The Taliban in Afghanistan is apparently suffering from money problems, as a result of both bad PR and Western attacks on their sources of revenue from the outside world. One result of this is that the Taliban is reportedly restructuring its funding of operations. Hitherto, regional commanders in Afghanistan have been given blocks of money to use as they though most wisely. Apparently some of these regional commanders decided that the wisest course was to a goodly portion of the money away for a rainy day, rather than use it to fund operations against the government and the Coalition forces.
The new operational funding policy uses âperformance basedâ criteria likely to warm to cockles of any fiscal conservativeâs heart. In effect, regional commanders will now receive money on the basis of the number of attacks they make against government and Coalition forces. This may be one reason for the recent rise in attacks, particularly suicide attacks, in Afghanistan. It may also lead some of the less ardent Taliban commanders to decide that peace is preferable to continuing the struggle, since only in peace will they be able to enjoy the benefit of the money theyâve been stashing away for some time.
Posted by: ed ||
01/16/2006 06:37 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Terrorists will be coming to a bookstore near you.
#3
Hitherto, regional commanders in Afghanistan have been given blocks of money to use as they though most wisely. Apparently some of these regional commanders decided that the wisest course was to a goodly portion of the money away for a rainy day...
Shell has evacuated around 330 workers from four sites in the Niger delta area of Nigeria following a gunboat attack. Gunmen fought Nigerian soldiers on Sunday as they overran the Benisede pumping station near the port of Warri. Five Shell workers were injured and there are unconfirmed reports that some soldiers and gunmen died in the attack.
The evacuations from Benisede and three other pumping stations will not affect production, already halted because of a pipeline attack last Wednesday.
The latest attack helped put upward pressure on oil prices, with markets already worried about the nuclear standoff involving Iran, the world's fourth largest crude oil exporter.
In London on Monday morning, the price for a barrel of Brent crude had risen by 19 cents to $62.45.
In two attacks last week, militants ruptured a major pipeline feeding an export terminal and kidnapped four foreign workers from another Shell oil rig in the region. The hostages, who are still being held, come from the UK, the US, Honduras and Bulgaria, a Shell spokeswoman said.
Correspondents say the move will increase pressure on Nigeria's government to crack down on ethnic Ijaw militants who want more control over the region's oil revenues.
The Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta, the group that says it is holding the hostages, has demanded the release of separatist leader Mujahid Dokubu Asari, who is being held on treason charges, and former Bayelsa State governor Diepreye Alamieyaseigha, who is accused of money-laundering.
"It must be clear that the Nigerian government cannot protect your workers or assets. Leave our land while you can or die in it," the group said in an email statement. "Our aim is to totally destroy the capacity of the Nigerian government to export oil."
The kidnappings and explosion, the latest in a string of violent incidents in the troubled region, have slashed Shell's production there by some 220,000 barrels a day - almost 10% of Nigeria's average output of 2.6m barrels.
#3
I think The Thugs took out futures in fuel cell technology as well as other alternate fuels. What else could explain their efforts to inspire us to work faster to achieve these goals.
#4
Remember Zawahiri's letter? One of the main goals of the islamonazis is to take control of as much oil as possible. Control of oil means control of oil-using nations, in their sight. They don't understand that if they succeed, all bets are off. That will be a definitive declaration of war not even the French can mis-construe. In the meantime, the United States needs to do three things: establish a REAL, WORKING national energy policy that includes drilling wherever oil can be economically recovered, development of a working, affordable oil shale process, developing a national natural gas pipeline infrastructure that's both workable and economical, development of alternate energy resources to include replacing coal- or oil-fired generating plants with breeder reactor nuclear plants, and cracking down on the envirowackos around the world (and their funding) with the same zeal and energy we have expended on the islamonazis. Otherwise in ten years we'll be dancing to the Wahabbists' tune, or engaged in a very serious war that may include the use of nuclear weapons by both sides.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
01/16/2006 16:54 Comments ||
Top||
Nigerian troops battled militia fighters in swamps around a Royal Dutch Shell oil platform that militants attacked at dawn Sunday, the third assault on Shell oil facilities in less than a week in the troubled region.
