of slaughter. After all, what Hitler did to the Jews WAS legal, and would be so now if he had one.

IMO, the actions that the US has NOT done ( add Armenia to the above list) will be regretted far more than what we have done.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Teribus
Date: 28 May 08 - 03:39 PM

No Little Hawk, what you tried to do is selectively present past history to support your own extremely bigotted and biased view of the United States of America, and why? Because you couldn't stand your corner in an arguement with some kids from the US when you moved down there - hence your "I'm always for the underdog. Immaterial if they happen to be in the right or in the wrong".

But if you are going to quote historical examples at least get the bloody details right in both fact and perspective.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 May 08 - 02:04 PM

When will Washington cease its illegal activities, BB? Its whole war in Iraq is illegal, and was so right from the start. Its continued occupation of Iraq is illegal. Its torturing of prisoners is illegal. Its offshore prison facilities in Guantanamo and elsewhere are illegal.

You just don't get it, BB. You're living in the current spiritual counterpart to Hitler's Germany...only still without the concentration camps (so far) or the attacks on Jews or some other such scapegoat...a nation which attacks whomever it pleases, whenever it pleases, for no reason other than that it pleases, and without any genuine provocation or justification...and legality be damned.

None of this has anything to do with legality, it has to do with the exercise of naked power by the Superpower.

I wonder, assuming Bush's alleged attack plan goes ahead this summer, what will happen afterward in regards to the American election and the next administration? Well, we'll have to wait and see. Hopefully this alleged attack will not happen at all. If it does, it will not be good for anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 May 08 - 01:21 PM

Nice neutral source....


And several of the claims ( re the UN and it's reports) are false.

So when will Iran comply with the UN and cease it's illegal activities?