BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 May 09 - 12:14 PM

That last was 1,000.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: mayomick
Date: 20 May 09 - 01:42 PM

Congrats on that Carol.
There's something sinister but amusing in all the hypocrisies involved in this business about whether Iran wants to acquire nuclear weapons or not .We're all caught up in the deceit . Everybody knows the truth , but the pro-war rightwing can't afford to give the proof , while the antiwar left doesn't want to tell the truth for obvious reasons. So we have go through the charades of UN inspectors threats and deadlines .

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 May 09 - 02:12 PM

The truth is that all of the drum beating for war against Iran has nothing whatever to do with the national security of anyone at all, and everything to do with the ambitions of the US and Israel for regional (and in the case of the US, global) hegemony.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 22 May 09 - 03:52 PM

Last update - 21:49 22/05/2009   


'1 in 4 Israelis would consider leaving country if Iran gets nukes'

By Ofri Ilani, Haaretz Correspondent



Some 23 percent of Israelis would consider leaving the country if Iran obtains a nuclear weapon, according to a poll conducted on behalf of the Center for Iranian Studies at Tel Aviv University.

Some 85 percent of respondents said they feared the Islamic Republic would obtain an atomic bomb, 57 percent believed the new U.S. initiative to engage in dialogue with Tehran would fail and 41 percent believed Israel should strike Iran's nuclear installations without waiting to see whether or how the talks develop.

"The findings are worrying because they reflect an exaggerated and unnecessary fear," Prof. David Menashri, the head of the Center, said. "Iran's leadership is religiously extremist but calculated and it understands an unconventional attack on Israel is an act of madness that will destroy Iran. Sadly, the survey shows the Iranian threat works well even without a bomb and thousands of Israelis [already] live in fear and contemplate leaving the country."

Women are more fearful than men that Iran will obtain nuclear weapons: 83 percent of female respondents said they fear such a scenario in contrast to 78 percent of men; 39 percent of women said they would consider leaving the country in such an event as opposed to 22 percent of men.

Age was also a factor for respondents: 89 percent of those aged 42 and above said they were fearful of a nuclear Iran, in comparison to 61 percent of those aged 18 to 41.

Some 80 percent of left-wing voters and 67 percent of right-wing voters expressed deep concern over a nuclear Iran. Respondents describing themselves as centrists were the most fretful, with 88 percent saying they feared Iran would obtain the bomb.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 22 May 09 - 04:02 PM

1 in 4 Israelis already want to leave Israel, even if Iran never gets any nukes.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 22 May 09 - 04:15 PM

CarolC,

Care to support your statemnet with facts, or do you just want us to believe it because YOU said so?


9 out of 10 Palestinians want to kill Jews.

( see who they elected in Gaza, who they support, and what they do when offered a peaceful settlement.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 22 May 09 - 04:40 PM

I already supported that one with statistics, on the WW 3 thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 22 May 09 - 04:45 PM

BTW, voting for Hamas and insisting on being given their freedom does not mean they want to kill Jews. A peaceful settlement is not necessarily the same thing as freedom, and nobody in their right mind would settle for peace in a prison rather than fighting for their freedom. (What's that phrase we like to use here in this country? Live free or die?) It only means they want their freedom and they think that Hamas is more likely to help them get it than Fatah. They're probably right about that, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 09 - 09:48 AM

Obama: N. Korea 'recklessly challenging' the world
         

Merrill Hartson, Associated Press Writer – 24 mins ago


WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama said Monday that North Korea's latest nuclear test should be "a matter of grave concern to all nations" and accused Pyongyang of behaving recklessly and defying international will.

Obama also said in an early-morning statement that the United States "will continue working with our allies and partners" in multilateral talks and will hold consultations with members of the U.N. Security Council on it and a subsequent series of test-firings of short-range ground-to-air missiles.

In Pyongyang earlier, North Korea said that it had carried out a powerful underground nuclear test — much larger than one conducted in 2006. The regime also test-fired three short-range, ground-to-air missiles later Monday from the same northeastern site where it launched a rocket last month, the Yonhap news agency reported, citing unnamed sources.

The rocket liftoff, widely believed to be a cover for a test of its long-range missile technology, drew censure from the U.N. Security Council, which scheduled a meeting in New York for later Monday.

Reining in Pyongyang's nuclear program has been a continuing problem for U.S. administrations, dating to the Clinton administration. Former President George W. Bush labeled North Korea as a country that was part of an international "axis of evil," but the United States subsequently removed Pyongyang from its list of official state sponsors of terrorism when it shut down a nuclear installation late in the Bush administration.

The question now is calculating precisely the nature of a threat and what are options are available to the Obama administration.

"We are gravely concerned by North Korea's claims. We are analyzing the data," the State Department said in a statement. "The U.S. Geological Survey confirmed that a seismic event took place consistent with a test. We are consulting with our Six Party and U.N. Security Council partners on next steps."

Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, last month dismissed an earlier rocket launch as a failure_ both technologically and as an effort to market its missiles to other countries.

"Would you buy from somebody that had failed three times in a row and never been successful?" he asked during a briefing at the Pentagon. Cartwright said the abortive missile launch showed that North Korea had failed to master the midair thrust shift from one rocket booster to another, an integral part of ballistic missile technology.

In his statement Monday, Obama noted that North Korea had "conducted a nuclear test in violation of international law."

"It appears to also have attempted a short range missile launch," the president said in his statement. "These actions, while not a surprise given its statements and actions to date, are a matter of grave concern to all nations. North Korea's attempts to develop nuclear weapons, as well as its ballistic missile program, constitute a threat to international peace and security."

"By acting in blatant defiance of the United Nations Security Council," he said, "North Korea is directly and recklessly challenging the international community. North Korea's behavior increases tensions and undermines stability in Northeast Asia."

"Such provocations will only serve to deepen North Korea's isolation. It will not find international acceptance unless it abandons its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery."

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he believed the latest series of tests "just speak to the growing belligerence on the part of North Korea ... the growing defiance of international law."

Mullen, appearing Monday morning on CBS's "The Early Show" show, said that "all of those things point to a country I think continues to destabilize that region and in the long term, should they continue to develop a nuclear weapons program, poses a grave threat to the United States."

Mullen, making appearances on the network morning news shows to pay tribute to troops on Memorial Day, told NBC's "Today" program that he was "very confident we can deal with a threat posed by North Korea."

"It's not just the U.S., but there are many other countries that are equally concerned," the admiral said. "This was not an unanticipated test on the part of North Korea, should we be able to confirm it. ... It's a country that continues to isolate itself, and the international community must continue to bring pressure to make sure they don't achieve a nuclear weapons program that can threaten other countries and the U.S. as well."

He did not discuss whether there were any changes in U.S. military alert status.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, leading a congressional delegation on a tour in China, said, "If today's announcement is true, these tests would be a clear violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1718, which requires that North Korea not conduct any further nuclear tests. Such action by North Korea is unacceptable and cause for great alarm."

The California Democrat said she and other members of her delegation planned to urge Chinese leaders to use their influence to get the North to return to six-nation talks aimed at ending its nuclear program.

Wendy Sherman, a former Clinton administration adviser on North Korean policy, told The Associated Press: "We're sending the message that there is international law; there are international norms; that countries will be isolated from the international community."