Shell confirmed the attack on the Benisede oil platform in the southern oil-rich Niger Delta and said some of its staff had been injured and taken to hospital. The company also said it had begun evacuating personnel from vulnerable facilities in the region because of worsening security.
In a statement, Shell said "heavily armed persons" in speedboats attacked the platform early Sunday. "They burned down staff accommodations and damaged the facility before leaving."
Soldiers guarding Benisede returned automatic weapons fire, but it was unclear if they had lost control of the oil platform, said Brig. Gen. Elias Zamani, commander of a special task force charged with security in the volatile oil region.
Zamani had no other details of the fighting and said the military was investigating. But a military official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to the media said there had been casualties on both sides.
Residents of the area reported continuous gunfire and the explosion of heavy guns for most of Sunday after troop reinforcements moved in.
"There is a war going on here," Enitowari Inengi, a resident of the Ozobo fishing community near Benisede, said by telephone. "People are scared and are taking their boats and moving away." Another resident, Nelson Wariebi, said he had seen military helicopters moving in to attack positions held by the militants.
On Wednesday, gunmen attacked Shell's EA platform in shallow waters near the delta coast, seizing a Bulgarian, an American, a British and a Honduran. A major Shell pipeline leading to its Forcados export terminal was blown up the following day. Though Shell resumed some production cut last week, the first two attacks initially forced a 10 percent drop in Nigeria's oil exports.
one of the militants' objectives, I would assume
A previously unknown militant group, Movement for Niger Delta Emancipation, claimed responsibility for first two attacks, warning all Western oil companies to leave the Niger Delta for their safety and calling on the government to release militia leader Mujahid Dokubo-Asari.
Dokubo-Asari campaigned for secession and greater local control of oil wealth before he was jailed in September and charged with treason. Nigeria is Africa's leading oil exporter and the fifth-biggest source of U.S. oil imports. The country produces about 2.5 million barrels a day.
Violence, hostage-taking and sabotage of oil operations have been common in the oil-rich Niger Delta in the past 15 years amid demands by the region's impoverished communities for a greater share of the oil revenue flowing from their land
LAGOS - Several people were killed when suspected ethnic militants stormed a Nigerian oil platform on Sunday, extending a three-week spate of attacks which has hit output in the worldâs eighth largest exporter. Heavily armed men invaded Royal Dutch Shellâs Benisede oil flow station in six speed boats, exchanged fire with troops, torched two housing blocks, damaged oil processing facilities and ran away left, authorities said.
Some attackers and some soldiers protecting the platform were killed in the gunfire, a top military official said. âThere was an attack. There was a fight there, an exchange of fire,â Brigadier-General Elias Zamani, who heads a military task force in the southern delta, told Reuters by telephone. âWe lost some soldiers and some of the other boys were killed also.â
Just another senseless attack in paradise ...
A diplomat said recent attacks and kidnappings targeting Nigeriaâs oil industry appear to be coordinated by one militant group with up to 500 members which has demanded a greater share of oil revenue for the Niger Delta and the release of two ethnic Ijaw leaders.
Shell evacuated Benisede and three other flow stations after Sundayâs attack, but oil output was unaffected because they were already closed after militants blew up a major crude oil pipeline nearby last Wednesday, the company said. However, Sundayâs attack may delay repairs to the 100,000 barrel-a-day Trans-Ramos pipeline, which had been expected to resume pumping to the Forcados tanker terminal on Monday or Tuesday, a senior industry source said.
The firefight occurred as a team of government negotiators began talking to militants holding four foreign oil workers hostage in the delta after abducting them from an offshore oilfield operated by Shell on Wednesday.
Talks musta gone well.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/16/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
British Premier Tony Blair held here [in London] today a meeting with Prince Saud Al-Faisal, the Foreign Minister. During the meeting, Prince Saud conveyed to the Premier the greetings of the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz and Crown Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz, Deputy Premier, Minister of Defense and Aviation and Inspector General. They also discussed bilateral relations between the two friendly countries, ways of their enhancement in all fields and the developments of the situations in the Middle East particularly at the Iraqi and the Palestinian arenas. The meeting was attended by Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf bin Abdulaziz, Saudi Ambassador to the United Kingdom and Ireland and a number of British officials. Prince Saud also met here today with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. During the meeting, they discussed bilateral cooperation and topics of mutual concern. The meeting was attended by the Saudi Ambassador and a number of officials of the British Foreign Office. File under diplo travel. I have no idea whether it's connected with anything at all, but by golly there sure are a lot of visits by .90 calibers going on at once.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/16/2006 16:48 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
Saudi Arabia has said the West is partly to blame for the current nuclear stand-off with Iran because it allowed Israel to develop nuclear weapons. The Saudi foreign minister told the BBC statements made by Iran's president were "extreme" but that diplomacy was the way to resolve the crisis.
