Archive for the ‘WMD’ Category

hp11-5-09g
Reuters

President Obama’s idea of waging “aggressive personal diplomacy“? Attacking President Bush for blustering belligerence:

But he asserted that Iran’s support for militant groups in Iraq reflected its anxiety over the Bush administration’s policies in the region, including talk of a possible American military strike on Iranian nuclear installations.

Yup. That explains Iranian aggression for the last 30 years against the United States.

Meanwhile, Israel seizes 500 tons of Iranian weapons on Wednesday:

Read the rest of this entry »

Sure, left wingers can come up with talking points, and soundbites, but over the past few weeks I’ve noticed that there are 10 core questions that most on the far left cannot seem to answer with any substance. Pass em on, try em out, and enjoy the mindfreak.

  1. If all the world hated America because of George W Bush’s 2003 invasion of Iraq….then why was America attacked on Sept 11, 2001; 2yrs before that invasion?
  2. Why has Al Queda been trying to exterminate every American for the past 17yrs?
  3. Did you want Bush to fail in Iraq, or did you want America to succeed?
  4. Given that Osama left Afghanistan in 2001, and Al Queda was largely destroyed in Afghanistan in 2002, how did the Bush Administration “take its eye off the ball [Afghanistan] by invading Iraq” in 2003?
  5. What caused the great recession of 2007?
  6. Read the rest of this entry »

Israeli F-16i built by US specifically with enhanced range and electronics to make the flight all the way to Iran

When the IAF attacks, Iranian leaders have promised to unleash their missile force. Some intermediate-range ballistic missiles have a high probability of getting through anti-missile defenses and hitting Israeli population centers.
Read the rest of this entry »

The Department has an Urgent Operational Need (UON) for the capability to strike hard and deeply buried targets in high threat environments. The MOP is the weapon of choice to meet the requirements of the UON.” It further states that the request is endorsed by Pacific Command (which has responsibility over North Korea) and Central Command (which has responsibility over Iran).

link to official USAF request to speed up procurement of special bunker buster bomb

2006-02-11

Iranians gather at Azadi (freedom) square to mark the 27th anniversary of Iran’s Islamic Revolution, as they carry a placard in support of Iran’s nuclear technology in Tehran February 11, 2006.
REUTERS/Raheb Homavandi

Iran continues to treat us like suckers because we behave like suckers born every minute:

“I made it quite clear that when they argue that their nuclear facilities are genuinely for peaceful purposes the burden of proof is on their side,” he said.

Ahmadinejad said Friday his country has complied with requirements to inform the IAEA six months before a new enrichment facility becomes operational, and was giving 18 months notice.

Iran has agreed to allow the IAEA to inspect the new facility. At the news conference Tuesday, Ban was asked why he didn’t wait for the U.N. nuclear agency to issue its report, as Ahmadinejad said.

“To be transparent and credible, when you have such an intent to build facilities, they should have informed _ notified the IAEA long time before, not just before everything would be completed,” Ban replied.

“That’s what I’m raising. So there is a question of transparency. That is why the world leaders have expressed their deep concern and that is why I have also expressed my concern,” he said.

“I urged him that Iran as (a) historically rich and proud country should take the constructive role in the international community by making very transparent and directly involvement and engagement in negotiations to prove all the pending issues,” Ban said.

The secretary-general said he was following up his meeting with Ahmadinejad with a meeting later Tuesday with Iran’s Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki.

“I sincerely hope that all these questions pertaining this new facility and other facilities _ all the pending issues concerning nuclear development programs of Iran should be resolved through dialogue in a transparent and objective manner with (the) international atomic agency involved,” he said.

*Groan*…why do we insist on being played like a violin?

Last week in wake of the disclosure of Iran’s “secret” “semi-industrial enrichment fuel facility”, Curt linked to this sentence in the WaPo:

President Barack Obama reiterated that Iran may have some right to nuclear energy _ provided it takes steps to prove its aspirations are peaceful.

“Prove its aspirations are peaceful”?!

Nima Gerami and James M. Acton at Foreign Policy spell it out:

the evidence that the new facility is part of a military program is compelling. According to unclassified U.S. government talking points, the clandestine facility near Qom is “intended to hold approximately 3,000 centrifuges” of an unknown type. In 2007, Gholamreza Aghazadeh, then head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI), said that Iran’s target was to have 50,000 centrifuges at its Natanz enrichment facility. This number was needed to make “meaningful amounts of nuclear fuel” for one or two commercial-scale power plants to generate electricity.