"U.S. officials had expected that North Korea might conduct a second nuclear test," she said. "That said, this is as President Obama said, 'of grave concern.' "

North Korea earlier this year rejected a plan for additional U.S. food assistance and kicked out five groups distributing American aid in the country.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 09 - 10:35 AM

Iran sends warships to Gulf of Aden
- navy
Mon May 25, 2009 5:43pm IST

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran has sent six warships to international waters, including the Gulf of Aden, to show its ability to confront any foreign threats, its naval commander said on Monday.

Admiral Habibollah Sayyari, quoted by the ISNA news agency, made the announcement five days after Iran said it test-fired a surface-to-surface missile with a range of 2,000 km (1,200 miles), putting Israel and U.S. bases in the area within reach.

Iran said on May 14 it had sent two warships to the Gulf of Aden to protect oil tankers from the world's fifth-largest crude exporter against attacks by pirates but ISNA did not make clear whether they were among the six Sayyari talked about.

Iranian waters stretch along the Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz and the Sea of Oman. Iran has threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz, through which about 40 percent of the world's traded oil is shipped, if it were attacked over its nuclear programme.

"Iran has dispatched six ... warships to international waters and the Gulf of Aden region in an historically unprecedented move by the Iranian Navy," Sayyari told a gathering of armed forces officials, IRNA reported.

Sayyari said that preserving Iran's territorial integrity in its southern waters called for the "perseverance and firmness" of the navy.

The move to dispatch the warships "is indicative of the country's high military capability in confronting any foreign threat on the country's shores," Sayyari said.

The ISNA report did not mention the threat of pirate attacks, which, fuelled by large ransoms, have continued almost unabated despite the presence of an armada of foreign warships patrolling the Indian Ocean and Gulf of Aden.

In January, pirates released an Iranian-chartered cargo ship carrying 36,000 tonnes of wheat to Iran from Germany that was seized in November. In March, a regional maritime official said Somali villagers had detained another Iranian vessel.

Nearly 20,000 ships pass through the Gulf of Aden each year, heading to and from the Suez Canal. Seven percent of world oil consumption passed through the Gulf of Aden in 2007, according to Lloyd's Marine Intelligence Unit.

On May 20, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran had tested a missile that defence analysts say could hit Israel and U.S. bases in the Gulf, a move likely to fuel concern about Tehran's nuclear ambitions.

The United States and its allies suspect the Islamic Republic is seeking to build nuclear bombs, a charge Tehran denies, but President Barack Obama has offered a new beginning of diplomatic engagement with Iran if it "unclenches its fist".

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 09 - 10:37 AM

Iran's Ahmadinejad rejects Western nuclear proposal

Mon May 25, 2009 9:30am EDT

By Parisa Hafezi

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday rejected a Western proposal for it to "freeze" its nuclear work in return for no new sanctions and ruled out any talks with major powers on the issue.

The comments by the conservative president, who is seeking re-election in a June 12 presidential vote, are likely to further disappoint the U.S. administration of President Barack Obama, which is seeking to engage Iran diplomatically.

The United States, Russia, China, France, Germany and Britain said in April they would invite Iran to a meeting to try and find a diplomatic solution to the nuclear row.

The West accuses Iran of secretly developing atomic weapons. Iran, the world's fifth-largest oil exporter, denies the charge and says it only wants nuclear power to generate electricity.

Breaking with past U.S. policy of shunning direct talks with Iran, Obama's administration said it would join such discussions with Tehran from now on.

"Our talks (with major powers) will only be in the framework of cooperation for managing global issues and nothing else. We have clearly announced this," Ahmadinejad said.

"The nuclear issue is a finished issue for us," he told a news conference.

He was asked about a so-called "freeze-for-freeze" proposal first put forward last year under which Iran would freeze expansion of its nuclear program in return for the U.N. Security Council halting further sanctions against Tehran.

Western diplomats say the proposal remains on the table. Ahmadinejad last month said Iran had prepared its own package of proposals to end the stalemate.

"We will not allow anyone to negotiate with us outside the agency's regulations and issues," he said on Monday, referring to the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency. "From now on we will continue our path in the framework of the agency."

Obama has offered a new beginning of diplomatic engagement with Iran if it "unclenches its fist," but Washington has not ruled out military action if diplomacy fails.

Ahmadinejad, facing a challenge in the election from moderates advocating detente with the West, has made angry rhetoric against the United States and it allies his trademark since he came to power in 2005.

Iran says it is ready for "constructive" talks but has repeatedly rejected demands to halt sensitive uranium enrichment which can have both civilian and military purposes.

Asked about North Korea's nuclear test on Monday, Ahmadinejad said: "In principle we oppose the production, expansion and the use of weapons of mass destruction."

He said Iran had no missile or nuclear cooperation with North Korea.

Ahmadinejad also proposed a debate with Obama at U.N. headquarters in New York, "regarding the roots of world problems."

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 09 - 10:40 AM

Half of Israelis back immediate strike on Iran

May 24 02:36 AM US/Eastern

Just over half of Israelis back an immediate attack on the nuclear facilities of arch-foe Iran but the rest want to wait and see the results of US diplomacy, according to a poll released on Sunday.
Fifty-one percent support an immediate Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear sites, while 49 percent believe the Jewish state should await the outcome of efforts by the US administration to engage with the Islamic republic, said the survey published by Tel Aviv University.

But 74 percent of those questioned said they believe that new US President Barack Obama's efforts will not stop the Islamic republic from acquiring atomic weapons.

Israel, widely considered to be the Middle East's sole if undeclared nuclear armed state, considers Iran its arch-foe after repeated statements by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for the Jewish state to be "wiped off the map."

Israel and Washington accuse Iran of trying to develop atomic weapons under the guise of a civilian nuclear programme, a charge Tehran has repeatedly denied.

Opinion is split among left- and right-wingers about whether to attack Iran's nuclear sites, with 63 percent of those leaning to the right favouring a strike, compared with 38 percent of those leaning to the left, the poll said.

It was carried out by Tel Aviv University's Centre for Iranian Studies among 509 Israeli adults and had a 4.5-percent margin of error.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 25 May 09 - 12:05 PM

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1087331.html

Israel's military option against Iran has died. The death warrant was issued courtesy of the new U.S. administration led by Barack Obama.

All the administration's senior officials, from the president to his vice president, Joe Biden, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and others are sending strong, clear hints that Israel does not have permission to strike Iran. Yet, given their familiarity with the Israeli client, they have not made do with simple hints and intimations. Washington dispatched the new CIA director, Leon Panetta, to Israel. Panetta made clear to Netanyahu, in so many words, that an Israeli attack would create "big trouble."

Perhaps Israel at one point had just a small window of opportunity to exercise the military option, or, in other words, the possibility of attacking sites in Iran to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons. This is assuming, of course, that Israel indeed has the military capability for carrying out such a mission - an assumption that raises many questions. This is a mission that requires gathering pinpoint intelligence, to identify the precise targets without harming thousands of innocent civilians.
        
Simply put, one of the targets of such a strike is the uranium enrichment facility in Isfahan, which lies in the heart of a congested civilian population. A realistic military option is also contingent on fighter jets finding undetected routes, as well as carrying a sufficient payload of bombs and missiles to inflict heavy damage on the targets.

