Iran Nuke Deal?
This rather provocative story was placed on an inside page of the New York Times today: a nuclear deal with Iran is very possible, perhaps imminent. The argument--one I've cited in the past--is that the Iranians have been seeking the capability to build a bomb, not the weapon itself. They have achieved that capability, given the belated success of their fuel enrichment program and rocketry advances--and have sent some clear signals in recent weeks that they are willing to play ball with the rest of the world. Two signals are especially important: their willingness to have the Qom facility inspected and their willingness to ship low-enriched uraniam to other countries (Russia, France) for enrichment to medical grade.
There are still plenty of questions. Why the secrecy surrounding the Qom plant? Are there other facilities we don't know about? But it is entirely possible that the Iranian regime has decided that it has enough trouble on its hands at home and no need to further antagonize the world. If so, this would be a real triumph for President Obama's foreign policy. But, as always with the Iranians, that's a fairly significant if...
-
1
"A nuclear deal with Iran is very possible, perhaps imminent."
WoooHoooo!! BHO for Nobel Peace Prize 2010!!!!
(Those Norweigians are geniuses!!!)
-
2
I think a war with Iran is just about the last thing this country can handle at the moment. That being said, I don't trust the Iranian regime to be honest players in anything. We just spent the last couple of months watching the Iranian government bully, side-line, imprison and even murder its own citizens to maintain power. You expect that lying and cover-ups towards the international community would somehow be beyond them?
-
2.1
The difference there is that they know they can do whatever they want to their own people and militarily no one would lift a finger. When nukes come into play it's a whole other game.
-
2.2
I think it is more what sanctions we can convince China and Russia to enforce then anything else short of an invasion at this point. Unfortunately Russia seems to enjoy using Iran to antagonize us, China wants it's resources and as of yet, neither seems to much care how de-stabilized the region becomes as a result of increasing Iranian belligerence.
-
2.3
But then why would Iran be open to deal if they know that A: russia and china aren't likely to sign onto any sanctions the US/EU put forward and B: even comprehensive sanctions would be largely toothless, strengthen the revolutionary guard through their control of black markets, and allow the regime to build support by continuing to play the victim card with their people?
-
-
3
JK, it is easy for men of goodwill to accuse JK of phoniness. And he es out of his way to make it easy too.
Take his 'arguments' here for instance: How consistent are his arguments - or are they conveniently formulated with malice towards a target identified by his masters - the Israeli?
" .. The argument ... is that the Iranians have been seeking the capability to build a bomb, not the weapon itself. "
What have the Israelis been seeking?
." ...(Iran) sent some clear signals in recent weeks that they are willing to play ball with the rest of the world. ..
Why should they?
JK konws, but conveniently overlooks the fact that Israel is a belligerent party that has on many occasions violated the sovereignty of neighboring countries by their numerous incursions that have killed multitudes and drawn charges of Rwanda-like crimes against humanity. And with apparent impunity, Israel continues to flout the UN's resolutions of the society of civilized nations - with regard to its nuclear program.
Is JK aware of this? How knowledgeable is JK?
Why isn't Israel "willing to play ball with the rest of the world"? And if Israel's intransigence is good for the World, then why isn't a similar stance by Iran, North Korea, Brazil, India, Pakistan, .... good for the World?
[oh, Brazil? India? Pakistan?]---------
" .. Two signals are especially important: their willingness to have the ... facility inspected and their willingness to ship low-enriched uraniam to other countries.. for enrichment .."
How important are these signals?
When shall we have similar signals from Israel, JK?--------
" .. There are still plenty of questions. Why the secrecy..? Are there other facilities we don't know about? .."Yes, JK, what else is there about the activities of Israel that the civilized world doesn't know about?
Shouldn't we know about it? Shouldn't we take all necessary steps to find out?
-----" .. But it is entirely possible that the Iranian regime has decided that it has enough trouble on its hands at home and no need to further antagonize the world. If so, this would be a real triumph for President Obama's foreign policy. .."
So, why aren't we fomenting enough trouble for Israel, JK?
Can you also present some potent arguments how the civilized world can go about taming the rogue regime in the Middle East?
Don't you want another foreign policy triumph for the USA and Pres Obama, JK?--------
But, as always with the Israelis, that's a fairly significant if...
Can they be trusted - those scheming, devious, ... -
4
Perhaps when the Iranians get their nuke, they can set it off under your bed, Joe Klein. I'll give them the address!