Prince Saud al-Faisal was giving a rare interview while in London for a two-day terrorism conference. He has chosen this visit to call for a nuclear-free zone in the Gulf.
Prince Saud told the BBC that the West was partly responsible for the current stand-off with Iran over its nuclear policy because, he said, it had helped Israel develop its own nuclear arsenal. But when asked how Saudi Arabia would respond if Iran acquired nuclear weapons, he ruled out joining the nuclear arms race. He said nuclear weapons benefited no-one and that if Iran were ever to use them against Israel, it would end up killing Palestinians.
Well yeah, but who in Arabia cares about them?
The Saudi foreign minister also called on the UK and other countries to back a Saudi initiative to set up an international counter-terrorism centre.
He said progress had been made in tackling al-Qaeda in Saudi Arabia but that his government was concerned about the return of Saudi militants who had been fighting in Iraq. Gaining the support of the public was crucial, he said, in winning the fight against terrorism.
On the issue of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, Prince Saud said he planned to thank Prime Minister Tony Blair on Monday for Britain's role, which he called both constructive and important.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/16/2006 00:35 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
NO WMDS in IRAQ = NO WMDS IN IRAN ...SYRIA... NORTH KOREA, etc. Amerika and the world need Mother Hillary and her Amazon Corps to save everyone from themselves and espec from meat-loving, anti-fruit/veggies, penile-centric, abusive power-manic untrustworthy philandering anti-butter-and-egg incompetent selfish Male Fascist brutes, i.e. Americans and error-prone, anti-Perfectionist/Totality anti-Cookie Fascist Socialism.
#6
You know if we had a real president when the twits took the embassy in Tehran, the place would have been glass thirty years ago and we wouldn't have a crisis today. No islamist, the Soviets would have thought real hard before sending troops into next door Afghanistan. Of course no one would like us, but when we spoke, we'd certainly be paid attention to.
Sheikh Jaber Al Ahmad Al Sabah, the emir of Kuwait and one of the United States' closest Mideast allies, was buried in an unmarked grave Sunday â a ceremony attended by thousands of weeping citizens who mourned the death of an admired ruler. The crown prince, Sheikh Saad Al Abdullah Al Sabah â in his mid-70s and ailing himself â assumed the throne but was expected to leave control of day-to-day government affairs to the veteran prime minister. No major policy shifts were foreseen.
Sheikh Jaber, who was restored to power by American forces after Saddam Hussein invaded the tiny, oil-rich country in 1990, was 79 when he died after 27 years in power. He was one of the few Arab rulers who supported the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq to topple Saddam. He allowed his country to be used as a launchpad for the American drive to Baghdad.
The new emir, who suffers from a colon condition and must travel abroad periodically for medical treatment, watched from a wheelchair as the body of his distant cousin, wrapped in a Kuwaiti flag, was carried shoulder-high through a crowd of 10,000 mourners and lowered into the grave after a brief prayer. Members of the ruling family, including Prime Minister Sheikh Sabah Al Ahmad Al Sabah, stood for hours at Al Sulaybikhat public cemetery to accept condolences from dignitaries and ordinary Kuwaitis. Sheikh Sabah is the former emir's half brother. Abdul-Rhida Asiri, head of the political science department at Kuwait University, said the prime minister will become the "de facto ruler" for now, and the family could make further leadership decisions after the mourning period.