Let us assume that Israel does, indeed, have a reasonable military capability which would enable it to strike at the targets, inflict heavy damage and set Iran's nuclear program back a few years. The opportunity to realize this capability arguably presented itself to Israel a few years ago. Iran at the time was subject to an intense international offensive. Inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency repeatedly exposed its lies and levied sanctions against the Tehran regime.

Threats made by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to wipe Israel from the map and his insistence on denying the Holocaust aroused great sympathy for Israel. This sympathy was buttressed by the Olmert government's willingness to hold peace talks with Syria and seek an agreement with the Palestinians. Above all, this friendly international atmosphere was backed by an accommodating Republican administration and a president who was ready to support (or to turn a blind eye to) any Israeli operation. In addition, Iran's ability to respond to an attack with missiles was limited.

But all this is now in the past. The sanctions are stuck. Ahmadinejad has, for the time being, softened his bellicose rhetoric. The production of Iranian missiles has doubled.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not ready to recognize the right of the Palestinians to a state of their own, nor does he have any intention of holding serious negotiations with Syria, regarding withdrawal from the Golan Heights. This position reduces international support for Israel. Yet, most importantly, there is a new president in Washington, one who has outlined a new policy vis-a-vis Iran. He has announced the start of negotiations with Iran, and even though he mentioned that the talks will have to be concluded by the end of this year, he did not set a clear deadline. All these factors, including the explicit statements made by administration officials, put Israel in its place.

The supreme tenet of Israeli defense policy states that Jerusalem must not launch any strategic initiative that stands in contradiction, or places in harm's way, the clear interests of the United States. This stance has underpinned every fateful decision taken by Israel relating to matters of war and peace. Israel embarked on the Six-Day War only after it was convinced that the U.S. would not oppose. In the hours leading up to the Yom Kippur War, Israel refrained from launching a preemptive strike for fear that Washington would blame it for starting the war. Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982 only after Defense Minister Ariel Sharon came under the impression that the U.S. would view the move with understanding. During the first Gulf War in 1991, the U.S. did not permit Israel to respond to Iraqi scud missiles, and Israel obliged.

If this tenet remains the cornerstone of defense policy, then Israel once again will not act against the explicit wishes of the U.S. Thus, when Israeli leaders say that "all options are open," this is nothing but a dog's bark being louder than his bite. Or, if you will, a mouse that roars. If the U.S. does not alter its policy, then Israel no longer has the military option at its disposal - if it ever had such an option at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 09 - 12:43 PM

You know that last source is entirely worthless- it contradicts you!


"In the hours leading up to the Yom Kippur War, Israel refrained from launching a preemptive strike for fear that Washington... "

And you have in the past claimed that Israel DID strike pre-emptively- so by your analyasis, anything they say is suspect.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 25 May 09 - 12:54 PM

I don't agree with everything in it. Just showing that there is another Israeli perspective on this subject besides the one being constantly harped on by the above poster.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 09 - 01:08 PM

Exactly...

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Lox
Date: 25 May 09 - 01:20 PM

Kim Jong Il is a menace.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 09 - 01:40 PM

"Fifty-one percent support an immediate Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear sites, while 49 percent believe the Jewish state should await the outcome of efforts by the US administration to engage with the Islamic republic, said the survey published by Tel Aviv University. "


Harp?

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 25 May 09 - 03:49 PM

Someone needs a good biffing here!

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 09 - 05:16 PM

UN chief sees 'violation' if NKorea test confirmed
AP - Monday, May 25, 2009 4:02:08 PM
By EDITH M. LEDERER

APThe U.N. chief said he strongly deplored a second nuclear test by North Korea that clearly violated a United Nations Security Council resolution, as the council called an emergency session Monday to discuss the matter.

The five permanent veto-wielding members of the council -- the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France -- met behind closed doors ahead of the meeting of the full 15-member council.

Japan, which called for the emergency meeting, said North Korea's "irresponsible" nuclear test and a missile launch in April had challenged the authority of the U.N.'s most powerful body "and the response must be firm."

"It's a very clear challenge," said Japan's U.N. Ambassador Yukio Takasu, a non-permanent council member. "So therefore we need a really, really clear and firm message from this -- preferably a resolution."

Takasu refused to say whether Japan would seek new sanctions against North Korea, saying he wanted to consult with other council members. "The important thinking is a unified message from the council," he said.

North Korea claimed it carried out a powerful underground nuclear test Monday that was much larger than one it conducted in 2006. Russia's Defense Ministry confirmed an atomic explosion occurred early Monday in northeastern North Korea and estimated that its strength was similar to bombs that devastated Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II.

"I sincerely hope that the Security Council will take necessary corresponding measures," U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told The Associated Press during a visit to Copenhagen, declining to specify what further measures, or sanctions, he would urge the council members to take.

Ban, who was in the Danish capital for a global business summit on climate change, said he would closely monitor the meeting in New York.

A statement issued by his spokeswoman later Monday said "the secretary-general strongly deplores the conduct of an underground nuclear test by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, in clear and grave violation of the relevant Security Council resolutions."

New testing by North Korea would undermine peace and security in the region, Ban told AP, and he urged the communist nation "to refrain from taking any actions which will deteriorate the situation."

He urged the Security Council in the statement "to send out a strong and unified message, conducive to achieving the goal of denuclearization of the Korean peninsula and peace and security in the region."

The 2006 U.N. resolution, adopted after North Korea conducted its first nuclear test explosion in October of that year, banned the North from conducting further nuclear tests.

Ban also said the announcement from North Korea's official news agency that it carried out an underground nuclear test Monday "will create negative impact to ongoing negotiation on nuclear disarmament."

"They should have come to the dialogue table and resolved all the issues through peaceful means," he said.

Pyongyang also test-fired three short-range, ground-to-air missiles Monday from the same northeastern site where it launched a rocket last month,

More World Photos

Troops in Iraq, Afghanistan honor their fallen
98
1

South Korea's Yonhap news agency reported, citing unnamed sources. U.N. Security Council resolutions bar North Korea from engaging in any ballistic missile-related activity.

North Korea's actions swiftly drew international condemnation.

President Barack Obama said the United States would work with allies around the world to "stand up to" North Korea. He said the latest nuclear tests "pose a grave threat to the peace and security of the world."

European Union Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said he hoped "the international community will be very clear in its reaction. I also encourage the North to refrain from all kinds of provocation."

Even China joined the chorus of disapproval, saying it "resolutely opposed" the test.

The U.N. Security Council last month rebuked North Korea for the April 5 rocket liftoff, which many nations saw as a cover for testing its long-range missile technology.

In response, North Korea announced it was quitting disarmament talks and restarting its atomic facilities after the U.N. Security Council imposed sanctions on three major North Korean companies due to Pyongyang's April rocket launch. The six-party talks, which began in 2003, had involved North Korea, South Korea, Russia, China, Japan, and the United States.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 09 - 05:31 PM

Israeli document: Venezuela sends uranium to Iran

AP - Monday, May 25, 2009 3:08:54 PM
By MARK LAVIE

Venezuela and Bolivia are supplying Iran with uranium for its nuclear program, according to a secret Israeli government report obtained Monday by The Associated Press.

The two South American countries are known to have close ties with Iran, but this is the first allegation that they are involved in the development of Iran's nuclear program, considered a strategic threat by Israel.

