|
Post by njugunajohn on Mar 9, 2012 9:44:15 GMT 3
A leading analyst has predicted that Israel will likely bomb all Iranian nuclear facilities by June.
This is almost inevitable now with Israeli's Benjamin Nyetanyahu vowing that he would not stand idly by as Israel and its people live under the threat of annihilation.
The question that I must now ask is what the likely outcome of such a move would be.
The first likely scenario would be that Iran would be compelled to strike back though I doubt that they have the capacity to do so.
Other middle-eastern countries would also feel compelled to side with one of these countries which in my view would be Iran. The only problem is that, Israel would not take this lying down and any such country would also fall in its cross-hairs.
The entry of super-powers would also be inevitable and in this case the US will probably stand by Israel though it is not clear at this point whether the EU and especially Britain would also side with Israel.
China and Russia would also have to voice their opinions or join sides. China would be compelled to intervene since North Korea would be directly involved in the Iranian affair seeing that it has been providing Iran with the enrichment know-how.
South Korea would have to join and Japan would follow in its footsteps.
Only one of two scenarios is possible. Either all the above will happen which has the potential of leading to a 3rd world war or nothing would happen at all i.e. Iran would be bombed, it would bark like a wounded dog but have no power whatsoever to do anything. World governments would voice their displeasure over Israel's move but at the end of the day the whole affair would be swept under the carpet as was the invasion of Lebanon by Israel some few years ago.
In a few years time we would all be drinking porridge and soup oblivious of the threat of a third world war having ever existed.
|
|
|
Post by omundu on Mar 9, 2012 13:04:02 GMT 3
Njugunajohn. You have a point but one tiny detail :
Obviously the US and any of its NATO affiliates are mightier than Iran in Military terms and the US alone would win any protracted war with Iran. The only problem is, at what cost. The cost to the world economy (e.g oil e.t.c) and in human life will not be acceptable to the US.
Secondly, the US has military bases in the region which can easily be attacked by Iran's medium range ballistic missiles (yeah, the ones they successfully tested recently). Iran supposedly supplies hezbollah, Hamas and other rebels in the region. What makes you think that they wouldnt use such forces in an unconventional war with either the US or Israel especially in making the straitz unpassable.
Irans medium range ballistic missiles have a range of over 2000 km which makes Israel very vulnerable. Israel knows that it cant go it alone and would need the support of the US. Obama has stated in no uncertain terms that the stick and carrot policy of dialogue and sanctions is the only viable strategy currently. Israel is left to stand alone and cannot go into the war without explicit support from the US.
The potential repercussions from Iran are more than just a bark and Israel (despite loudly beating the drums of war) knows it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2012 17:54:16 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Mar 18, 2012 13:20:32 GMT 3
British premier David Cameron went a-calling on American Obama this week. To bond up close and re-enforce the special relationship. These days of high-tech video conferencing you do not have to spend 8 hours on a round trip to discuss business if you are a top executive, so this was the boys getting together for some gossip and photo-ops. The pageantry and pomp included Cameron being allowed aboard airforce one. A historical first for a foreign head of state. A wife swap equivalent. Obama is suspected in Europe of focussing on the Pacific region as the anchor of American future safety, and looking for the emergence of a pacific equivalent of NATO, NATO which was the cold-war shield with a european preponderance. So this was also a time to assure the USA's most loyal NATO ally, that she is still top dog in the pecking order. They discussed Iran and Israel, concluded diplomacy still has a chance, and an Israeli attack would not be the appropriate thing. Of course, given the state of their economies and the global one sensitive to oil prices, that is sensible. With their war in Afghanistan badly in need of an exit strategy, this is hardly the moment to begin another one against yet another Islamic nation. And China and Russia will even be tougher to deal with over Iran, than they are over Syria. They discussed Syria. Displayed their impotence. They gave positive spin to developments in Libya. They had an awkward moment explaining the difference in their approaches to fixing their economic problems at home. [Obama is like the old continent, the EU, so despised by Tory UK. He bails out everything left and right, running his printing press spewing dollars like they are stamps, and lets the borrowing soar --things which thatcherite brits call proto-socialism!] So if this is the way to save the greatest capitalist juggernaut on earth, why is Davy boy thinking doing different will save little Britain? This was a full hit question. www.telegraph.co.ukNice anecdotes about Samantha and Michelle excluded. Exchanging recipes while the men watched basketball and talked politics.. or cheer girls!
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 18, 2012 16:04:33 GMT 3
British premier David Cameron went a-calling on American Obama this week. To bond up close and re-enforce the special relationship. These days of high-tech video conferencing you do not have to spend 8 hours on a round trip to discuss business if you are a top executive, so this was the boys getting together for some gossip and photo-ops. The pageantry and pomp included Cameron being allowed aboard airforce one. A historical first for a foreign head of state. A wife swap equivalent. Obama is suspected in Europe of focussing on the Pacific region as the anchor of American future safety, and looking for the emergence of a pacific equivalent of NATO, NATO which was the cold-war shield with a european preponderance. So this was also a time to assure the USA's most loyal NATO ally, that she is still top dog in the pecking order. They discussed Iran and Israel, concluded diplomacy still has a chance, and an Israeli attack would not be the appropriate thing. Of course, given the state of their economies and the global one sensitive to oil prices, that is sensible. With their war in Afghanistan badly in need of an exit strategy, this is hardly the moment to begin another one against yet another Islamic nation. And China and Russia will even be tougher to deal with over Iran, than they are over Syria. They discussed Syria. Displayed their impotence. They gave positive spin to developments in Libya. They had an awkward moment explaining the difference in their approaches to fixing their economic problems at home. [Obama is like the old continent, the EU, so despised by Tory UK. He bails out everything left and right, running his printing press spewing dollars like they are stamps, and lets the borrowing soar --things which thatcherite brits call proto-socialism!] So if this is the way to save the greatest capitalist juggernaut on earth, why is Davy boy thinking doing different will save little Britain? This was a full hit question. www.telegraph.co.ukNice anecdotes about Samantha and Michelle excluded. Exchanging recipes while the men watched basketball and talked politics.. or cheer girls! Jakaswanga has to teach us this trick. The other day, he was in Brussels in a closed door meeting between Raila Odinga and Herman van Rompuy. Now, over the big pond, he has details of what transpired between Cameron and Obama. What is difficult to understand is how Jakaswanga missed the most critical aspect of that meeting yet he was right there. Jakaswanga take two more guesses. Those who know Raila Odinga, have been in close contact with him in diplomatic settings and have seen him in practice at sensitive meetings are laughing at Jakaswanga and his fertile imagination.
|
|
|
Post by nereah on Mar 18, 2012 16:28:27 GMT 3
jakaswanga ;D
it is a fact that israel doesn't need america to blow up iran and reading bibi's lips at the last un general assembly, its obvious that the jewish state is merely rehearsing for and preparing the un family psychologically for its planned strike.
there is a level of double speak and contradictions in obama administration over this explosive issue.obama wants to have his cake and eat it at the same time on israel.he appears to be half-hearted, almost reluctant as you rightly observe and now roping in the british in slowing down bibi.
but on the other hands he has dispatched special forces in israel who, as my earlier post in this thread indicate,are there indifinitely--infact setting up a command centre there.the us-israelispecial forces are conducting joint military exercises,lets call them simulations and doomsday scenerios.
the jewish state anti-nuclear defense(iron dome) are being upgraded with rare support of obama. obama also handed bibi one of american toys,the bunker bursting warheads purposely for those underground desert nuclear plant sites in iran.
the other day i heard hamas claim that israel engineered provocations to strike back in what hamas claim were simulation for israeli's complex areal defense system
this thread is by all means interrogating the obama doctrine as much as we assess the arms race in the middle east and attendant destruction matrix. the obama war doctrine, lays emphasis on expending minimal human resources and pre-emptive strikes.
i have just watched cameron interview clip with abc where he is saying that uk wont support israeli strike on iran. this vindicate your viewpoint above.
of course you know as i do that israel only count on big cousin america for public relations and for obvious historical reasons never wait for anyone to come to its rescue.
i am attempting to say that this cameron-obama opposition to israeli planned strike on iran is defeatist and only emboldened israeli.
bibi dont care what obama or cameron or the world think where israeli security and survival as a state is at stake.hasnt he not arm twisted obama into laying ground for israel with america's indefinite military command presence in israel and joint training?