The close alliance with the US is not likely to change under Sheikh Saad. Washington named Kuwait a major non-NATO ally in 2004. Kuwait signed a defence pact with Washington after a US-led coalition fought the 1991 Gulf War that liberated Kuwait from a seven-month Iraqi occupation under Saddam. The small state's strategic significance lays mainly with its oil, the 10th largest reserves in the world. Al Sabah family has ruled Kuwait for more than 250 years, and enjoys respect and approval of Kuwaitis.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/16/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
GEORGE Galloway's reputation sank even lower yesterday after his spokesman admitted that the Respect MP's appearance on Celebrity Big Brother had turned into a "worst-case scenario". The maverick politician has attracted fierce criticism for choosing to go into the Big Brother house. His standing has suffered following days of controversial antics, which have seen the former Labour rebel impersonate a cat and dress up as a vampire.
and those were the times he acted with the MOST dignity
In the latest episode last night, the arch-critic of the Iraq war was shown hiding in a giant cardboard box and apparently squabbling with the disgraced television entertainer Michael Barrymore over his cigars.
Meanwhile, the MP's east London constituents have lambasted him for deserting them and humiliating himself. Yesterday his press adviser, Ron McKay, acknowledged that Mr Galloway's appearance on the Channel 4 TV show had badly backfired.
Meanwhile, it also emerged that a charity to which Mr Galloway has chosen to donate a six-figure sum from the show is at the centre of a diplomatic row between Britain, the US and Israel. Israel's ambassador to London will reportedly hold urgent talks with a Treasury minister this week to demand that action be taken against Interpal. The US is also said to be putting pressure on ministers to blacklist the charity, which President George Bush has declared a terrorist organisation. Interpal was established in 1994 and describes itself as "a non-political, non-profit-making British charity that focuses solely on the provision of relief and development aid to the poor and needy of Palestine". Interpal has twice been the subject of investigations by the Charities Commission, but on each occasion it found no evidence of links to terrorism. The charity will benefit from Mr Galloway's appearance fee and an estimated £100,000 from text-message voting.
It has been said that Mr Galloway will receive £60,000 for appearing on the show, although his closest aides have reportedly indicated he is actually being paid £150,000. Following savage criticism for his appearance, with government chief whip Hilary Armstrong starting a petition to "get him back to work", Mr McKay revealed the MP would refund to taxpayers the amount of his parliamentary salary he has drawn during his stay in the house. He said Mr Galloway seemed unhappy in the house and was "withdrawing into himself". Contestants were joined over the weekend by Sir Jimmy Savile on a mission to make some of their dreams come true. Mr Galloway asked to go to the Oscars.
So much for the suffering Palestinians. Pathetic.
Mr McKay said: "I knew the worst-case scenario would turn out to be something like this." He added: "George takes advice, but he is not a man that you can tell what to do."
Maybe not, but I bet a few of his constituents are telling him where to go ....
#1
he is actually being paid £150,000.
Okay, we can't get fat Teddy for that much, Biden? Nancy P? Wait, I'll bet Cynthia M would lap milk for $270,000.
#5
In case questions of the public then one of the British rantburgers should try to call and ask the question: "Why is he not collecting funds for Darfur and South Soudan victims instead. There are over two hundred people killed there for every Palestinian killed. Why is one Palestinian more important tyhan 100 Blacks. Why give money to those Paletinin kids who are NOT starving instead of the Soudanese kids who are? Because they are victims of Arabs?"
#6
describes itself as "a non-political, non-profit-making British charity that focuses solely on the provision of relief and development aid to the poor and needy of Palestine".
And we all know how needy those Palestinians are, especially when it comes to bright shiny new rocket launchers.
LONDON (AP) - The Finsbury Park mosque stood idle and empty for months after it was raided by anti-terror police and its former preacher was arrested on charges of inciting murder and stirring racial hatred.
Today, its prayer rooms are packed. Pakistanis, Somalis, Algerians and Kurds spill into the stairwells during Friday prayers. Hundreds of pairs of shoes fill wooden racks taller than most worshippers.
As Abu Hamza al-Masri is tried in London's Central Criminal Court, attendees say they are gratified by their mosque's recovery, but worried it will never escape association with its one-eyed, hook-handed former leader. "They only know it as the 'Abu Hamza' mosque," said Karim Ahmed, 22, as he attended Friday prayers at the building in north London.
For good reason.
The commission that oversees British places of worship banned al-Masri from the mosque that year after he allegedly said in one of his sermons that God had punished the crew who died in the Columbia space shuttle disaster. Trustees closed the building for 18 months. Worshippers stayed away even after it reopened.