-
4.1
Unfunny joke, Rusty. Perhaps you should take my advice from last time, also, and educate yourself about nuclear arms. They can't be placed under a bed and the best detonations occur at high altitudes, rere...
But perhaps we can place you under Joe's bed. Even better
-
-
5
"Capability to make a nuke" is a NONSENSE charge -- ANY country with a nuclear program has the theoretical capability to make a nuke. There are now more than 40 of them, according to the IAEA (including Brazil, Argentina, Rumania, Taiwan, S. Korea...)
The whole point of the IAEA is to allow countries to use civilian nuclear technology for their own benefit whilst ensuring that nuclear material has not been diverted to non-peaceful uses. In the case of Iran, the IAEA has repeatedly certified no nuclear material has been diverted to non-peaceful uses. Accusing Iran of seeking the "capability" to make nukes is rubbish and only proves that we really don't have any actual evidence against Iran.
-
6
This is mildly off topic but has been very helpful to my understanding of the Iranian situation.
.
Consider this from Iran's point of view, not only are they situated relatively close to Israel, a country which has bombed Iran before and by all appearances may well do so again at any time, but they now have significant US military presence on both their eastern and western borders, not to mention the US Navy sitting just off to their south.
.
From Iran's point of view, having a nuclear bomb is an eminently rational desire in terms of it's deterrent effect for their own national security.
.
I am not necessarily taking a position here but it is a good thing to keep in mind when talking about the situation.
.
PS. Just to play devils advocate a bit here: Couldn't an Iranian Bomb very well stabilize the region rather than destabilizing it by setting up a nuclear counterbalance to Israel? (Think MAD)-
6.1
Stabilized Middle East means less money (in billions of dollars every year) into Israel.
The world will have less tolerance for Israel's penchant for prospering off other peoples' sweat - by commandeering their lands and houses. They will have to earn their living just like the cursed gentiles do.
There will be less tolerance by Americans for Israel's penchant for prospering off the toil and sweat of working Americans - by appealing to their angst or guilt. [The "I am sick - You molested me - feed me - feed me" whine]
It also means that the world will be less inclined to let Israel get away with crap (and unfair business practices) the world over - and especially in Africa.
[Even the idea that they are the chosen people of god and they deserve superiority and your wealth will ring somewhat less compelling even to the beleaguered evangelicals in USA ..]
So, do Jews in and outside Israel want peace in the Middle East? Does AIPAC, JK and his Kraut pal sound as if they want peace in the Middle East?
[No grade given for the correct answer.] -
6.2
"Stabilized Middle East means less money (in billions of dollars every year) into Israel."
Israel does not have much in natural resources nor does it have an (independently sustainable) competitive advantage in any field of commerce. A stabilized Middle East - and thus the absence of less compelling reason for the rest of the world to pump FREE funds to that country - means a rapidly impoverished Israel and a people who cannot sustain their rapacious "way of life" as they have known it for decades.
But a stabilized Middle East is good for the working American who must pay over $2,000 to support each bum in Israel. It is also good for the 50 million starving gentiles of America - who also have no health care.
[There are about 15 million Israeli/Jews world-wide. And for them, even an American president must comply ... Why not for our 50 million starving "we, the people"? ]
-
-
7
Iranian Fuel Cycle must be viewed in a wider perspective of the Middle East:
What are the steps required from Iran to allay our fear that she would not develop Nuclear Bomb in the future?
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT or NNPT), 1968, is a treaty to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. Among the 189 countries party to the treaty, five nations have nuclear weapons: the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, China and France (also permanent members of the
UN Security Council).Nuclear Warheads 2009
US: 9552
Russia: 12987
UK: 192
China: 176
France: 300
India: 75
Pakistan: 90
Israel: 200
North Korea: 2SOURCE:
http://thebulletin.metapress.com/home/main.mpx">BULLETIN OF ATOMIC SCIENTISTS, GUARDIAN/DEFENCE ESTIMATESIran singed the NPT. Under this treaty Iran has the rights to enrich uranium, use nuclear byproducts for research, medicine, agriculture and produce nuclear electric power. There is no dispute that Iran is already a nuclear state. The states with this capacity are many; among them are Japan and Germany. Iran does not have any nuclear weapons and according to IAEA is in compliance with the terms of the treaty.
The treaty requires that the members give up their rights to have nuclear weapons for defense; those who had nuclear weapons and had signed the NPT had agreed to eliminate their nuclear weapons. China, England, France, Russia, and USA had singed the NPT treaty. All these nations are in violation of the NPT.