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Mar 18, 2012 17:10:36 GMT 3
jakaswanga ;D
it is a fact that israel doesn't need america to blow up iran and reading bibi's lips at the last un general assembly, its obvious that the jewish state is merely rehearsing for and preparing the un family psychologically for its planned strike.
this a level of double speak and contradictions in obama administration over this explosive issue.obama wants to have his cake and eat it at the same time on israel.he appears to be half-hearted, almost reluctant as you rightly observes and now roping in the british in slowing down bibi.
but on the other hands he has dispatched special forces in israel who, as my earlier post in this thread indicate,are there indifinitely--infact setting up a command centre there.the us-israelispecial forces are conducting joint military exercises,lets call them simulations and doomsday scenerios.
the jewish state anti-nuclear defense(iron dome) are being upgraded with rare support of obama. obama also handed bibi one of american toys,the bunker bursting warheads purposely for those underground desert nuclear plant sites in iran.
the other day i heard hamas claim that israel engineered provocations to strike back in what hamas claim were simulation for israeli's complex areal defense system
this thread is by all means interrogating the obama doctrine as much as we assess the arms race in the middle east and attendant destruction matrix. the obama war doctrine, lays emphasis on expending minimal human resources and pre-emptive strikes.
i have just watched cameron interview clip with abc where he is saying that uk wont support israeli strike on iran. this vindicate your viewpoint above.
of course you know as i do that israeli only count on big cousin america for public relations and for obvious historical reasons never wait for anyone to come to its rescue.
i am attempting to say that this cameron-obama opposition to israeli planned strike on iran is defeatist and only emboldened israeli.
bibi dont care what obama or cameron or the world think where israeli security and survival as a state is at stake.hasnt he not arm twisted obama into laying ground for israel with america's indefinite military command presence in israel and joint training? Nereah wa Amadi,There are already millitary scenarios available! Even on internet, and continental papers have been at it. How many runs [sorties] of the total israeli airforce; how many ballistic missiles of maximum destructive caliber --from 1. Submarines, 2. inland silos, 3 offshore decks, would Israel by herself need to cripple Iran on the first day; to totally erase her ability to retaliate. The figures are bad, short of a massive nuclear strike. [And what can Iran do with her crudes in response?]For instance the airforce would have to fuel in mid air. The Israeilis have no capacity to fuel 100 planes mid air in one day. Then there is the hostile territory over which such fueling must take place. Only the USA can fix the skys in the gulf for Israeli total air superiority. Only the USA can pressurize all those arab regimes to give Israel a free run. Israel, short of a nuclear armageddon, can not decapitate Iran without USA backing. The understanding has always been, in the doctrine of conjoined destiny, that Israel at war means the USA automatically at war. But the Israeilis do not force America's hand. Bibi declared Israel is in charge of her destiny. Meaning can do without America, even in the case of Iran. Obama hinted he could call his bluff. Really? they aked at the Pentagon --the guys building that missile shield dome you are talking about. A correspondent of your favourite paper Ha'aretz was quick to remind the Americans Bibi can be a like spoilt child and must be handled with care! Let us be adults around here please! Iran is a big deal and could stick in Israel's throat. I think the IDF [israeli defence force] know they have to care what the american CIC [commander in chief] will do. Even if it is not an election year!
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Mar 18, 2012 17:22:16 GMT 3
It is a powerful lesson on international diplomacy, and shows the correctness of North Korea's decision to rapidly go nuclear.
Israeli politicians&generals are openly speculating about the destruction of Iran, and there is no condemnation from any quarter of the so called civilized world and international community. If Iran were to as much as threaten an attack on Israel, would not Western politicians be beside themselves with ever more hysterical vehemence at condemnation? Would not NATO immidiately launch a red alert. In other words, Iranian sovereignity is worth nothing in the eyes of those who rule the world now.
I can only say these guys need a bomb to deter this kind of insane and criminal talk. To destroy the nuclear programme, Iran has to be bombed back to pre-history with hundreds of thousands dead. It appears this is not even worth mentioning in western capitals. So long the dead are not white, they do not matter. I think it is this mindset which is a danger to world peace.
If others can so casualy talk about the destruction of my country the way Obama and Bibi did over Iran, I guess every country has to take care of herself the best she can. And a nuclear bomb for [Korea, India, Pakistan] now seems to me a very good point to start.
MAD they used to call it during the cold war. Mutually assured destruction as deterrence!
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Mar 18, 2012 17:35:00 GMT 3
Roughrider,
I was amazed that the Israeli president and the Israeli premier should both be in Washington at the same time. I know there is Iran in background, but still I thought I was missing something. Now watch Jakaswanga at work, and learn something. ---------- I think I have figured it out. There is a cardinal rule of the wise; that you do not win the presidency of the USA without the Jewish vote. This block is marshalled by the Jewish lobby, organized in the heroic AIPAC. And this is an election year, and AIPAC was holding an annual delegates conference.
[There used to be another cardinal rule that you had to be absolutely ... to be voted occupant of the White House. Then this kid Obama came up. But that one aside for now]
Netanyahu and Perez, simultaneously in Washington, and in the sidelines scheduled to adress AIPAC gatherings and meet those who move the levers of that sleek machinery, were definately sending an intimidation code to Obama in an electoral year. A softening up operation. It is plain blackmail, couched in posh: 'We hold the rights to your second term. Play ball or forget it!'
Better thinking will be welcome.
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Mar 18, 2012 17:49:03 GMT 3
Jakaswanga has to teach us this trick. The other day, he was in Brussels in a closed door meeting between Raila Odinga and Herman van Rompuy. Now, over the big pond, he has details of what transpired between Cameron and Obama. What is difficult to understand is how Jakaswanga missed the most critical aspect of that meeting yet he was right there. Jakaswanga take two more guesses. Those who know Raila Odinga, have been in close contact with him in diplomatic settings and have seen him in practice at sensitive meetings are laughing at Jakaswanga and his fertile imagination. Roughrider,I am all sport and one can catch me trying to teach old dogs new tricks. I have other odd hobbies apart from collecting waragi bottles you know! Wellcome to my lessons! my fellow Luo village boy! I will soon be back in Homa Bay, sending dispatches from ahangla bars in the county! May be that will draw lesser blood from your bile! And if you catch me in a good mood after a hot day, I may let you in on how the kalapapla trick is done on the synthesizer. NB: It will surprise you how insensitive these things are from another perspective. Like the Israelis did not think much of what Raila discussed with Bibi Netanyahu. What did Dennis Onyango tell you about that? I note your cynical tone ''yet jakaswanga was right there'! And I know the tongue of a market lelo selling fish to another she does not like! Lucky you am reformed, so I indulge you with polite, declining smile, instead of an equally rabid b!tchy tongue! Anybody out there want to punch a whole on my Cameron-Obama bon hommie report? Roughrider's mind is gone rot in cynicism.
|
|
|
Post by nereah on Mar 18, 2012 17:57:24 GMT 3
Roughrider,I was amazed that the Israeli president and the Israeli premier should both be in Washington at the same time. I know there is Iran in background, but still I thought I was missing something. Now watch Jakaswanga at work, and learn something. ---------- I think I have figured it out. There is a cardinal rule of the wise; that you do not win the presidency of the USA without the Jewish vote. This block is marshalled by the Jewish lobby, organized in the heroic AIPAC. And this is an election year, and AIPAC was holding an annual delegates conference. [There used to be another cardinal rule that you had to be absolutely ... to be voted occupant of the White House. Then this kid Obama came up. But that one aside for now] Netanyahu and Perez, simultaneously in Washington, and in the sidelines scheduled to adress AIPAC gatherings and meet those who move the levers of that sleek machinery, were definately sending an intimidation code to Obama in an electoral year. A softening up operation. It is plain blackmail, couched in posh: 'We hold the rights to your second term. Play ball or forget it!' Better thinking will be welcome. so, israel may decide who wont be the president of america through its powerful jewish lobby,aipac but lets look at the flip side: when was the last time a president with jewish blood was in white house?this is worth an academic paper,doctoral research maybe; why its extremely difficult for anti-israeli presidential candidate to win the white house and twice as impossible for america to vote in one with a jewish blood?
obama's is a rarity and i hazard a guess that he is the president america has been waiting to fix the historical and bloody israel-arab conflict. i have a hunch that he will do this in his second term.
b.t.w, there are folk up there,mostly conservatives, who wont let go the falsehood that obama is a practising muslim.