The mosque's trustees were replaced by a new group last February. Muslims begun flocking back in the last few months. Eight hundred people attended prayers last Friday. The mosque, which seats 800, scheduled four services to handle the demand on the annual Islamic feast of sacrifice, Eid al-Adha. "Why should we hate or want to kill the nonbelievers?" asked Imam Ajmal Masroor, a 34-year-old who delivered his sermon almost exclusively in English to followers seated on the carpeted floor. "It is through our good nature that we will be able to bring them toward us."
So you're saying that the Qu'ran doesn't demand that you kill the infidels?
Dressed in a white robe and black prayer hat, he exhorted the congregation to be more introspective and focus on their problems rather than those of the "nonbelievers."
One of the mosque's transient clerics, Masroor drops by about once a month to deliver Friday prayers. He said the followers have slowly returned. "People can see a change has taken place and that's why they are coming back," Masroor said. "They were afraid when Hamza and the gang were here. They knew that if they said anything there would be reprisals."
Ihtisham Hibatullah, a spokesman for the new trustees at the mosque, said trustees are declining interviews until al-Masri's trial finishes. Until then, the mosque continues to win back followers, Hibatullah said. It even hosts a monthly interfaith meeting, he said. "A few years ago, a lot of these things would have been unheard of," Hibatullah said. "Now things are slowly getting back to normal."
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/16/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
By me Fatwa the Abu Hamza' mosque in Finsbury Park from now on will be know as al Hookna mosque.
an attack on Israel isn't the only serious harm a nuclear-armed Iran could cause
With Iranian nuclear aspirations gaining notice, it's worth directing attention to the growing relationship between Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Venezuela's President Hugo Chávez. The Reagan administration repulsed Soviet efforts to set up camp in Central America. Iranian designs on Venezuela perhaps deserve similar U.S. attention.
The warmth and moral support between Ahmadinejad and Chávez is very public. The two tyrants are a lot more than just pen pals. Venezuela has made it clear that it backs Iran's nuclear ambitions and embraces the mullahs' hateful anti-Semitism. What remains more speculative is just how far along Iran is in putting down roots in Venezuela.
In September, when the International Atomic Energy Agency offered a resolution condemning Iran for its "many failures and breaches of its obligations to comply" with its treaty commitments, Venezuela was the only country that voted "no." Ahmadinejad congratulated the Venezuelan government, calling the vote "brave and judicious."
Three months later, in a Christmas Eve TV broadcast, Chávez declared that "minorities, the descendants of those who crucified Christ, have taken over the riches of the world." That ugly anti-Semitic swipe was of a piece with an insidious assault over the past several years on the country's Jewish community. In 2004, heavily armed Chávez commandos raided a Caracas Jewish school, terrifying children and parents. The government's claim that it had reason to believe that the school was storing arms was never supported. A more reasonable explanation is that the raid was part of the Chávez political strategy of fomenting class hatred--an agenda that finds a vulnerable target in the country's Jewish minority--and as a way to show Tehran that Venezuela is on board. Ahmadinejad rivals Hitler in his hatred for the Jewish people.
It's tough to tell whether Chávez is a committed bigot or whether his anti-Semitism and embrace of the mullahs are simply a part of his calculated efforts to annoy the Yanquis. But it doesn't make much difference. The end result is that the Iranian connection introduces a new element of instability into Latin America.
In his efforts to provoke the U.S., the Venezuelan no doubt hopes that saber rattling against imperialismo can stir up nationalist sentiment and save his floundering regime. That view argues that the U.S. would do best to ignore him, but it's not easy to ignore a Latin leader who seems intent on forging stronger ties with two of the worst enemies of the U.S., Ahmadinejad and Fidel Castro.
That Chávez is making a hash of the Venezuelan economy while he courts international notoriety is no secret. There are shortages of foodstuffs that are abundant even in other poor countries. Milk, flour for the national delight known as arepas, and sugar are in short supply. Coffee is scarce because roasters say government controls have set the price below costs, forcing them to eat losses. The Chávez response last week was a threat to nationalize the industry.
Property rights are being abolished. Last week, authorities invaded numerous "unoccupied" apartments in Caracas to hand them over to party faithful, part of a wider scheme to "equalize" life for Venezuelans.