"There are reports that Venezuela supplies Iran with uranium for its nuclear program," the Foreign Ministry document states, referring to previous Israeli intelligence conclusions. It added, "Bolivia also supplies uranium to Iran."

The report concludes that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is trying to undermine the United States by supporting Iran.

Venezuela and Bolivia are close allies, and both regimes have a history of opposing U.S. foreign policy and Israeli actions. Venezuela expelled the Israeli ambassador during Israel's offensive in Gaza this year, and Israel retaliated by expelling the Venezuelan envoy. Bolivia cut ties with Israel over the offensive.

There was no immediate comment from officials in Venezuela or Bolivia on the report's allegations.

The three-page document about Iranian activities in Latin America was prepared in advance of a visit to South America by Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon, who will attend a conference of the Organization of American States in Honduras next week. Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman is also scheduled to visit the region.

Israel considers Iran a serious threat because of its nuclear program, development of long-range missiles and frequent references by its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to Israel's destruction. Israel dismisses Iran's insistence that its nuclear program is peaceful, charging that the Iranians are building nuclear weapons.

Iran says its nuclear work is aimed only at producing energy. Its enrichment of uranium has increased concerns about its program because that technology can be used both to produce fuel for power plants and to build bombs.

Israel has been pressing for world action to stop the Iranian program. While saying it prefers diplomatic action, Israel has not taken its military option off the table. Experts believe Israel is capable of destroying some of Iran's nuclear facilities in airstrikes.

Iran, under Ahmadinejad, has strengthened its ties with both Venezuela and Bolivia, where it opened an embassy last year. Its alliance with the left-led nations is based largely on their shared antagonism to the United States but is also a way for Iran to lessen its international isolation.

The Israeli government report did not say where the uranium that it alleged the two countries were supplying originated from.

Bolivia has uranium deposits. Venezuela is not currently mining its own estimated 50,000 tons of untapped uranium reserves, according to an analysis published in December by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The Carnegie report said, however, that recent collaboration with Iran in strategic minerals has generated speculation that Venezuela could mine uranium for Iran.

The Israeli government report also charges that the Iran-backed Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon have set up cells in Latin America.

It says Venezuela has issued permits that allow Iranian residents to travel freely in South America.

The report concludes, "Since Ahmadinejad's rise to power, Tehran has been promoting an aggressive policy aimed at bolstering its ties with Latin American countries with the declared goal of 'bringing America to its knees.'"

The document says Venezuela and Bolivia are violating the United Nations Security Council's economic sanctions with their aid to Iran.

As allies against the U.S., Ahmadinejad and Chavez have set up a $200 billion fund aimed at garnering the support of more South American countries for the cause of "liberation from the American imperialism," according to the report.

Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor refused to comment about the secret report.

The Israeli government report did not say where the uranium that it alleged the two countries were supplying originated from.

Bolivia has uranium deposits. Venezuela is not currently mining its own estimated 50,000 tons of untapped uranium reserves, according to an analysis published in December by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The Carnegie report said, however, that recent collaboration with Iran in strategic minerals has generated speculation that Venezuela could mine uranium for Iran.

The Israeli government report also charges that the Iran-backed Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon have set up cells in Latin America.

It says Venezuela has issued permits that allow Iranian residents to travel freely in South America.

The report concludes, "Since Ahmadinejad's rise to power, Tehran has been promoting an aggressive policy aimed at bolstering its ties with Latin American countries with the declared goal of 'bringing America to its knees.'"

The document says Venezuela and Bolivia are violating the United Nations Security Council's economic sanctions with their aid to Iran.

As allies against the U.S., Ahmadinejad and Chavez have set up a $200 billion fund aimed at garnering the support of more South American countries for the cause of "liberation from the American imperialism," according to the report.

Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor refused to comment about the secret report.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 09 - 08:23 PM

Obama: World must 'stand up' to North Korea
         
Merrill Hartson, Associated Press Writer – 41 mins ago

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama assailed North Korea Monday for new missile tests, saying the world must "stand up to" Pyongyang and demand that it honor a promise to abandon its nuclear ambitions.

Appearing on the White House steps, Obama said that its latest nuclear underground test and subsequent test firings of short-range ground to air missiles "pose a grave threat to the peace and security of the world and I strongly condemn their reckless action."

It was his second statement within hours of the tests, the latest in a number of nuclear actions that Obama said "endanger the people of Northeast Asia." He called it "a blatant violation of international law" and said that it contradicted North Korea's "own prior commitments." Obama had released a written statement chastising the North Koreans in the early morning hours of Monday.

In his statement in the White House Rose Garden, he noted that the latest tests had drawn scorn around the world. Pyongyang's actions "have flown in the face of U.N. resolutions" and had deepened its isolation, he said, "inviting stronger international pressure."

"North Korea will not find security and respect through threats and illegal weapons," the president said. "We will work with our friends and allies to stand up to this behavior. The United States will never waver from our determination to protect our people and the peace and security of the world."

more

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 25 May 09 - 09:10 PM

Considering Israel's hard-on for making war against Iran, I don't think it would be reasonable for us to take any reports coming from that country seriously. They were giving us "secret" reports on Iraq before we attacked that country, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: bobad
Date: 25 May 09 - 09:19 PM

Israel has nothing to gain by making war against Iran but they will take out their nuclear weapons, you can count on that, and the world be better off for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 26 May 09 - 12:23 AM

Israel has a policy of not allowing any major powers to emerge in the Middle East other than itself. Israel wants total hegemony in the region. Israel was gunning for Iran long before the acquisition of nuclear weapons was even an issue with Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 May 09 - 01:13 PM

Gee, CarolC,

You state your opinion as if it were fact. I know that you do not intend to do that- since you have no facts to back you up.

IMO, what Israel wants is peace with it's neighbors, and the removal ( by peaceful means if possible, but before Israel itself is destroyed under any circumstances) of those threats which have been made against it.

Just my opinion- as your comments were just your OPINION.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 26 May 09 - 02:03 PM

It's not my opinion. It's a fact. There is more than ample documentation of this, and it is openly acknowledged by many members of the Israeli government.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 May 09 - 02:21 PM

I would concur regarding Israel's ambitions in the Middle East, Carol.

Meanwhile, however, we still have Liechtenstein to worry about. Fear the Sleeping Croissant!

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 May 09 - 02:38 PM

Well, If LH agrees with you, that must be proof of something...


Can we have some agreement here about what a "fact" is????

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 May 09 - 04:10 PM

There are a lot of different types of "facts" out there, BB, and they vary wildly from one civilization and culture to another.

There are some we all can agree on, such as...

1 + 1 = 2
up is the opposite of down
things fall down, not up
water flows downward and takes the path of least resistance
etc...

Then there are some we don't agree on, such as...

The USA is the greatest nation in the world.
China is the greatest nation in the world.
Japan is the greatest nation in the world.
Russian is the greatest nation in the world.
Egypt is the greatest nation in the world.
etc...

Yet many Americans feel that to state "the USA is the greatest nation in the world" is to state a fact! ;-) Well, it's not a fact, it's an opinion.

When making political arguments, people sieze upon any fact(s) that they feel will strengthen their position, and they discount or ignore any fact(s) that they feel will imperil their position.

This has been going on ever since Og said it was a fact that Mog stole his wife and cheated him at "toss the sticks".