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 19, 2012 10:15:14 GMT 3
It is a powerful lesson on international diplomacy, and shows the correctness of North Korea's decision to rapidly go nuclear. Israeli politicians&generals are openly speculating about the destruction of Iran, and there is no condemnation from any quarter of the so called civilized world and international community. If Iran were to as much as threaten an attack on Israel, would not Western politicians be beside themselves with ever more hysterical vehemence at condemnation? Would not NATO immidiately launch a red alert. In other words, Iranian sovereignity is worth nothing in the eyes of those who rule the world now. I can only say these guys need a bomb to deter this kind of insane and criminal talk. To destroy the nuclear programme, Iran has to be bombed back to pre-history with hundreds of thousands dead. It appears this is not even worth mentioning in western capitals. So long the dead are not white, they do not matter. I think it is this mindset which is a danger to world peace. If others can so casualy talk about the destruction of my country the way Obama and Bibi did over Iran, I guess every country has to take care of herself the best she can. And a nuclear bomb for [Korea, India, Pakistan] now seems to me a very good point to start. MAD they used to call it during the cold war. Mutually assured destruction as deterrence! Jakaswanga;Despite the talk, it is still unlikely that there will be any bombs this year. For three reasons: 1) all politics is local - three elections are likely to be held this year - Palestinian (May), Israeli (sometime in the next few months) and American (November). In order to win elections in the US - as you correctly observe elsewhere - you must be pro-Israel. Obama is. His speech at AIPAC was the most pro-Israel of along time and certainly of his presidency. In order to win elections in Israel you must be seen to be getting along with the Americans. Bibi needed to demonstrate this a bit more. Finally, the disagreements between Obama and Bibi have been about the Palestinian issues, not really the Iran problem. Changes in the Palestinian political set-up may open up room for engagement. Turning to Iran, perhaps such news speaks better about the diplomatic work behind the scenes: www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74157.html
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 19, 2012 10:31:39 GMT 3
Jakaswanga has to teach us this trick. The other day, he was in Brussels in a closed door meeting between Raila Odinga and Herman van Rompuy. Now, over the big pond, he has details of what transpired between Cameron and Obama. What is difficult to understand is how Jakaswanga missed the most critical aspect of that meeting yet he was right there. Jakaswanga take two more guesses. Those who know Raila Odinga, have been in close contact with him in diplomatic settings and have seen him in practice at sensitive meetings are laughing at Jakaswanga and his fertile imagination. Roughrider,I am all sport and one can catch me trying to teach old dogs new tricks. I have other odd hobbies apart from collecting waragi bottles you know! Wellcome to my lessons! my fellow Luo village boy! I will soon be back in Homa Bay, sending dispatches from ahangla bars in the county! May be that will draw lesser blood from your bile! And if you catch me in a good mood after a hot day, I may let you in on how the kalapapla trick is done on the synthesizer. NB: It will surprise you how insensitive these things are from another perspective. Like the Israelis did not think much of what Raila discussed with Bibi Netanyahu. What did Dennis Onyango tell you about that? I note your cynical tone ''yet jakaswanga was right there'! And I know the tongue of a market lelo selling fish to another she does not like! Lucky you am reformed, so I indulge you with polite, declining smile, instead of an equally rabid b!tchy tongue! Anybody out there want to punch a whole on my Cameron-Obama bon hommie report? Roughrider's mind is gone rot in cynicism. Jakaswanga; My heart cries out for Homa Bay. Other than rip-roaring entertainment of the 'live' variety, every other viable industry has been bled to death. But I love how our people can have fun. Life is all of 70 years - take or leave a few. So why shouldn't we enjoy it. I was concerned about your attack on Raila; he raised funds for KDF to get into AMISOM - 100 million Euros. Yet you chose to see his mission as auditioning. Even then, you grossly underestimate the grasp of global affairs and history, the diplomatic mien, the wit and the quiet charisma Raila displays in private meetings. Raila is turning out to be Africa's and the Worlds more dependable African leader. His position on ICC, Ivory Coast, Mugabe, etc have been carefully calculated. It is not for nothing that he is a regular guest at Davos. It is not for nothing that he has, on his speed dial several World leaders. Perhaps the most revealing should be the views of the likes of Jendayi Frazer as reported on Wikileaks. Raila was more engaging, more articulate, more measured during negotiations for peace in 2008. But you did not factor the man in your analyses. I think he bested Van Rompuy. My guess is that if you knew Raila better, you perhaps would have had a different report of the Brussels meet.
|
|
|
Post by nereah on Mar 25, 2012 19:08:02 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by wanyee on Mar 26, 2012 0:31:59 GMT 3
nereah, My sincere apologies. Labda baridi ya Ottawa ilikuwa nyingi. ;D I have deleted the other thread and duly re-posted here. --- Mossad and CIA concur: Iran is not seeking nukes While CIA admits Iran is not developing nuclear weapons, sanctions against Iran remain in placeGlobal Research, March 19, 2012 Russia Today - 2012-03-18 Israel’s intelligence service Mossad has acknowledged, just like their American counterparts, there is no proof Tehran is carrying out a nuclear weapons program, a source in US intelligence told the New York Times. An unnamed former senior US intelligence official told the paper “Mossad does not disagree with the US on the [Iranian] weapons program.” The consensus among US spy agencies remains that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons research several years ago. “There is not a lot of dispute between the US and Israeli intelligence communities on the facts,” the official continued. Such recognition comes in stark contrast with Israeli politicians, who have continually insisted on an immediate military strike on Iran’s nuclear installations to prevent it from evolving into an “existential threat” to the Jewish state. The assessment of the intelligence available is the key to the ongoing war or peace dilemma with Iran. US spy agencies have been searching around for years, trying to find proof Iran is developing a nuclear warhead and missiles to deliver it. For all of their troubles, this is what they’ve found: the program was shut down way back in 2003. As of today, the intelligence data on Iran has not significantly changed. “Iran is the hardest intelligence target there is. It is harder by far than North Korea,” another former intelligence officer confessed to the NYT. His explanation was simple: the US doesn’t have many agents on the ground to verify information. There are reports the US use sensors implanted near Iranian nuclear facilities to monitor the situation. But while intelligence circles might admit Iran is not close to obtaining nuclear weapons, the sanctions against Iran remain in place. Meanwhile, neither Israeli nor American leaders make any bones of threatening Iran with a military solution to prevent the country's frustrated nuclear ambitions from seeing the light of day. Iran insists on the utterly peaceful character of its nuclear program and promises not to give it up at any cost. SOURCE: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29843--- 'Mossad, CIA agree Iran has yet to decide to build nuclear weapon'New York Times report quotes senior American officials who believe there is little disagreement between Israeli and U.S. intelligence over Iran’s nuclear program, despite calls for a strike by Israeli officials.Published 08:53 18.03.12 Latest update 08:53 18.03.12 By HaaretzIsrael’s intelligence services agree with American intelligence assessments that there is not enough proof to determine whether Iran is building a nuclear bomb, according to a report published Sunday in the New York Times. The newspaper said that senior American officials believe there is little disagreement between the Mossad and U.S. intelligence agencies over Iran’s nuclear program, despite the fact that Israeli political leaders have been pushing for quick action to block Iran from becoming what they describe as an existential threat. The report further quoted one former senior American intelligence official who states that the Mossad “does not disagree with the U.S. on the weapons program,” adding that there is “not a lot of dispute between the U.S. and Israeli intelligence communities on the facts.” According to the New York Times, the extent of the evidence the spy agencies have collected is unclear since most of their findings are classified. However, intelligence officials say they have been throwing everything they have at the Iranian program. The United States and Israel share intelligence on Iran, American officials said. For its spying efforts, Israel relies in part on an Iranian exile group that is labeled a terrorist organization by the United States, the Mujahedeen Khalq, or M.E.K., which is based in Iraq, says the report. Furthermore, the report states that the Israelis have also developed close ties in the region of Kurdistan in northern Iraq, and they are believed to use Kurdish agents who can move back and forth across the border into Iran. According to the New York Times, American intelligence officials are wary of relying on information from an opposition group like the M.E.K., especially after their experience in Iraq where they relied on flawed information provided by the Iraqi National Congress, an exile group run by Ahmad Chalabi. The report comes days after top Israeli official congratulated a decision by the world's largest financial money transfer network to cut off Iranian banks targeted by EU sanctions from the system, saying that the move represented a "mortal blow" to the Iranian regime. The move was an unprecedented measure that will effectively prevent Iranian institutions from electronically transferring global funds. An Israeli official indicated that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu raised the issue of disconnecting the Iranian banks from the SWIFT system during his recent conversations with U.S. President Barack Obama as well as with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper. According to the official, Netanyahu told Obama that "we need SWIFT swiftly." In response to SWIFT's Thursday announcement, the Prime Minister's Office released a statement later in the day, saying that "Prime Minister Netanyahu congratulated SWIFT for its decision to cut the Iranian banks from the system." The New York Times report also comes on the heels of an interview between U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron and NBC's Brian Williams, in which Cameron reiterated his opposition to an Israeli strike, saying that he didn't "think as we stand today that military action by Israel would be justified." I don't think the Israelis should take that action now. We told them they shouldn't and said we wouldn't support it if they did. We've been very clear," Cameron said. "It's very, very important [Israel] knows it has strong allies like America, like the United Kingdom, but I don't support action now because, frankly, we've got more road to run in putting in place sanctions and putting in place tough measures against the regime and saying to them they need to take a different path," Cameron added. Cameron added that Iran could retain "civil nuclear power, if they give up the ambition of having military nuclear power, they can have a future as a country that has more normal relations with the rest of the world," adding: "We