I suggest the following three steps to eliminate potential for violation of NPT by Iran and developing nuclear weapon in the future:
1. Nuclear Fuel Cycle Iranian Consortium:
USA should join the consortium among others Japan, Germany, France and England to actively monitor the Iranian fuel cycle activity too. IAEA has consistently asserted that the agency could not find any indications that Iran is diverting the fuel cycle for nuclear bomb development. Iran has asserted that their activities are limited to development of fuel for nuclear reactor.2. Nuclear Shield
An international nuclear shield for all nations in the Middle East, including Iran, from nuclear bomb states;3. A nuclear- bomb-free Middle East
This action will remove any pressure from Iran to develop nuclear bomb in the future for deterrence against nuclear bomb Israeli state.-
7.1
Totally eliminating the bomb as a factor would have a similar effect, i am not arguing that it would be positive from the United State's point of view for the Iranians to have a nuclear weapon.
.
However, while yes the problem could be solved by convincing israel to abandon it's own nuclear deterrent the political likely hood of that happening is close to zero. While the US has large amounts of leverage in the form of foreign aid any threats to cut said aid would only further convince Israel that they have to "look to their own defense" (meaning hang on to their nukes).
-
-
8
Joe,
The protocols only require that Iran show any facility designated to receive a nuclear materials within 6 months of the transaction. This site was nearly 1.5 years from the point where notice would be required.
Let us not be distracted, also, from the fact that the main proponent of sanctioning and/or attacking Iran has been and continues to be Israel and the Israeli lobby (AIPAC aka the US Senate). JFK sent Ben-Gurion a letter with a stern and final warning before he was assassinated: Israel must show that it is not a rogue nuclear nation "beyond a reasonable doubt". When LBJ took office, he not only reversed this stance, but increased the arms funding given to Israel many fold. In addition, Nixon followed with a promise to Golda Meir to follow a "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy insofar as Israel's nuclear arms were concerned.
Now this country is sitting on 200-400 nukes, while engaging in endless, bloody wars with all of its neighbors over its 60 year occupation of land that belonged to someone else.
----
I voted for Obama, not for "Change, but so that our politicians simply "Drop the Bullsh*t". AIPAC should be registered as a foreign agent and entity. The interests of no country should be supreme to that of the United States within our own senate. Further, I'm a realist and I find it repugnant that the media has been so obsessed with Iran's nuclear program, which it is trying to be overt and transparent over, while Israel continues to massacre and do as it pleases. Enough is enough. -
9
By unilaterally reducing the threat of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, Iran has cleverly increased the isolation of Israel. It is time for the President to play hardball over a Palestinian settlement.
- TIME The scoop on Google Buzz from @techland | http://su.pr/1zDlZ6 - 2 hours ago
- TIME Are the bible stories true? Evidence from archaeology | http://su.pr/2ekoPX - 3 hours ago
- TIME Why is NBC pretending Conan never existed? | http://su.pr/4Pbjbh - 4 hours ago
Most Popular »
- Undercover Boss Is Phony and Manipulative. But Don't Hold That Against It.
- NBC: There Was Never a Conan O'Brien
- NH Poll: Dems Face A Thumpin'
- Gibbs Mocks Palin, Tea Party Convention
- Barack Obama: Then vs. Now
- Paul Ryan Won't Run For Prez In 2012
- Today's Health Care Checkup - GOP Plans Under the Spotlight
- Irony of the Day
- Do You Spend Less than $2,000 Annually on Internet, TV, Cell Phone Service, and Video Games?
- CO Gov Poll: Hickenlooper +4
- Asian Carp Battle: Foreign Fish Threaten Great Lakes
- Is the Bible Fact or Fiction? Archaeology's Discoveries
- Spain's Troubled Economy: Fears Over Euro Zone Outlook
- Kennewick Man, Archaeology Find: Who Discovered America?
- Al-Qaeda, Yemen, Wedding: Unlucky Name, Celebration
- Tea-Party Convention: Lessons on Palin and the Movement
- Venezuela: Chavez Protests at Ball Game Over Electricity
- Jim Frederick, Black Hearts in Iraq's Triangle of Death
- Marja: Operation Moshtarak Tests Obama's Afghan War Plan
- Why China Needs The U.S. -- And Vice Versa
Quotes of the Day »
RSS