We will never succeed in all agreeing on which facts truly matter and which facts don't and which are really the REAL facts and which aren't.

So, get used to it. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 26 May 09 - 04:18 PM

In this case, it's a fact according to stated policy, and it's a fact according to their behavior and the results of their behavior.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 26 May 09 - 04:26 PM

CarolC,

I disagree with your statement of "facts"



Have you the documentation to support
"In this case, it's a fact according to stated policy"?




"and it's a fact according to their behavior and the results of their behavior. "

Implies that it is a fact that Palestinians do not want peace, or a state of Israel. ( from their behavior)

Will you allow that as a FACT, then?

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 26 May 09 - 05:38 PM

May 25, 2009 23:51 | Updated May 26, 2009 2:32
Iran watching US reaction to N. Korea
By HILARY LEILA KRIEGER, JERUSALEM POST CORRESPONDENT
WASHINGTON


US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spent Monday engaged in "intensive diplomacy" concerning North Korea's reported nuclear test, according to the State Department.

She had spoken by phone to her Japanese and South Korean counterparts by press time and was due to consult with Chinese and Russian leaders later in the day.

While it wasn't immediately clear what steps the US would be taking in response to the test, US President Barack Obama paused before his Memorial Day visit to Arlington Cemetery Monday morning to denounce the "blatant violation of international law."

He called the test a threat to the populations in the region and a violation of North Korea's own commitments made under multilateral negotiations - known as the six-party talks - over ending its nuclear program.

"The United States and the international community must take action in response," he declared. "North Korea will not find security and respect through threats and illegal weapons."

Obama added, "We will work with our friends and our allies to stand up to this behavior and we will redouble our efforts toward a more robust international nonproliferation regime that all countries have responsibilities to meet."

While the US was calling for international cooperation, analysts in Washington said that the nuclear test - and the American response to it - had global implications.

"Given the cooperation between North Korea and Iran, there is reason to fear that North Korea and Iran may be sharing data on nuclear matters, as they do on ballistic missiles," John Bolton, the former undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, said on Fox News Monday. "This is a threat not just in northeast Asia, but potentially in the Middle East as well."

And Ilan Berman, vice president for policy of the American Foreign Policy Council, said that Teheran will be watching the American response closely, to apply it to its own circumstances.

"Everyone's taking their cues from this," he said. "The Iranians, based on how America responds or doesn't respond, are going to make assumptions about how far they can go in their nuclear program, how far they can go in their missile program without eliciting a serious response from America."

He pointed to a missile test that North Korea held earlier this spring despite opposition from the White House as paving the way for this week's nuclear test announcement.

Despite America's verbal condemnation ahead of the missile test, Berman said, "the response was pretty dramatic in its nonexistence; it was a pretty telling moment."

"The expectation is that the Obama administration's not going to have a very steely approach to this," he added.

If that turns out to be the case, he said, "The Iranians could be justified in concluding that Washington is going to respond the same way to them."

Bolton described the test as "a real moment of truth for the Obama administration."

The US ambassador to the UN under former president George W. Bush recommended that the US add North Korea back to its state-sponsors of terrorism list, as well as impose tough UN sanctions.

Berman suggested that tying up its financial transactions - an effective strategy the Bush administration used before relaxing its approach to North Korea - as well as sanctions could be employed.

"If you choose to do nothing, you still have made a choice, and everyone understands that you have made a choice," Berman said.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 May 09 - 06:49 PM

It's quite silly to imagine that North Korea presents any serious threat to anyone except South Korea. They BOTH present a serious threat to one another...potentially...and they will continue to do so until such time as they agree on peaceful coexistence and an end to hostilities.

The North Koreans are doing what they normally do. They are trying to provoke some international attention which will get them some foreign aid, and they are trying to create a deterrent to any possible outside attack by far greater military power than their own. They are also trying to boost morale at home. It's always considered a big boost to national morale when a small country improves its weapons systems and makes a technical advance in space, nuclear weapons, missiles, or anything else along that line.

The North Korean leadership are simply doing what they think will further secure their position and their security. Period. For the world to panic over that is just silly.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 May 09 - 08:14 PM

"any serious threat to anyone except South Korea."

Are you planning to tell the Japanese this? THEY seem more than a little concerned.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 26 May 09 - 09:23 PM

"In Tokyo, a former defense minister and ruling party lawmaker said that Japan should consider developing the ability to conduct preemptive strikes against North Korea, even though Japan's constitution prohibits it from taking offensive military action.

North Korea is believed to possess more than 200 mid-range Nodong missiles that can strike nearly any part of Japan. The Japanese government, which has invested billions of dollars in a U.S.-made antimissile defense system, is concerned that the North is making progress in designing nuclear warheads that could fit atop its missiles.

"We must look at active missile defense such as attacking an enemy's territory and bases," the former defense minister, Gen Nakatani, said at a meeting of Japan's ruling Liberal Democratic Party.
"

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 26 May 09 - 09:26 PM

Sure, I can get some documentation. Later, when I have more time.

Whether or not the Palestinians want peace is irrelevant. What they want is freedom, and their actions and stated policies are perfectly consistent with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 26 May 09 - 09:29 PM

I was reading something about probable reasons for what North Korea has been doing lately. Someone was suggesting that Kim Jong Il is not well, and the government of Korea is staging some shows of macho power because of some internal rifts within the government itself around the question of succession.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 27 May 09 - 01:56 AM

On the subject of those who want peace and those who don't...

http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2009/05/israel-wants-to-keep-the-settlements-pa-says-they-can-stay-as-palestinian-citizens.html

Israel wants to keep the settlements, PA says they can stay as Palestinian citizens

The Obama administration is putting Israeli settlements front and center and Israeli politicians are doing their best to spin the issue. Likud MK Tzipi Hotovely has held her conference opposing the two-state solution where Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon argued against ending the conflict with the Palestinians. Ha'aretz quotes Ya'alon as saying, "We have to disavow the commonly held perception that we should find an imminent solution." Towards the center of Israeli politics, Defense Minister Ehud Barak is seeking to bring a "compromise" on settlements to Obama when he visits Washington next week. According to the Associated Press, Barak will offer to dismantle settlement outposts in exchange for allowing Israel to continue to expand the vast majority of settlements.

Barak's proposal, which Netanyahu supports, is clearly not a compromise at all, it is simply a demand to continue the status quo. Even the AP points out, "The wildcat outposts are a peripheral part of Israel's West Bank settlement enterprise because only a few thousand people live there." As a point of reference there are over 500,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. Barak's offer is totally inconsequential towards ending Israeli control over the West Bank, and if anything it should raise questions about his support for these very outposts. Both Ibn Ezra and Max Blumenthal has shown lately that the outposts are spreading with the active support of the Israeli military.

In the AP article, chief Palestinian negotiator Ahmed Qureia makes the common sense point, "what does a peace process mean when settlements are continuing on the Palestinian territories?" He has a more in depth, and interesting, interview with Akiva Eldar in Ha'aretz in preparation for Mahmoud Abbas's visit to Washington later this week. From the interview:

    Do you believe Israel would agree to evacuate Ma'aleh Adumim's 35,000 residents?