need to keep up the pressure to encourage them to make the right choice." SOURCE: www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/mossad-cia-agree-iran-has-yet-to-decide-to-build-nuclear-weapon-1.419300--- Iran in the crosshairsThe Canadian Charger February 15, 2012As the threats of war against Iran have been escalating in the last few weeks, Zafar Bangash, Director of the Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought, said the majority of Canadians don't want war, so we have to resist this madness that is being pushed down our throats. Speaking at McMaster University at a presentation entitled “Iran in the Crosshairs” Mr. Bangash emphasized what he described as a campaign of misinformation by the United States - similar to the one used to justify the war in Iraq – that is now being used to prepare for war against Iran. He said that between 2003 and 2005 the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA) subjected Iran's nuclear facilities to a thorough inspection and found nothing illegal, yet western powers still refused to lift their sanctions. Then in its November 8, 2011 report, the IAE said it's inspectors believe Iran may have conducted a secret nuclear program. “They said 'we think.' They suspect but they have no evidence,” Mr. Bangash said. In mid-January 2012, in Istanbul, the Iranian foreign minister Ali Akbar Salehi told the P5 + 1 (five permanent member of the UN Security Council plus Germany) that Iran would negotiate in good faith, but the western powers must first recognize Iran's right to enrich uranium, in accordance with Article 4 of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). However, the western powers continue to insist that Iran must stop enriching uranium. On January 29th, Mr. Salehi reiterated Iran's position, as senior members of the IAEA began a three-day inspection of Iran's nuclear facilities. "No one has the right to tell us to halt enrichment. Enrichment is our right based on the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) and our being an official member of IAEA, and no one has the right to ask us to stop this legal activity," he said, adding that Iran "fully adheres" to IAEA regulations. "The inspection delegation can visit any of our nuclear sites it requests to visit," Mr. Salehi said. Meanwhile, Mr. Bangash said the oft-repeated quote from Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmedinajad that Israel should be wiped off the map is a good example of the misinformation campaign, Israel and the United States are using to justify war against Iran. “This is a quote taken from the October 2005 Conference in Iran, the theme of which was “A World Without Zionism.” It was attributed to President Ahmedinajad, but it's not true. Just like the apartheid regime in South Africa, the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia have disappeared, Ahmedinajad said the regime occupying Jerusalem 'should be removed from the page of time.' This is the correct translation from Farsi. They've (western powers) distorted it so they can promote their own agenda.” Moreover, Mr. Bangash said President Ahmedinajad doesn't deny the Holocaust. “He asks who the perpetrators of the Holocaust were - it's well – documented that it was the Germany government. Then he asks why the Palestinians must pay the price for it.” Although President Obama said in his State of the Union address that the United States is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, and no options are off the table, Mr. Bangash said he doesn't believe the western powers will attack Iran – at least not at this time – because they understand the implications and consequences. “Iran's nuclear facilities are wide-spread. It would be impossible to destroy all of them. Iran has thousands of missiles. They could hit U.S. forces in Afghanistan, Bahrain, the Persian Gulf and Qatar, as well as the oil in Saudi Arabia. Iran has already said, 'If you hit our missiles, we have 1,000 missiles pointed at Israel's nuclear facilities.' ” One U.S. intelligence analyst said that an attack on Iran will only further Iranian determination to acquire nuclear weapons, causing Iranians to rally around their leader and redouble their nuclear efforts deeper underground, with no IAEA inspectors present. Amid all this speculation about war, Mr. Bangash said war is no longer the solution to the world’s problems: negotiations are. “They (western powers) have to negotiate with honesty. Iran said it will adhere to certain principles. As a signatory to the NPT, under article 4, it has the right to enrich uranium. If they (western powers) accept this, Iran will offer whatever assurances and guarantees the west wants.” In an interview before his presentation, Mr. Bangash said he thinks Iran is being targeted because it has broken the international system created by the victors of WWII, which accepted U.S. supremacy. “They (Iran's leaders) insist they want to pursue an independent policy. Every other Muslim country is dictated to by the U.S., even if it goes against their own interests. If Iran is able to set its own policy, it may set a precedent others may emulate.” SOURCE: www.thecanadiancharger.com/page.php?id=5&a=1199
|
|
|
Post by wanyee on Mar 27, 2012 0:58:18 GMT 3
Threats Against Iran are Criminal Under International Law Brazilian Foreign Affairs Minister Reprimands Ban Ki-moonBy Global Research News March 2, 2012Last week, Brazil’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Antonio Patriota, reminded Ban Ki-moon regarding his role as UN Secretary General. it referred to the issue of criminal actions in derogation of international law. "One sometimes hears the expression, 'all options are on the table.' But some actions are contrary to international law" Patriota told UN Secretar General Ban Ki-moon. This declaration was reported by Yahoo News, which explains the context: Patriota's comments come as the United States, United Kingdom and Russia have asked Israel both privately and publicly not to carry out a preemptive strike against Iran's nuclear facilities. (Laura Rozen, UN should weigh in on legality of Iran strike, Brazil’s foreign minister tells Yahoo News, Yahoo News, February 23, 2012) This article implies that only Israel has uttered such threats. Yet, President Obama himself said that “all options are on the table”, a warning also issued by other U.S. officials from both his and the previous administration. The Yahoo News article reviews Brazil’s growing influence in international politics. Mark Weisbrot from the Center for Economic and Policy Research specified that this kind of threat represents a “serious crime under international law, and a clear violation of the United Nations Charter.” (Mark Weisbrot, Brazil Takes the Lead In Trying to Prevent Another Senseless War, February 28, 2012) Antonio Patriota was referring to Article 2 of the UN Charter, which states: All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations. (Charter of the United Nations) This means the U.S. and Israel commit a crime each time they threaten to strike Iran or any other member state. SOURCE: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29577 Related News:Mossad and CIA concur: Iran is not seeking nukes While CIA admits Iran is not developing nuclear weapons, sanctions against Iran remain in placewww.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29843 --- US WAR ON IRAN: "THE WORST MISTAKE IN AMERICAN HISTORY" The Road to DisasterBy Fidel Castro Ruz Global Research, March 23, 2012 Cuba Debate - 2012-03-21Fidel Castro‘s latest reflections hints to the danger of a looming US Iran war. Fidel Castro warns that a war with Iran war would be the worst mistake in US history. This Reflection could be written today, tomorrow or any other day without the risk of being mistaken. Our species faces new problems. When 20 years ago I stated at the United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro that a species was in danger of extinction, I had fewer reasons than today for warning about a danger that I was seeing perhaps 100 years away. At that time, a handful of leaders of the most powerful countries were in charge of the world. They applauded my words as a matter of mere courtesy and placidly continued to dig for the burial of our species. It seemed that on our planet, common sense and order reigned. For a while, economic development, backed by technology and science appeared to be the Alpha and Omega of human society. Today, everything is much clearer. Profound truths have been surfacing. Almost 200 States, supposedly independent, constitute the political organization which in theory has the job of governing the destiny of the world. 25, 000 nuclear weapons needed to defend the changing order? Approximately 25,000 nuclear weapons in the hands of allied or enemy forces ready to defend the changing World order, by interest or necessity, virtually reduce to zero the rights of billions of people. I shall not commit the naïveté of assigning the blame to Russia or China for the development of that kind of weaponry, after the monstrous massacre at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, ordered by Truman in August 1945 after Roosevelt’s death [April 1945]. Nor shall I fall prey to the error of denying the Holocaust that signified the deaths of millions of children and adults, men or women, mainly Jews, gypsies, Russians or other nationalities, who were victims of Nazism. For that reason the odious policy of those who deny the Palestinian people their right to exist is repugnant. Does anyone by chance think that the United States will be capable of acting with the independence that will keep it from the inevitable disaster awaiting it? In a few weeks, the 40 million dollars President Obama promised to collect for his electoral campaign will only serve to show that the currency of his country has lost its value, and that the US, with its unusual growing public debt drawing close to 20 quadrillion, is living on the money it prints up and not on the money it produces. The rest of the world pays for what they waste. Nor does anyone believe that the Democratic candidate would be any better or worse than his Republican foes: whether they are called Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum. Light years separate these three characters from Abraham Lincoln or Martin Luther King. It is really unheard-of to observe such a technologically powerful nation and a government so bereft of both ideas and moral values. Iran has no nuclear weapons. It is being accused of producing enriched uranium that serves as fuel energy or components for medical uses. Whatever one can say, its possession or production is not equivalent to the production of nuclear weapons. Dozens of countries use enriched uranium as an energy source, but this cannot be used in the manufacture of a nuclear weapon without a prior complicated purification process. However, Israel, with the aid and cooperation of the United States, has manufactured nuclear weaponry without informing or accounting for their actions to anybody. Not admitting their possession of these weapons, they have hundreds of them. To prevent the development of research in neighbouring Arab countries, they attacked and destroyed reactors in Iraq and Syria. They have also declared their objective of attacking and destroying the production centres for nuclear fuel in Iran. International politics have been revolving around that crucial topic in that complex and dangerous part of the world, where most of the fuel that moves the world economy is produced and supplied. The selective elimination of Iran’s most eminent scientists by Israel and their NATO allies has become a practice that motivates hatred and feelings of revenge. The Israeli government has openly stated its objective to attack the plant manufacturing Iran’s enriched uranium, and the government of the United States has invested billions of dollars to manufacture a bomb for that purpose. On March 16, 2012, Michel Chossudovsky and Finian Cunningham published an article revealing that “A top US Air Force General has described the largest conventional bomb – the re-invented bunkers of 13.6 tons – as ‘fantastic’ for a