Thus, by Iran’s own admission, the Qom facility is too small for civilian purposes. It is not, however, too small to produce meaningful amounts of highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapons program.
Read the rest of this entry »

27
Sep

Peace through Weakness

Posted by: Wordsmith @ 8:09 am in History, Iran, WMD, foreign policy

“Here a question arises: whether it is better to be loved than feared, or the reverse. The answer is, of course, that it would be best to be both loved and feared. But since the two rarely come together, anyone compelled to choose will find greater security in being feared than in being loved.”

-Nicolo Machiavelli, “The Prince”

In wake of the disclosure that Iran’s been secretly developing (at least one) secret underground uranium enrichment facility (sounds like spies were caught) or face more harsh words and stern warnings from the “outraged” international community, Iran offers the following response:

Iran said it successfully test-fired short-range missiles during military drills Sunday by the elite Revolutionary Guard, a show of force days after the U.S. warned Tehran over a newly revealed underground nuclear facility it was secretly constructing.

Gen. Hossein Salami, head of the Revolutionary Guard Air Force, said Iran also tested a multiple missile launcher for the first time. The official English-language Press TV showed pictures of at least two missiles being fired simultaneously and said they were from Sunday’s drill in a central Iran desert. In the clip, men could be heard shouting “Allahu Akbar” as the missiles were launched.

“We are going to respond to any military action in a crushing manner and it doesn’t make any difference which country or regime has launched the aggression,” state media quoted Salami as saying. He said the missiles successfully hit their targets.

President Obama’s biggest weakness is the perception (and the reality?) that he is “no George W. Bush”; that military action as a means of kumbaya diplomacy is off the tables and not an option. In short, President Obama is not feared.

Ahmadinejad praises Obama. Castro praises Obama. Chavez praises Obama. Khaddafi endorses him. Now why do you suppose this is?

George W. Bush was feared (at least in his first term, up until he became damaged politically).

Gee, I wonder what NK’s been up to in the shadow of the media spotlight on Iran.

Barack H. Obama is loved. Is America any safer?

IRAN
Love at First Sight
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (R) greets Venezualan President Hugo Chavez in Tehran July 29, 2006. REUTERS/Raheb Homavandi (IRAN)

Last November, MataHarley mentioned about how Russia was planning to help Hugo Chavez build a nuclear energy program. Of course, like the typical power-hungry dictator that he is, all he claims to want is to acquire nuclear power for clean energy and peaceful medical purposes.

At this point, they are still in the planning stages, with Chavez explaining, “not to worry, folks”:

“I say it before the world: Venezuela is going to start the process of developing nuclear energy, but we’re not going to make an atomic bomb, so don’t be bothering us afterward … (with) something like what they have against Iran,” Chavez said Sunday.
Read the rest of this entry »

By ROBERT BURNS
AP National Security Writer
updated 4:50 p.m. ET, Fri., July 10, 2009

WASHINGTON - After a half-year of extending patient feelers to Iran, President Barack Obama has set a timeline — warning Tehran it must show willingness to negotiate an end to its nuclear program by September or face consequences.

Obama said that in September “we will re-evaluate Iran’s posture toward negotiating the cessation of a nuclear weapons policy.” If by then it has not accepted the offer of talks, the United States and “potentially a lot of other countries” are going to say “we need to take further steps,” he said.

The president did not say what steps he has in mind. He mentioned neither sanctions nor military force. But it seems clear that a next step to pressure Iran would entail some form of sanctions.

UPDATE:
Today Pres Obama announced that Iran has been building a secret underground nuclear facility and hiding it from the UN for years. In response, he said that he will bring up the nuclear issue at talks with the Iranians on October 1st (recall the Iranians agreed to talks as long as the nuclear issue was not discussed). Obama-along w the British and French-then went on to threaten that there might be sanctions if Iran doesn’t seriously talk about resolving the nuclear issue at the talks where they’ve already said they won’t talk about the nuclear issue.

question: At what point does threatening to take action no longer seem as though it’s a threat?

OBAMA’S DIPLOMACY HAS FAILED

History-like hindsight-is supposed to be 20:20, but the deliberate partisan, political divide regarding the invasion of Iraq makes that hard.

fghjfghj

It’s not a new phenomenon. Long ago it was said that the true story of a war can’t be told until the last of its veterans has passed away, and only a few months ago did the last World War One veteran go to his great reward. For decades after the Civil War (and some would argue even today) the debate raged on, and the healing of Southern Reconstruction didn’t really start culturally until the unity of the Spanish-American War turned foes into brothers-in-arms.