    Qureia: "[Former U.S. secretary of state] Condoleezza Rice told me she understood our position about Ariel but that Ma'aleh Adumim was a different matter. I told her, and Livni, that those residents of Ma'aleh Adumim or Ariel who would rather stay in their homes could live under Palestinian rule and law, just like the Israeli Arabs who live among you. They could hold Palestinian and Israeli nationalities. If they want it - welcome. Israeli settlements in the heart of the territories would be a recipe for problems.

This idea, while controversial among Palestinians, is an interesting way of turning Israeli intransigence on its head. If Israelis are not willing to leave the settlements then they are welcome to stay in Palestine, but only if they are willing to live in equality with Palestinians, and not from a position of dominance. So far there have not been any signs that Israel would be willing to do this.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,Greycap
Date: 27 May 09 - 05:54 AM

Yes, Folks,
It's Korea!!! Nuke a Commie for Christ.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Lox
Date: 27 May 09 - 09:05 AM

LH,

North Koreas Nuclear capability is a serious problem.

Kim Jong Il is a spoiled kid with a self entitlement complex.

He's like a little evil boy with a gun trying to exert power over his classmates and looking for an excuse to impose that power.

He is spoiling for a fight with South Korea and it wouldn't surprise me if he nuked Seoul.

I hope that the security council can act quickly to prevent such an utter monstrosity.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 May 09 - 02:10 PM

N. Korea threatens to attack US, S. Korea warships
         

By HYUNG-JIN KIM, Associated Press Writer Hyung-jin Kim, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 34 mins ago

SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea threatened military action Wednesday against U.S. and South Korean warships plying the waters near the Koreas' disputed maritime border, raising the specter of a naval clash just days after the regime's underground nuclear test.

Pyongyang, reacting angrily to Seoul's decision to join an international program to intercept ships suspected of aiding nuclear proliferation, called the move tantamount to a declaration of war.

"Now that the South Korean puppets were so ridiculous as to join in the said racket and dare declare a war against compatriots," North Korea is "compelled to take a decisive measure," the Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of Korea said in a statement carried by state media.

The North Korean army called it a violation of the armistice the two Koreas signed in 1953 to end their three-year war, and said it would no longer honor the treaty.

South Korea's military said Wednesday it was prepared to "respond sternly" to any North Korean provocation.

North Korea's latest belligerence comes as the U.N. Security Council debates how to punish the regime for testing a nuclear bomb Monday in what President Barack Obama called a "blatant violation" of international law.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 27 May 09 - 05:40 PM

Clinton Warns North Korea for 'Belligerent' Behavior in Region

By Heejin Koo and Indira A.R. Lakshmanan

May 27 (Bloomberg) -- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said North Korea must face consequences for its "belligerent and provocative behavior" after Kim Jong Il's regime threatened military action against South Korea.
Clinton spoke in Washington after North Korea's official news agency said Kim's government would no longer abide by the 1953 armistice that ended the Korean War and may respond militarily to South Korea's participation in a U.S.-led program that would block ships suspected of carrying nuclear weapons or material for export.
The U.S. takes "very seriously" its commitments to defend South Korea and Japan, its principal allies in the region, Clinton said. She called on North Korea to return to the so- called six party talks aimed at dismantling its nuclear arms program.
North Korea has continued to ratchet up tension since it tested a nuclear weapon on May 25, drawing international condemnation and the prospect of increased sanctions against the communist nation.
"The Korean People's Army will not be bound to the Armistice Agreement any longer," the official Korean Central News Agency said in a statement today. Any attempt to inspect North Korean vessels will be countered with "prompt and strong military strikes."
South Korea dispatched a warship to its maritime border and is prepared to deploy aircraft, Yonhap News reported, citing military officials it didn't identify. South Korea's military said it will "deal sternly with any provocation" from the North.

'Calm' Response
Still, South Korean President Lee Myung Bak ordered his government to take "calm" measures in the face of the threats, his office said in a statement today. Japan's Chief Cabinet Secretary, Takeo Kawamura, echoed those remarks and called on North Korea to "refrain from taking actions that would elevate tensions in Asia."
President Barack Obama's spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said North Korea's rhetoric will only bring the nation further isolation. "Threats won't get North Korea the attention it craves," he said.
North Korea routinely issues threats directed at the U.S., South Korea and Japan, warning of military retaliation if they continue to take actions that the country's leadership characterizes as threats to its security.

Aggressive Shift
"This rapid-fire provocation indicates a more aggressive shift in the Kim Jong Il regime," said Ryoo Kihl Jae, a professor at the University of North Korean Studies in Seoul. "Kim is obviously using a strategy of maximum force."
North Korea raised the specter of a maritime confrontation. The dispatch by the Korean Central News Agency said North Korea can't guarantee the safety of ships passing through its western waters. The statement specified five islands controlled by the South that were the site of naval skirmishes in 1999 and 2002.
"What they are saying is that they will take military action if there is any action taken on behalf of the program such as boarding their ships, stopping and searching and so on," said Han Sung Joo, a former South Korean foreign minister.
South Korea yesterday agreed to join the Proliferation Security Initiative, or PSI, set up to locate and seize shipments of equipment and materials used to make weapons of mass destruction.
Reaction to Test
President Lee had resisted joining the PSI until the nuclear test, even after North Korea fired a ballistic missile on April 5. His predecessor, Roh Moo Hyun, had said that joining the initiative would be too provocative.
North Korea has also fired five short-range missiles in two days in a further display of military defiance. The United Nations Security Council agreed in an emergency session on May 25 to condemn the nuclear test and missile launches.
Under the July 27, 1953, armistice that ended the Korean War, both sides agreed to "a complete cessation of all hostilities" and pledged to accept the demarcation line that has become the world's most-heavily mined demilitarized zone.
The U.S. has about 28,500 troops stationed in South Korea, according to the United States Forces Korea Web site.
In addition to the weapons tests, North Korea may be preparing to reprocess spent fuel rods at its Yongbyon nuclear reactor, the Chosun Ilbo newspaper reported earlier today, citing an unidentified South Korean official. Steam has been rising from the facilities, the newspaper said.

Succession
A succession crisis and internal jockeying and unease over who will succeed Kim may be fueling the North's actions.
Kim likely suffered a stroke last August, according to U.S. intelligence officials, and disappeared from public view before presiding over a parliamentary session in April, when he looked gaunt and aged. Research groups including the U.S. Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute say Kim is 68, while the regime says he is a year younger.
North Korea's threat of a military response may flow less from U.S. and South Korean actions than from domestic turmoil over a possible leadership change, said analysts including Wendy Sherman, former coordinator for North Korea policy under President Bill Clinton.
The leaders "right now care more about internal matters than international acceptance," Sherman said. "It's not that they're not trying to get our attention. They are trying to show each other" how loyal they are to Kim.

---

Message edited to shorten it, but it's still over the one-screen limit. Watch it, Bruce.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 27 May 09 - 06:41 PM

Russia fears Korea conflict could go nuclear - Ifax

Wed May 27, 2009 4:48pm IST By Oleg Shchedrov

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia is taking security measures as a precaution against the possibility tension over North Korea could escalate into nuclear war, news agencies quoted officials as saying on Wednesday.

Interfax quoted an unnamed security source as saying a stand-off triggered by Pyongyang's nuclear test on Monday could affect the security of Russia's far eastern regions, which border North Korea.