military attack on Iran. “Such an eloquent comment on the massive killer-artefact took place in the same week that President Barack Obama appeared to warn against ‘easy words’ on the Persian Gulf War.” “…Herbert Carlisle, deputy chief of staff for US Air Force operations […] added that probably the bomb would be used in any attack on Iran ordered by Washington. “The MOP, also referred to as ‘The Mother of All Bombs’, is designed to drill through 60 metres of concrete before it detonates its massive bomb. It is believed to be the largest conventional weapon, non-nuclear, in the US arsenal.” “The Pentagon is planning a process of wide destruction of Iran’s infrastructure and massive civilian victims through the combined use of tactical nuclear bombs and monstrous conventional bombs with mushroom-shaped clouds, including the MOABs and the larger GBU-57A/B or Massive Ordinance Penetrator (MOP) that exceeds the MOAB in destructive capacity. “The MOP is described as ‘a powerful new bomb that aims straight at subterranean Iranian and North Korean nuclear facilities. The giant bomb –longer than 11 persons shoulder to shoulder, or more than 6 metres from end to end’.” I ask the reader to excuse me for this complicated military jargon. As one can see, such calculations arise from the hypothesis that the Iranian combatants, numbering millions of men and women well-known for their religious zeal and their fighting traditions, surrender without firing a shot. In recent days, the Iranians have seen how US soldiers occupying Afghanistan, in just three weeks, urinated on the corpses of killed Afghans, burned copies of the Koran and murdered more than 15 defenceless citizens. Let us imagine US forces launching monstrous bombs on industrial institutions, capable of penetrating through 60 metres of concrete. Never has such an undertaking ever been conceived [and carried out]. Not one word more is needed to understand the gravity of such a policy. In that way, our species will be inexorably led towards disaster. If we do not learn how to understand, we shall never learn how to survive. As for me, I harbour not the slightest doubt that the United States is about to commit and lead the world towards the greatest mistake in its history. Fidel Castro Ruz March 21, 2012 (Signed by Fidel Castro)SOURCE: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29923
|
|
|
Post by wanyee on Mar 27, 2012 20:33:11 GMT 3
Veteran U.S. political commentator: I would be shocked if Israel were to attack Iran Joe Klein, the seasoned political writer of Time magazine, does not mince words when it comes to IranBy Yael Lavie"If the Israeli military attacks Iran unilaterally, it will be the stupidest thing that Israel has done since the 1982 incursion into Lebanon, stupid and even more disastrous." Joe Klein, the seasoned political writer of Time magazine, does not mince words when it comes to Iran. We are sitting in his Rockefeller Center office, overlooking midtown Manhattan, a place where the 40-year veteran of journalism spends very little time these days. He is usually on campaign buses or planes. "This is the 10th U.S. election I am covering. The 10th! It's like a disease with me." But it's a disease that spawned a distinguished career, which peaked in 1996 when Klein, today 65, published "Primary Colors: A Novel of Politics," under the pseudonym "Anonymous," to great success. The novel, a thinly disguised, detailed behind-the-scenes account of Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, revealed the mechanism fueling the machine of the Democratic then-candidate, and although the characters' names were made-up, it was easy to figure out what the real-life analog of most of them was, as well as that of the author. All of that did not stop President Clinton from giving Klein continued coverage access throughout his second term in office. In fact, Democrats in general seem to like Joe Klein. Republicans maybe not so much. "Look, there is a real price to be paid for saying certain kinds of things. I was accused of being an anti-Semite many times...," Klein reminisces with a sad smile, recalling his coverage of McCain's 2008 presidential campaign. Why was that? "The trouble I have gotten into usually has been because of Iran ... I mean I got kicked off John McCain's campaign because of Iran. There was a press conference in South Carolina and I asked him a simple question. I said 'Why do you keep on talking about [President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad since Ahmadinejad has absolutely no power over Iran's military or nuclear program.' At the time, I suggested there was a small group of Jewish neoconservatives surrounding McCain who were pushing us toward war with Iran, and I said it may or may not be in Israel's best interest to attack Iran - although I kind of think it isn't - but it is certainly not in America's best interest to do so!" Not only John McCain was angry at Klein for his comments. The Anti-Defamation League came out strongly against him as well. Klein, however, who is openly Jewish, remained unapologetic. 'Death cult' The prominence of the Iran issue in the current Republican primary race also incenses Klein, who is quick to elaborate that the force behind the rhetoric is not just a "small group of Jewish neoconservatives." "There is this whole bunch of meshugenner Evangelicals who love their little Jewish 'sisters and brothers,' who they believe are going to incinerate themselves once the Rapture comes...The Evangelicals are a major force in American politics and the Republican politicians listen to what they are is saying. When you have a politician like [Newt] Gingrich or [Rick] Santorum say that Iran's government is completely irrational, that it is a death cult - using words like 'satanic cult that will use the bomb as soon as it gets it' - they are following a Rapturian line, No. 1, and No. 2, there are people in the Israeli government - and I know this for a fact - who are selling that to them." Isn't that more or less the line of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu? "Yes, well, Bibi inserted himself into the American election like no other foreign prime minister has ever done. He already did it last spring. When he came here and purposely misquoted the president, saying that he favored a two-state solution [of the Israel-Palestine conflict] on the 1967 lines, without mentioning he also supports the [idea of] mutually agreed-upon land swaps as part of the process. That happens to be the position of the Netanyahu administration as well, by the way - the land swaps - yet Netanyahu sold it here as something other than that, after meeting with Obama then, and by doing so he placed a bet on the Republican Party in this presidential election. The Obama staff was furious about that. And you know, as an American Jew, I found that behavior disgraceful and disrespectful." It can be argued that the Netanyahu hard line on Iran is selling quite well in the States. And what if Iran is indeed that dangerous? "Look, the Iranians are no bargain either...the Iranian administration does its best to make itself [appear] as obnoxious as possible in the world - towards Israel and the U.S. But what I am saying is that it's one thing to say Iran should not have a bomb because that is going to escalate things in the region, which is probably true. But when these guys - the Republicans - say you are dealing with a satanic death cult that is going to launch as soon as they get the bomb, that is crazy talk. And the fact is that you have an awful lot of uninformed Americans who are willing to believe it. That is what I was getting at with McCain in 2008: that the only reason McCain was using Ahmadinejad so much was to scare people like my Jewish parents, because they knew Ahmadinejad is a Holocaust denier. "I have been to Iran a couple of times. Ahmadinejad sounds crazy, but he is a puppet. And the Iranians are really, really feeling the pressure right now. Not just from the sanctions. The sabotage. The universal approach of the world. They are very proud people. I have many great Iranian friends, some of whom have been jailed by the creeps in the regime. I have no love lost for the Iranian regime. I also think the mismatch between the Iranian regime and the Iranian people is the greatest of any country in the world." But what if Israel's hard line continues to the extent that it decided to attack Iran unilaterally. What do you think the Obama administration would do then? "I don't know what it would do, but I know what it should do if that happens: They should shut down all military assistance to Israel. I mean, look at the settlements, look at the crap that Obama got about the settlements and he did not even withhold funds like Bush, Sr. did when he was president in the 80s, a Republican president. I thought it was entirely appropriate when Israel refused to stop building settlements to withhold funds from them, but Obama did not. "All that being said, I would be shocked if there were an Israeli attack on Iran. Think about it: The Israeli military does not go around bragging of what they can do before an attack. It may not be out of character for Likud, because I think that the last 30 years of Israel foreign policy, when Likud has been in charge, has been an unmitigated disaster, but the Israeli army does not behave this way usually before a war. It's not the Israel Defense Forces' strategy, no?" 'Like watching Jonestown' Klein speaks out of genuine concern. He has been covering the Middle East for years, in between U.S. presidential campaigns. Israel is clearly very dear to him. Over the last couple of months, however, Klein has been concerned only from afar. His time is consumed by the ongoing election year coverage, most recently by the Republican primaries - when he is not getting kicked off GOP buses or planes. He calls the nomination race to date a "spectacle" that is "like watching Jonestown unfold: There is no cohesive party line and they look like a cult." What is the feeling within the Obama administration about the Republican candidates? Given the chaotic nature of the Republican primaries, it seems like they are not sweating. "Not really the case - they are concerned to a certain degree. Obama is going to have a tough re-election campaign and they know that. It's not going to be like last time. You cannot run as the Messiah again if you have been in office for four years and have proven to be all-too human." Klein proceeds to critique the Obama term to date. Though he acknowledges that the administration inherited a troubled country to begin with, he also claims that it did not succeed in some major areas, which can be exploited by the Republicans. Klein: "There is a very sane, rational case to be made that Obama tried to do too much too soon. Going after universal health care may not have been wise; the Republicans can say that he should have focused more on the economy. There is also a larger case to be made that the American economy needs some major revision. There is no creative destruction in government here and there needs to be. The Democrats who should have been very much about managing the government because they were the party of government this term...never manage it very well." The journalist recalls talking with Bill Clinton toward the end of his second term: "He recognized too late - he admitted it to me - that job one for an American president is to prove that you can manage the government and manage the economy. Which Clinton managed to do partly in 1993 with a budget that brought in surpluses. But Obama has not done that. He went with a lot of crap in his stimulus package. If you look at this financial reform - we had an outrageous breach of confidence with the banks here, which caused the collapse in 2007-2008. His response to that was entirely insufficient and the bill that he eventually came up with is a disaster." Some argue that Obama's foreign policy has not been a huge success either. "He admitted to me in an on-the-record interview that he blew the Middle East in his first year. But you have to look at the bigger picture of his policy, and it is three-dimensional. The bigger picture is that colonialism is so over. Colonialism is so 50 years ago, and when we try to impose our will, even with the best intentions, in the Middle East, we are starting with a negative and we are moving into a bigger negative because of the history of Western imperialism in the region. It is something that I think Barack Obama understands, and that George W. Bush did not understand." Are you willing to predict whom Obama will eventually run against in November? "I am not going to guess for you...I stopped making predictions a long time ago. There are just too many moving parts for a mere mortal to predict...We journalists are very good at doing 'right now,' and we are excellent at doing the past, but God forbid we try to predict the future - it's like trying to predict the Middle East. Never, ever try to predict what will happen in the Middle East: You will never get it right." SOURCE: www.haaretz.com/weekend/week-s-end/veteran-u-s-political-commentator-i-would-be-shocked-if-israel-were-to-attack-iran-1.419032