Conspiracy theories-often fueled by politics-still rage over the 911 attacks, the invasion of Iraq, whether or not Roosevelt deliberately allowed the Pearl Harbor attack to happen, whether or not the U.S. Navy knew the U.S.S. Maine had a boiler explosion and wasn’t sunk by a mine. People still think that the Lusitania was set on a suicide mission to get the United States into World War One. These myths will always remain, and it’s good that they do because they spark investigation and a search for understanding of these world changing events. The relationship between the 911 attacks and the invasion of Iraq is interesting in that both have a long list of conspiracy theories attacked to each, and yet the abstract, more indirect relationship between the two events is dismissed out of hand. To that end, even if one believes the relationship between Iraq War and 911 attacks is a conspiracy theory, it’s worthwhile to examine if for no other reason than harvesting a better understanding. Read the rest of this entry »

Hey, remember that Russian cargo ship that disappeared for a few days, then re-appeared off the coast of Gibraltar after allegedly being attacked by pirates in the Baltic Sea? Yeah, well, some people claimed that it was carrying Russian air defense weapons to Iran, that the Israelis detected it, captured it, and did something with the weapons. Those kind of reports need to be taken with a grain of salt to say the least, but the tale is getting more interesting.

The ship was officially carrying timber from Finland to Algeria when it was boarded on July 24 by a group of eight men. They were charged with kidnapping and piracy after it was intercepted by Russian warships off Cape Verde

Ya know, if any of this story is true, it’s almost as if Israel doesn’t have faith in President Obama’s ability to stop the Iranian nuclear program with diplomacy. Why on Earth would anyone believe that?

Bold headlines are attention grabbers, and rarely does the substance of their supporting text prove them correct, but this is a rare moment when (albeit supported by my humble prose) the headline is true. Tomorrow night President Barack Obama will address Congress and the nation, and it will be one of the greatest speeches in the history of mankind.

Now, how do I know that? Have I seen the speech? Have I spent the 3-day weekend listening to Churchill, Roosevelt, Kennedy, and re-reading the Gettysburg Address? Was I there were Herodocus debated with Namenicus on the floor of the Roman Senate? No, of course not, but the sheer magnitude and audacity of President Obama means that his speech can be nothing shy of a choir of angels. Thankfully, his one of the greatest orators in modern history, and easily the most inspiring teleprompter-reader of the 21st Century.
Read the rest of this entry »

President Obama is worthy of admiration for his efforts to improve relations with America’s adversaries Iran, North Korea and a few others. But for most of those states, it’s time to give it up, and the Obama administration appears to realize that.

I agree. There’s no point in trying carrots or stick diplomacy with Iran or North Korea. Diplomacy has failed. I do wonder, however, how the writer plans to deal w NKorea’s nukes and Iran’s nukes+terrorist ties? Just live with it, and wait for something to go wrong/hope that “sane” people like Kim and Ahmadinejad can be trusted w nuclear weapons? Or is the writer advocating support for military action since it’s obvious that Iran and NKorea cannot be trusted w nuclear weapons, and obvious that diplomacy has failed.

So what is it? Now that we’ve established the long-held “neocon” claim that diplomacy w NKorea and Iran isn’t possible-what is it? Read the rest of this entry »

LONDON (Reuters) – Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair will be asked to testify to a panel investigating the Iraq war, the head of the inquiry said Thursday.

Former civil servant John Chilcot said the inquiry, set up by Prime Minister Gordon Brown, would look at British involvement in the war, covering the period from the summer of 2001 to the end of July this year.

“The people we invite to give evidence will be those we judge … are best placed to supply the information we need to conduct our task thoroughly,” the inquiry chairman told a news conference.

“That will, of course, include the former prime minister and other senior figures involved in decision taking,” he added.

Blair’s decision to send 45,000 troops to join the U.S.-led invasion to oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein six years ago provoked massive anti-war protests in London and the resignations of ministers.

No Truth Commissions here in the US (though if Obama’s poll numbers take another hit, and Healthcare fails…it’s a good bet there’ll be more dancing & calling for one from the distraction driven Dems.

Call me Tony. I’m happy to help w the timeline & pics
:)

WASHINGTON (AP) – The Pentagon’s second-in-command says North Korea’s missiles could threaten the continental United States if the reclusive rogue nation continues to develop its weapons.

Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn agreed with an assessment by Sen. John McCain that the U.S. should be prepared for a “worst-case scenario” with North Korea.

Pentagon officials also told the Senate Armed Services Committee Tuesday that North Korea is working with other nations, including Iran and potentially Syria, to develop ballistic missiles.

Well, they called it “fear-mongering” when Bush Admin made this claim, so I guess it’s still “fear-mongering.” Unless…it’s true.
;)

“if North Korea launched a missile or two against us, we wouldn’t sit back and say, ‘I wonder if we have enough test data in order to launch,’” McQueary said. “We would launch.”

The only thing missing is the will to defend the United States; to give the order