"The need has emerged for an appropriate package of precautionary measures," the source said.

"We are not talking about stepping up military efforts but rather about measures in case a military conflict, perhaps with the use of nuclear weapons, flares up on the Korean Peninsula," he added. The official did not elaborate further.

North Korea has responded to international condemnation of its nuclear test and a threat of new U.N. sanctions by saying it is no longer bound by an armistice signed with South Korea at the end of the 1950-53 Korean War.

Itar-Tass news agency quoted a Russian Foreign Ministry official as saying the "war of nerves" over North Korea should not be allowed to grow into a military conflict, a reference to Pyongyang's decision to drop out of the armistice deal.



more

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 May 09 - 02:02 PM

Iran says it boosts uranium enrichment capability
         

AP Thu May 28, 9:25 am ET

TEHRAN, Iran – President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran has boosted its capacity to enrich uranium, another sign of anti-Western defiance by the leader seeking re-election in a vote next month.

Ahmadinejad said last month that Iran had 7,000 centrifuges at its uranium enrichment facility in Natanz in central Iran. The figure marked a significant boost from the 6,000 centrifuges announced in February. In his latest comments, reported by the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency on Thursday, he did not give a specific new figure.

"Now we have more than 7,000 centrifuges and the West dare not threaten us," IRNA quoted Ahmadinejad as saying on a small radio station late Wednesday.

Ahmadinejad has made Iran's expanding nuclear program one of the centerpieces of his campaign for the June 12 elections and has struck an increasingly harsh tone against the United States and other countries calling for Iran to halt it uranium enrichment.

Iran's leaders say they will never give up nuclear technology and insist they seek only energy-producing reactors. The United States, Israel and other nations worry that Iran's enrichment facilities could eventually produce material for nuclear warheads.

There is broad consensus among Iranian voters on the nation's rights for a nuclear program. But Ahmadinejad's three challengers — a fellow hard-liner and two moderates — have questioned his uncompromising stances against the West and their offers of economic incentives in exchange for suspending uranium enrichment.

The centrifuges spin at supersonic speeds to remove impurities from uranium gas, which then goes through other steps to become nuclear fuel or, at higher enrichment levels, nuclear weapons material.

Earlier this year, Iran said it was using an upgraded centrifuge that produces enriched uranium at about double the rate of its original systems.

Currently, Iran is only capable of slowly producing enriched uranium for reactors. But Iranian officials have said their long-term goal is for more than 50,000 centrifuges, which would give it the ability to produce high-grade nuclear material in a start-to-finish cycle of just weeks.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 May 09 - 03:02 PM

US, SKorea militaries gird for NKorean provocation
         

Jae-soon Chang, Associated Press Writer – 8 mins ago

SEOUL, South Korea – The U.S. and South Korea put their military forces on high alert Thursday after North Korea renounced the truce keeping the peace between the two Koreas since 1953.

The North also accused the U.S. of preparing to attack the isolated communist country in the wake of its second nuclear bomb test, and warned it would retaliate to any hostility with "merciless" and dangerous ferocity.

Seoul moved a 3,500-ton destroyer into waters near the Koreas' disputed western maritime border while smaller, high-speed vessels were keeping guard at the front line, South Korean news reports said. The defense ministry said the U.S. and South Korean militaries would increase surveillance activities.

Pyongyang, meanwhile, positioned artillery guns along the west coast on its side of the border, the Yonhap news agency said. The Joint Chiefs of Staffs in Seoul refused to confirm the reports.

The show of force along the heavily fortified border dividing the two Koreas comes three days after North Korea conducted an underground nuclear test and fired a series of short-range missiles.

The test drew immediate condemnation from world leaders and the U.N. Security Council, where ambassadors were discussing a new resolution to punish Pyongyang. President Barack Obama called it a "blatant violation" of international law.

In response, South Korea said it would join more than 90 nations that have agreed to stop and inspect vessels suspected of transporting weapons of mass destruction.

North Korea called South Korea's participation in the U.S.-led Proliferation Security Initiative a prelude to a naval blockade and a violation of the truce signed to end the three-year war that broke out in Korea in 1950.

On Wednesday Pyongyang renounced the 1953 armistice and the following day warned U.S. forces against advancing into its territory.

"The northward invasion scheme by the U.S. and the South Korean puppet regime has exceeded the alarming level," the North's main Rodong Sinmun newspaper said in a commentary carried by the official Korean Central News Agency. "A minor accidental skirmish can lead to a nuclear war."

The U.S., which has 28,500 troops in South Korea and another 50,000 in Japan, has denied it is planning military action. But U.S. and South Korean troops were placed on their highest alert level for more than two years.

The South Korea-U.S. combined forces command rates its surveillance alert on a scale to 5, with 1 being the highest level. On Thursday, the level was raised from 3 to 2, the second-highest level, South Korean Defense Ministry spokesman Won Tae-jae said. He said the last time the alert level was that high was in 2006, when the North conducted its first nuclear test.

Won said both militaries were raising their surveillance activities, although he would not explain what that meant. South Korean media reported that the higher alert would involve increased monitoring of North Korea using satellites and navy ships.

The U.N. Command on Korea said it would continue to observe the armistice, saying it "remains in force and is binding on all signatories, including North Korea."

North Korea has repudiated the armistice several times before, most recently in 2003 and 2006.

South Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman Moon Tae-young accused the North of "seriously distorting" the decision to join in the initiative.

Seoul has said its military would "respond sternly" to any North Korean provocation, and that it would be able to contain the North with the help of U.S. troops.

The South Korean military has dispatched "personnel and equipment deployment" along its land and sea borders, a Joint Chiefs of Staff officer said. He spoke on condition of anonymity citing department policy.

He said there has been no particular movement of North Korean troops in border areas.

The two Koreas technically remain at war because they signed a truce, not a peace treaty, in 1953. However, North disputes the U.N.-drawn maritime border off their west coast, and used that dispute to provoke deadly naval skirmishes in 1999 and 2002.

South Korea's mass-circulation JoongAng Ilbo newspaper said more anti-air missiles and artillery were dispatched to military bases on islands near the disputed western sea border with North Korea.

Yonhap said the destroyer has artillery guns, anti-ship guided missiles, ship-to-air missiles and torpedoes. Air force fighters are were on standby, the report said.

North Korea's West Sea fleet has 13 submarines and more than 360 vessels, Yonhap said.

The recent flurry of belligerence could reflect an effort by 67-year-old leader Kim Jong Il to boost his standing among his impoverished people.

It was also seen as a test of Obama's new administration, and came as two Americans, journalists Euna Lee and Laura Ling, remained in custody in Pyongyang accused of illegal entry and "hostile acts." They face trial in Pyongyang next week.

Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso said any new Security Council resolution must be stronger than the one issued after the North's first atomic test in October 2006, and contain sanctions.

A Russian Foreign Ministry official said Moscow did not want to see Pyongyang further isolated. Andrei Nesterenko said Russia opposed sanctions but did not object to a U.N. resolution.

Hong Hyun-ik, a senior analyst at the Sejong Institute security think tank, said sanctions would not be effective unless China — North Korea's traditional ally — implemented them.

"Kim Jong Il must be scoffing" at the talk of sanctions, he said. "He knows the world will forget about any sanctions in the end."