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Mar 27, 2012 20:57:34 GMT 3
Would bombing really work? Iran is a world-leader in making super-tough concrete that is quite unlike anything the Americans have bombed in the past, and they are continually improving it: www.economist.com/node/21548918
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Mar 31, 2012 14:01:35 GMT 3
thenuclearsecuritysummit.orgI was in mind to muse about Manmohan Singh and the options of India in the event of a new gulf war. Iran is India's chief oil supplier [17-25%], and the oil-deal and trade collaterals are set to rise exponentially. Have the indians an ace up their sleeve, or why did their PM appear so relaxed in Seoul, South Korea. But the conference was hijacked by a hilarious incident which I can not resist. And this made the american obssession with Iran look quite irrelevant. (Obama was canvassing for total international isolation of Iran.) State department spokesperson Victoria Nuland, in the run to the summit in Korea, had toned down the rhetoric of financial sanctions when she exempted Japan and ten other european countries. The US had announced these on countries continueing to purchase Iranian crude, but looking at the list, one understands why this was a non-starter: thy are all major US allies! France, Germany, The UK, Italy, Spain, Holland & Belgium, Poland [where the new European Defence Shield is to be based!] Czech Republic, and Greece. [And let us not talk BRIC yet]. In other words, if the Americans declared sanctions on major importers of Iranian oil, she would be declaring sanctions on the EU! adding a trade war to the already fragile economic situation, scattering the prospects of speedy recovery on both sides of the atlantic, and thus further weakening the western front. India, the biggest importer, can sleep easy, and this, I suspect, is why Manmohan Singh just grinned back at the journalist who asked him if he had found alternatives to wean India off Iranian oil!But this: The Americans had pumped up this summit as the last-chance-for-Iran show. But that North Korea and Iran, the two nuclear rogues, were not attending even in observer capacities, did not bother the Americans. Then North Korea put a spanner in the works and grabbed all the headlines. She announced an anniversary was coming up, something to do with the death or the birthday of the deceased god Kim Il Sung, the revolutionary whose voice the heavens obeyed and whose finger moved mountains! Such an occasion called for a fireworks, so there would be an ICBM launched. But given it was a test-flight, something could of course go wrong, causing it to explode somewhere up there, with the risk that debris could fall back on Seoul! With Air Force One itself landed in Seoul, this was of course madness! World leaders scampering into bunkers because North Korea was celebrating some birthday with a big-bang? Absolute madness! ..But.. surely in exchange for a very fat cheque, carnavals can be postponed, even if they celebrate the death of a divine Titan who moved mountains by a simple cough! So the South Koreans hid this brotherly chit-chat from the visitors but, in the two twin holy Korean languages of Capitalism and Revolution, the two brothers reached an amicable solution. The North had made a mistake on the date --errors are human, and the launch was still a month away, long after the world leaders have left Seoul anyway. And the South too had made a mistake --humans that they are: the new financial sanctions announced by the USA, did not include the several hundreds million that flows via that China bank to the North. (What was the problem again?) Meanwhile nobody was talking about Iran. All the headlines were North Korea and her half-god half-man boy ruler. Obama was forced to abandon his Iran speech and put the emphasis on North Korea. Warning them in blood-curdling language. www.dailymail.co.uk North Korea responded Obama's war mongering rhetoric was twins with George Bush's, old and stale, and North Korea would wait for the sense of peace to take hold of him, before seriously consedering dialogue! Meanwhile: Hu Jin Tao couldn't say much. Something to do with the rotating presidency of China. He will soon be ex-president. Medvedev, Obama's friend, has never exactly been the president, and now with Putin's coronation next month, even less. Though a candid-open-mike moment between Medvedev and Obama has raised condemnation from the republican field. Obama sold America, shouted Newt. What a weakling! chorused Romney! Xi Jinping, the man expected to replace Hu Jin Tao, was on an introduction visit to the USA earlier this year. Asked on Iran, he quipped not everbody wants to cross the bridges before they come to them. Which probably meant I am not yet the president, and what I say could be used against me! since the Central committee of the communist party of China is a snakepit! NB: President Goodluck Jonathan of Nigeria looked great. Flowing priestly robes and that black daddy hat. All Black Mambazo attire. Only I think he should be much more worried about malaria than nuclear states! Malaria dysentry bilharzia and cholera is what will soon be wiping Nigerians out! So he should shine instead at a Malaria summit! Obama warns North Korea.
|
|
|
Post by nereah on Mar 31, 2012 20:02:57 GMT 3
thenuclearsecuritysummit.orgI was in mind to muse about Manmohan Singh and the options of India in the event of a new gulf war. Iran is India's chief oil supplier [17-25%], and the oil-deal and trade collaterals are set to rise exponentially. Have the indians an ace up their sleeve, or why did their PM appear so relaxed in Seoul, South Korea. But the conference was hijacked by a hilarious incident which I can not resist. And this made the american obssession with Iran look quite irrelevant. (Obama was canvassing for total international isolation of Iran.) State department spokesperson Victoria Nuland, in the run to the summit in Korea, had toned down the rhetoric of financial sanctions when she exempted Japan and ten other european countries. The US had announced these on countries continueing to purchase Iranian crude, but looking at the list, one understands why this was a non-starter: thy are all major US allies! France, Germany, The UK, Italy, Spain, Holland & Belgium, Poland [where the new European Defence Shield is to be based!] Czech Republic, and Greece. [And let us not talk BRIC yet]. In other words, if the Americans declared sanctions on major importers of Iranian oil, she would be declaring sanctions on the EU! adding a trade war to the already fragile economic situation, scattering the prospects of speedy recovery on both sides of the atlantic, and thus further weakening the western front. India, the biggest importer, can sleep easy, and this, I suspect, is why Manmohan Singh just grinned back at the journalist who asked him if he had found alternatives to wean India off Iranian oil!But this: The Americans had pumped up this summit as the last-chance-for-Iran show. But that North Korea and Iran, the two nuclear rogues, were not attending even in observer capacities, did not bother the Americans. Then North Korea put a spanner in the works and grabbed all the headlines. She announced an anniversary was coming up, something to do with the death or the birthday of the deceased god Kim Il Sung, the revolutionary whose voice the heavens obeyed and whose finger moved mountains! Such an occasion called for a fireworks, so there would be an ICBM launched. But given it was a test-flight, something could of course go wrong, causing it to explode somewhere up there, with the risk that debris could fall back on Seoul! With Air Force One itself landed in Seoul, this was of course madness! World leaders scampering into bunkers because North Korea was celebrating some birthday with a big-bang? Absolute madness! ..But.. surely in exchange for a very fat cheque, carnavals can be postponed, even if they celebrate the death of a divine Titan who moved mountains by a simple cough! So the South Koreans hid this brotherly chit-chat from the visitors but, in the two twin holy Korean languages of Capitalism and Revolution, the two brothers reached an amicable solution. The North had made a mistake on the date --errors are human, and the launch was still a month away, long after the world leaders have left Seoul anyway. And the South too had made a mistake --humans that they are: the new financial sanctions announced by the USA, did not include the several hundreds million that flows via that China bank to the North. (What was the problem again?) Meanwhile nobody was talking about Iran. All the headlines were North Korea and her half-god half-man boy ruler. Obama was forced to abandon his Iran speech and put the emphasis on North Korea. Warning them in blood-curdling language. www.dailymail.co.uk North Korea responded Obama's war mongering rhetoric was twins with George Bush's, old and stale, and North Korea would wait for the sense of peace to take hold of him, before seriously consedering dialogue! Meanwhile: Hu Jin Tao couldn't say much. Something to do with the rotating presidency of China. He will soon be ex-president. Medvedev, Obama's friend, has never exactly been the president, and now with Putin's coronation next month, even less. Though a candid-open-mike moment between Medvedev and Obama has raised condemnation from the republican field. Obama sold America, shouted Newt. What a weakling! chorused Romney! Xi Jinping, the man expected to replace Hu Jin Tao, was on an introduction visit to the USA earlier this year. Asked on Iran, he quipped not everbody wants to cross the bridges before they come to them. Which probably meant I am not yet the president, and what I say could be used against me! since the Central committee of the communist party of China is a snakepit! NB: President Goodluck Jonathan of Nigeria looked great. Flowing priestly robes and that black daddy hat. All Black Mambazo attire. Only I think he should be much more worried about malaria than nuclear states! Malaria dysentry bilharzia and cholera is what will soon be wiping Nigerians out! So he should shine instead at a Malaria summit! Obama warns North Korea. excellent piece jakaswanga. my respects!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2012 6:14:24 GMT 3
Under a False Flag Our “friends,” the Israelis, implicate us in war crimes
by Justin Raimondo, January 16, 2012
Will Israel succeed in dragging us into war with Iran?
If not, it won’t be for lack of trying. Their influential lobby in the US has been agitating for a US strike since the last year of the Bush presidency, when they almost succeeded in pulling it off: fortunately for us, Bush demurred, perhaps because he didn’t want his legacy to be two unwinnable and disastrous wars instead of just one.
Israel was to be the spearhead, with the US providing back up support, as the Guardian reported at the time:
“Israel gave serious thought this spring to launching a military strike on Iran’s nuclear sites but was told by President George W Bush that he would not support it and did not expect to revise that view for the rest of his presidency, senior European diplomatic sources have told the Guardian.”
Deterred from firing the first shots of World War III, the Israelis didn’t give up. Instead, they turned to other less direct means to achieve their goal. As Mark Perry reports on foreignpolicy.com:
“Buried deep in the archives of America’s intelligence services are a series of memos, written during the last years of President George W. Bush’s administration, that describe how Israeli Mossad officers recruited operatives belonging to the terrorist group Jundallah by passing themselves off as American agents. According to two U.S. intelligence officials, the Israelis, flush with American dollars and toting U.S. passports, posed as CIA officers in recruiting Jundallah operatives – what is commonly referred to as a ‘false flag’ operation.”
You bet those memos are buried deep – lest Americans discover that their faithful “allies” are trying to implicate them in war crimes.
Jundallah is a terrorist organization, Sunni-oriented and linked to al-Qaeda, that has murdered Iranian civilians in bombings and other attacks within Iran: their ostensible goal is to “liberate” Iranian (and Pakistani) Baluchistan. According to the memos, the Israelis recruited these terrorists right out in the open in London, where Mossad operatives – posing as CIA officers – met with Jundallah officials. “It’s amazing what the Israelis thought they could get away with,” Perry quotes one intelligence officer as saying. “They apparently didn’t give a damn what we thought.”
Of course not – and why should they? After all, we’ve given them a pass every time: when Jonathan Pollard stole what US officials described as the intelligence community’s “crown jewels” and passed them off to the Russians; when they stole our trade and military secrets and passed them off to China: when they were tracking the 9/11 conspirators and didn’t tell us what Mohammed Atta and his crew were up to. They took our “foreign aid” with one hand, and stabbed us in the back with the other.
What did we do about it, and what were the consequences for the Israelis?
The answer is: nothing, and none: nor has the story changed much this time around. Perry reports:
“A senior administration official vowed to ‘take the gloves off’ with Israel… but the United States did nothing – a result that the officer attributed to ‘political and bureaucratic inertia.’”
“’In the end,’ the officer noted, ‘it was just easier to do nothing than to, you know, rock the boat.’ Even so, at least for a short time, this same officer noted, the Mossad operation sparked a divisive debate among Bush’s national security team, pitting those who wondered ‘just whose side these guys [in Israel] are on’ against those who argued that ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend.’”
Oh well, I suppose you could call the cancellation of those planned joint US-Israeli military exercises more than nothing. Although Washington is claiming the cancellation is due to a desire to dial down tensions in the region, that didn’t stop them from ordering their warships to the Persian Gulf. In any case, the cancellation of “Austere Challenge 12” will hardly stop the Israelis from pursuing their plan to provoke the Iranians into attacking US facilities and/or personnel in the region. After all, since there are never any significant consequences attendant on their bad behavior, what have they got to lose?
The Americans don’t dare come out in public and take Tel Aviv to task: the powerful Israel lobby would have the President’s scalp, and Congress – aptly characterized as “Israeli-occupied territory” by the politically incorrect Pat Buchanan – would probably pass a resolution condemning their own President if Obama dared step out of line. And then there is all that campaign money the Democrats hope to scarf up this worrisome election season: taking the Israelis out to the wood shed would enrage the big money-bags who make unconditional support for Israel the price of their support.
Why should the Israelis care that their actions put US personnel in jeopardy, inviting attacks in kind from Tehran? Iranian attacks on US military personnel stationed in Iraq could easily inflict thousands of casualties, and this is especially true now that the US footprint is considerably reduced – but that would be the Americans’ problem. The Israelis, for their part, had the perfect “false flag” operation going: neither the Iranians nor top Jundallah cadre knew where the support was really coming from.
Jundallah’s leader, Abdolmalek Rigi,was captured by the Iranians and executed in the summer of 2010: before he was offed, however, he did an interview with Iranian media in the course of which he recalled a 2007 meeting in Morocco with a group of individuals who were supposed to be “NATO officials: “When we thought about it,” said Rigi, “we came to the conclusion that they are either Americans acting under NATO cover or Israelis.”
Rigi was just another pawn in the game as far as Israelis are concerned: they aren’t too particular about the types of unwitting allies they recruit. Rigi personally murdered his brother-in-law for disobeying orders, cutting his head off while Dan Rather’s cameras rolled. Kidnappings are a Jundallah favorite, along with videotaped decapitations. The Israelis have a whole collection of such charming types: they are arming and training the separatists of the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), who conduct terrorist attacks on civilian targets in Turkey, and are doing the same for the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), a weird Marxist cult formerly succored by Saddam Hussein, which has carried out terrorist attacks in Iran.
These are the allies and proxies of “the only democracy in the Middle East”!
The tactical objective behind Israeli support for Jundallah is simple: magnifying tensions between the US and Iran takes us farther down the road to war. When Rigi was captured and “confessed” on Iranian television, he averred that he was a tool of the CIA and claimed he had recently been on a US military base in Afghanistan: no doubt the Israelis were well pleased with their “student.” He had learned his lessons well.
Israeli sponsorship of Jundallah, the PKK, and MEK all point to Tel Aviv’s underlying strategic perspective, and that is a policy of sowing chaos whenever and wherever possible. If the idea is to atomize Israel’s neighbors, and reduce them to a condition of internal chaos, then this is surely the best way to go about it: by sponsoring every separatist and violently crazed sect that will take their cash.
“Flush with American dollars and toting U.S. passports,” as Perry put it, the Israelis arrived in London on the lookout for recruits. We know where those American dollars came from – straight out of the pockets of American taxpayers, who are forced to shell out over $3 billion every year in “foreign aid” to Israel. But what about those American passports? Maybe they came from the same place these passports originated. In the brouhaha over the Mossad’s theft of passports in New Zealand, Great Britain, Ireland, France, and elsewhere, no mention was ever made of any “cloned” American passports – but that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
The Israelis cannot take out Iran all on their own: they need the US to deliver the death blow and execute a program of “regime change” on the ground. Then and only then will their goal of regional hegemony be realized. That’s why they’ve mobilized all their resources, including their numerous and vocal political allies in the United States, to pull out all the stops and provoke a shooting war between the US and Iran. That such an event would lead to an economic downturn that would make the present one seem relatively prosperous is irrelevant, from the narrow perspective of a rabid Israeli nationalist. And that is precisely who is making policy in Israel today: the most extreme right-wing ultra-nationalist government since the founding of the Jewish state.
To these extremists, the Americans are an obstacle rather than a valued ally. And they have increasing power in Israel, in the government and in society at large. Fundamentalists are pushing the separation of the sexes, and the powerful religious parties are campaigning for expanded “settlements,” i.e. more provocations aimed at the downtrodden Palestinians.
Isn’t it time we gave our “special relationship” with Israel a second look? As Israeli agents covertly seek to incite the peoples of the Middle East – including the Iranians – against us, one has to wonder, like those intelligence analysts cited above: just whose side are these guys on, anyway?