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 May 09 - 03:47 PM

Analysis: Has North Korea reached a 'tipping point'?

Story Highlights
Analysis: President Obama can't let North Korea's nuclear antics go unanswered

Role of China and Russia likely to be crucial in dealing with North Korea

It may be time for a fundamental overhaul of U.S. policy toward North Korea

Analysis: U.S. and allies must develop plan to prevent arms race, instability in region

updated 3:29 a.m. EDT, Thu May 28, 2009

By Elise Labott
CNN State Department Producer
   
Editor's note: Since becoming State Department producer in 2000, Elise Labott has covered four secretaries of state and reported from more than 50 countries. Before joining CNN, she covered the United Nations.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- When North Korea conducted a nuclear test in 2006, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice promised tough consequences for North Korea's actions but said the door was still open for negotiations.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said pretty much the same thing last month when North Korea lobbed a long-range rocket, prompting fears that it could hit Japan or even Hawaii.

The broken record was replayed this week when President Obama called for "stronger international pressure" after North Korea turned pyrotechnics into an extreme sport, with an apparent nuclear test followed by a series of missile launches.

Fifteen years after the Clinton administration signed the Agreed Framework, essentially bribing North Korea to give up its weapons program with a nuclear power plant, the U.S. has been riding a merry-go-round of deal-making, provocation and punishment with the North.

The Bush administration also tried unsuccessfully to get North Korea to abandon its nuclear ambitions -- first by trying to squeeze the regime and then by reaching a deal with Pyongyang to dismantle its main nuclear reactor.

Economic sanctions, U.N. Security Council resolutions and even the Obama administration's policy of engagement with rogue states all have failed so far. And military action to take out North Korea's nuclear arsenal is unthinkable, with Pyongyang's enormous conventional army sure to retaliate against neighbors South Korea and Japan.

With North Korea posing an early test to his administration, Obama can't let North Korea's nuclear antics go unanswered. But as it did in April after the missile launch, the U.S. wants to handle this in a way that will preserve the ability to restart the so-called six-party talks. Obama's aides are debating the pros and cons of what limited options the administration has.

For now, eyes are on the Security Council, where the U.S. and its allies are discussing elements of a resolution. Some of the ideas being proposed are tightening existing sanctions, intercepting nuclear cargo and cutting off North Korea's access to cash, possibly with a ban on the lucrative sale of conventional weapons it uses to fund its nuclear program.

The role of China and Russia, typically reluctant to impose sanctions against North Korea, will be crucial. Last month the U.S. could barely get Beijing and Moscow to sign onto to a watered-down statement criticizing North Korea. But administration officials involved in North Korea policy say the one silver lining in the latest antics is that they were so outrageous they crossed a line, which could galvanize Russia and China to act.

Officials acknowledge that with North Korea already sanctioned to the hilt, such measures may do little more than get the regime's attention. But maybe that is the point. North Korea is known for its attention-grabbing, and some officials predict (read: wish) that a strong international reaction could be what Pyongyang needs to nudge it back to the table.

As one senior official put it, "Once we both know we have each other's attention, we can have a drink and a smoke and get back to business."

But even as the administration looks down the road at another round of six-party talks, officials are questioning the long-term viability of the exercise. Gary Samore, the president's top adviser for nonproliferation, and Hillary Clinton have both said that North Korea does not appear to want the talks to move forward.

That's the thing about talks -- they generally aren't productive when only one side is talking.

Seriously complicating matters is the health of ailing North Korean leader Kim Jong Il and the lack of clear succession in place. Officials say that the country's internal dynamics are a large, if not the critical, component driving North Korea's actions.

It's particularly concerning because the future of the regime is one where nobody, including the Chinese, can do anything to alter the equation. In that case even the most strenuous international diplomacy may influence North Korean behavior on the margins but will have little effect on how this situation ultimately plays out.

With decades of diplomacy unable to produce a denuclearized Korean Peninsula, it begs the question of whether it is time for a fundamental overhaul of U.S. policy toward North Korea. There are serious conversations in Washington and among capitals about whether North Korea has reached a "tipping point," offering the world final proof it is intent on developing what it calls a "nuclear deterrent."

A nuclear weapon with the missile systems to deliver it would not only pose an existential threat to South Korea and Japan, officials fear it would spark an arms race in East Asia -- turning this region, which has been relatively stable for 40 years, into a much different place.

The U.S. and its allies must huddle quickly and develop a plan to prevent this alternate -- and scary -- reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Rapparee
Date: 28 May 09 - 04:55 PM

In 1967 Kim Il Song began what (I believe) was called "Juche" -- taking the South by force preceded by revolt against the ROK government. From then until 1971 the North launched many attacks against the ROK, including the Blue House Raid, the Pueblo, and the shoot-down of an EC121 "spy plane". The attacks lessened after that but still continued.

During this time the US and South Korea were involved in Vietnam. DPRK is again pushing when the US is involved in combat elsewhere (Afghanistan, Iraq). Militarily, DPRK and ROK are pretty well matched militarily and many believe that ROK has or could very quickly develop nuclear weapons (the US removed all of theirs in 1991 but can fly them from Guam or Okinawa within a couple or three hours).

Park Chung He, the President of ROK in the 1960s, was quite ready to head North, especially after the Blue House Raid.

If provoked ROK will fight back and the US will assist due to treaties signed many years ago (and the troops would shoot in self defense in any case).

Except for Kim Jong Il being in very bad health and an internal power struggle going on inside DPRK I would expect the same-o, same-o as in the past.

Because of the internal struggles I would not be surprised by a war.

I only wonder what will happen when the NK troops get a look at the life style and economic prosperity in the South. Will they realize the lies they've been fed?

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 28 May 09 - 05:43 PM

I was just reading some of the history of Korea. The Korean peninsula has been subject to many centuries of colonialist enterprises by other countries like Russia and Japan (just two examples), and after WWII, when the country was partitioned into two countries, it was still under foreign occupation (the US and Russia). Korea should have been handed their independence at that time, but the US and Russia didn't want to allow that because of their cold war machinations.

I can see now how it has been possible for the government of North Korea to be able to brainwash their people to accept Juche ideology. They see it as being a way to hold on to their sovereignty and their culture in the face of imperialist encroachments by Western powers into all non-Western countries. They see themselves as being some of the last holdouts against Western imperialist rule. Personally, I think they have a point, although I can't see how the Korean government could possibly expect that it can continue down the road it is on in the long run.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Rapparee
Date: 28 May 09 - 06:23 PM

Carol, I have recently had the pleasure (???) of reading over 1,700 pages of declassified documents relating to Korea from 1966 to 1970. I have also been finding more and more and more documents relating to the country from 1945 (when the Japanese occupied it) to the present. More, I have been reading more lightly in the history of Korea pre-WW2.

And I've been there.

They are are proud people, and have every reason to be. They have an unfortunate location, between China, Russian/Manchuria, and Japan.

Before you call it "US Imperialism", please take a peek at, for example, Kim Il Sung's life and lies. Korea, when I was there, was just starting to replant the trees cut down by the Japanese for their war efforts. Do not forget the Korean women taken by the Japanese as sex slaves during WW2, or this report from the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress. Find out why there a tunnel along the Imjin River is called the "Chinese Tunnel."

I respect and like the Korean people. I would not like to see them suffer yet again.