The answer is: they’re on their own side. The question Perry’s scoop ought to raise in the mind of every American is: when are we going to start being on our own side? original.antiwar.com/justin/2012/01/15/under-a-false-flag/
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2012 6:57:38 GMT 3
Israel’s Secret Weapon
Which country in the Middle East has undeclared Nuclear weapons? Which country in the Middle East has undeclared biological and chemical capabilities? Which country in the Middle East has no outside inspections? Which country jailed its nuclear whistleblower for 18 years? Vanunu told the world that Israel had developed between one hundred and two hundred atomic bombs and had gone on to develop neutron bombs and thermonuclear weapons. Enough to destroy the entire Middle East and nobody has done anything about it since. It’s thought plutonium is made in Dimona; nuclear weapons are assembled at Yodefat and stored at Zachariah and Eilabun. Three nuclear submarines are based in Haifa and Israel’s biological and chemical warfare laboratories are at Nes Ziona. Israel never comments on such reports. But evidence continues to emerge. In 1992 an Israeli cargo plane crashed in Amsterdam killing forty-three people. The Israelis claimed it was carrying flowers and perfume. It took six years and a Dutch parliamentary enquiry before they admitted it was carrying DMMP, a key component for sarin nerve gas. The DMMP was bound for The Israeli Institute of Biological Research at Nes Ziona, one of Israel’s most secret defence sites. It is subject to no international inspection and reporting of its activities in Israel is prevented by strict military censorship.topdocumentaryfilms.com/israels-secret-weapon/
|
|
|
Post by nereah on Apr 1, 2012 17:05:25 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by wanyee on Apr 11, 2012 23:43:55 GMT 3
Thanks for that interesting bit of information nereah. Great piece Jakaswanga! Kathure, that article on false flags is very timely. -- See also:SURGE IN US SECRET SURVEILLANCE OF IRAN: Washington's "Real Agenda" is Not Global Security, It's "Regime Change" By Finian Cunningham Global Research, April 9, 2012A “surge” in US secret surveillance of Iran’s nuclear programme over the past three years, involving “hundreds” of spy drone flights, has not produced the slightest evidence to support Washington’s much-vaunted fears that the Islamic Republic is building a nuclear weapon. The complete lack of gun, never mind smoking gun, comes days before the resumed P5 + 1 talks in Istanbul in which the US-led Western nuclear powers will no doubt try to browbeat Iran over its entirely legal and legitimate civilian nuclear programme. The newly disclosed massive expansion of CIA personnel dedicated to the “Iranian operations division”, known as Persia House, has grown from a few dozen to several hundred individuals since President Barack Obama took office. Yet despite the mushrooming of Pentagon resources to find evidence that Iran is trying to develop the capability of making mushroom clouds, no such evidence has been found. This is the startling conclusion from a report disclosed in the Washington Post (April 9, 2012). However, neither the US officials quoted in the report nor the newspaper itself makes that obvious conclusion. They choose instead to congratulate on how the ever-so smart spy drones could carry out hundreds of secret missions evading Iranian defences. The Washington Post states: “At a time of renewed debate over whether stopping Iran might require military strikes, the expanded intelligence collection has reinforced the view within the White House that it will have early warning of any move by Iran to assemble a nuclear bomb, officials said.” In other words, there is no evidence of nuclear weapons or an effort to build nuclear weapons by Iran – just as Iran has consistently said over the several years. “CIA stealth drones scoured dozens of sites throughout Iran, making hundreds of passes over suspicious facilities, before a version of the RQ-170 crashed inside Iran’s borders in December. The surveillance has been part of what current and former U.S. officials describe as an intelligence surge that is aimed at Iran’s nuclear program and that has been gaining momentum since the final years of George W Bush’s administration,” writes the Washington Post. Leaving aside the criminal issue of infringing Iranian territorial air space that the disclosure admits, we can be sure that if there was single gamma-ray of evidence that Iran was engaging in an illicit nuclear weapons program, the Western intelligence agencies and their pliable mainstream media mouthpieces would have it plastered all over the front pages. But they don’t because they don’t have any evidence – despite massive, intrusive surveillance. This by the way, is what several US intelligence assessments have been saying as far back as 2007 – that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons programme. In another tacit admission of the latest blank, the Washington Post reports: “The Obama administration has cited new intelligence reports in arguing against a preemptive military strike by Israel against Iranian nuclear facilities.” In other media reports, the Western powers and illegally nuclear-armed Israel are said to be prepared to accept Iran’s right to process very low enriched uranium (three per cent) but not 20 per cent, and that for the Iranians to even have the right to the lower-enrichment yield, they must dismantle the underground processing facility at Qom. Iran must also consent to ever more rigorous site inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which has shown itself to be a tool of Western intelligence, fingering the identity of Iranian nuclear scientists who have subsequently been assassinated by CIA/Mossad hitmen. But this seeming Western concession is a provocative, unwarranted prohibition on Iran’s right to develop civilian nuclear technology for medical purposes such as radiotherapy. Uranium for weaponisation needs to be enriched to 90 per cent. How can 20 per cent enriched uranium be construed as representing a nuclear weapons ambition except to the most paranoid bigot or misinformed? One can only conclude that despite all the brouhaha, alleged nuclear weapons have nothing to do with the US-led agenda towards Iran. The real agenda is regime change and all the (baseless) allegations and warmongering over nuclear weapons is but a pretext to hide naked imperialist designs on a vital geopolitical region. The real issue is not “global security” but US energy security. Washington cannot say that because any rational person would rightfully see such foreign policy as predatory and programmed for war. Finian Cunningham is Global Research’s Middle East and East Africa Correspondent SOURCE: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30223 -- Former Mossad chief: Israel will know before Iran begins producing nuclear weaponsNuclear talks between Iran, Western powers to begin next month; officials in Jerusalem estimate Israel will allow at least three months for discussions, until oil embargo on Iran comes into full effect in July. By Barak Ravid, Natasha Mozgovaya and Haim Handwerker Published 12:07 21.03.12 - Latest update 12:07 21.03.12Discussions between Iran and the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany over the Islamic Republic's nuclear program will begin on April 13, senior U.S. and EU officials informed Israel on Tuesday. The talks are likely to take place in Geneva. Officials in Jerusalem estimate that Israel will allow at least three months for discussions, until the oil embargo on Iran comes into full effect in the beginning of July. Meanwhile, former Mossad head Meir Dagan said he believes Israel will be aware when Iran moves to the stage of nuclear weapon production – for example, enriching uranium to a degree of 90 percent. Dagan said that at that stage Israel would have to attack the Iranian nuclear sites if the international community does not stop its program. Speaking at an event in a Haifa hospital, Dagan said that currently Israel must not attack Iran, and that a strike on its nuclear facilities should be the last resort. Dagan said he believed the Israeli Air Force has the capability to significantly damage Iran's nuclear sites, yet warned that such a strike will have serious repercussions. He added that in case of an Israeli attack, hundreds of missiles will be launched at Israel, together with barrages from Hezbollah in Lebanon and Iranian-linked organizations in Gaza. President Barack Obama made a direct appeal on Tuesday to the Iranian people, saying there was "no reason for the United States and Iran to be divided from one another." In a video message marking the Persian new year, known as Nowruz, Obama said the U.S. seeks a dialogue with the Iranian people in order hear their views and understand their aspirations. And he sharply rebuked the Iranian government for setting up an "electronic curtain" around its people that the U.S. says blocks access to much of the outside world. Israel has been in constant talks with the U.S. administration and the EU in preparation of the talks, and has insisted on holding the Iranians to a timeline. A senior official said that Helga Schmidt, deputy to European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, visited Jerusalem a few days ago and discussed the Iranian issue. According to an Israeli official, Schmidt expressed concern over the possibility of a unilateral Israeli action against Iran. She said that the talks were serious and will be comprised of a series of meetings. On Tuesday, representatives from the six nations met in Brussels to coordinate positions ahead of the talks. Washington and other European capitals expressed concerns that a breakdown of the talks would lead to a significant escalation and will require a serious examination of a military option. Despite Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's statements about Israel's duty to prepare for an independent strike against Iran, a decision is not expected to be made in the coming weeks. In television interviews after his visit to Washington Netanyahu said a decision should be made "not within days, but not within years either." SOURCE: www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/former-mossad-chief-israel-will-know-before-iran-begins-producing-nuclear-weapons-1.419978
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Apr 15, 2012 10:34:20 GMT 3
Thanks for that interesting bit of information nereah. See also In other media reports, the Western powers and illegally nuclear-armed Israel are said to be prepared to accept Iran’s right to process very low enriched uranium (three per cent) but not 20 per cent, and that for the Iranians to even have the right to the lower-enrichment yield, they must dismantle the underground processing facility at Qom. Iran must also consent to ever more rigorous site inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which has shown itself to be a tool of Western intelligence, fingering the identity of Iranian nuclear scientists who have subsequently been assassinated by CIA/Mossad hitmen. ABSOLUTELY TRUE: THE LATEST ROUND OF NEGOTIATIONS STARTED APRIL 13TH 2012 IN ISTANBUL TURKEY. [NOT THE EARLIER HYPED GENEVA OR VIENNA --Iranian scientists have been kidnapped and poisoned in those venues earlier years, with the collusion of the secret services of the hosting nation] ...But.. Are the negotiations between Israel and the USA? in effect? The anxieties of the US president in an election year, pitted against those of an hawkish Likud premier, his gun-ho finger already on the trigger? Some of the demands on the table are purely outrageous, --post by Wanyee gives a fair inkling, as if meant to have the talks collapse, and show Iran is not cooperative. For instance the demand that the Fordow complex [enrichmet plant] at Qom be totally dismantled, now! Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy organization, is quoted as laughing this demand off, together with the 20% enrichment limit. [This 20% seems to be the threshold from which bombs can be built successfully --guys in the know, please enlighten us!]. The demand for the closure of Qom was only included in the American and European position during the negotiations, on Israeli insistence. Ehud Barak of defence went around Western Capitals blackmailing them with initiating bombing! This is why the question became: are we negotiating with Israel by proxy ---Obama as their puppet; or is the whole issue a continueing tug of war between a puppet who wants to rid off its master, and the master tightening the chain even further! Discussions between Iran and the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany over the Islamic Republic's nuclear program will begin on April 13, senior U.S. and EU officials informed Israel on Tuesday. The talks are likely to take place in Geneva. Istanbul it became. THIS IS WHAT REUTERS REPORTED IN THE RUN-UP: Ahead of the summit, Obama had told a meeting of more than 10,000 members of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) lobbying group on March 4 that “Iran’s leaders should understand that I do not have a policy of containment; I have a policy to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.… I will not hesitate to use force when it is necessary to defend the United States and its interests.”Obama and Netanyahu made clear that Israel was sovereign to decide when to defend itself. Netanyahu told AIPAC after his meeting with Obama that Israel “ deeply appreciate the great alliance between our two countries. But when it comes to Israel’s survival, we must always remain the masters of our fate.” Netanyahu said there was no doubt that Iran was working to acquire a nuclear weapons capability and that Israel could not “afford to wait much longer” NPR Story on Iran Talks Features ACA's Daryll KimballArms Control Association Executive Director Daryl G. Kimball was interviewed by NPR's Mike Shuster on the upcoming P5+1 negotiations in Istanbul, Turkey. "I think the [U.S. and its partners] as well as the Iranians are going into this with much more seriousness. They understand that the stakes are higher in part because Iran's enrichment program continues to advance, slowly, but it continues to advance." bbc: IRAN NUCLEAR TALKS CONSTRUCTIVE in Istanbul. What a positive spin!
|
|