A bridge collapse earlier this month on the main artery linking Caracas to the country's largest airport, seaport and an enormous bedroom community is seen as a microcosm of the country's failing infrastructure. Aside from the damage to commerce, it has caused great difficulties for the estimated 100,000 commuters who live on the coast, Robert Bottome, editor of the newsletter Veneconomy, told me from Caracas on Wednesday. The collapse diverted all this traffic to an old two-lane road with hairpin turns and more than 300 curves. It is now handling car traffic during the day and commercial traffic at night, with predictable backups.
With Venezuelan oil fields experiencing an annual depletion rate on the order of 25% and little government reinvestment in the sector, similar infrastructure problems are looming in oil. In November, Goldman Sachs emerging markets research commented on a fire at a "major refinery complex" in which 20 workers were injured: "In recent months there has been a string of accidents and other disruptions [of] oil infrastructure, which oil experts attribute to inadequate investment in maintenance and lack of technical expertise to run complex oil refining and exploration operations."
Chávez is notably nonchalant about all this, as if the health of the economy is the last thing on his mind. His foreign affiliations are more important to him. The Iranian news agency MEHR said last year that the two countries have signed contracts valued at more than $1 billion. In sum, Iranians, presiding over an economy that is itself crumbling into disrepair, are going to build Venezuela 10,000 residential units and a batch of manufacturing plants, if MEHR can be believed. Chávez reportedly says these deals--presumably financed with revenues that might be better employed repairing the vital bridge--include the transfer of "technology" from Iran and the importation of Iranian "professionals" to support the efforts.
Details on the Iranian "factories"--beyond a high-profile tractor producer and a widely publicized cement factory--remain sketchy. But what is clear is that the importation of state agents from Hugo-friendly dictatorships hasn't been a positive experience for Venezuelans. Imported Cubans are now applying their "skills" in intelligence and state security networks to the detriment of Venezuelan liberty. It is doubtful that the growing presence of Iranians in "factories" across Venezuela is about boosting plastic widget output. The U.S. intelligence agencies would do well to make a greater effort to find out exactly what projects the Chávez-Ahmadinejad duo really have in mind. Almost certainly, they are up to no good.
#1
That Chávez is making a hash of the Venezuelan economy while he courts international notoriety is no secret. There are shortages of foodstuffs that are abundant even in other poor countries. Milk, flour for the national delight known as arepas, and sugar are in short supply. Coffee is scarce because roasters say government controls have set the price below costs, forcing them to eat losses. The Chávez response last week was a threat to nationalize the industry.
And it's ALL our fault.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
01/16/2006 9:20 Comments ||
Top||
North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il is believed to have left a whorehouse in the southern Chinese province of Guangdong for another destination, probably Beijing, Japanese news reports said on Monday. Public broadcaster NHK said a convoy of heavily-guarded cars left a top hotel in the Chinese boomtown of Shenzhen late on Sunday for the city station and that a special 20-car train later left with all its curtains drawn. It speculated that the North Korean leader's next destination would be Beijing, so that Kim could hold talks with Chinese President Hu Jintao. The six-party talks on Pyongyang's nuclear programme and US sanctions against a bank in Macau over North Korea's alleged attempts to launder money would probably be on the agenda of any such talks, NHK said.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/16/2006 15:26 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
I put this on this page because Japan's ability to counter China and to help fight the growth of Islamacism in Asia is tied very directly to their economy and the security - or insecurity - felt by its aging population.
In the past eight months, programs to recover the remains of U.S. war dead, feed hungry North Koreans and build civilian nuclear power plants have been scrapped. "The official U.S. connections have atrophied," said Donald Gregg, U.S. ambassador to South Korea under the first President Bush and now president of the Korea Society
The loss of contacts between North Koreans and Americans involved in these programs might make it harder to resolve the main dispute between the countries. North Korea could have as many as 13 nuclear weapons, according to the Institute for Science and International Security, a Washington think tank.
The isolation is North Korea's fault, said Christopher Hill, assistant secretary of State for Asia. Once the North Koreans understand "there's no role for nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula," Hill said last week, "the sooner they will have a brighter future."
Ties between the United States and North Korea grew after a 1994 agreement in which the North Koreans promised to trade nuclear weapons development for aid and diplomatic recognition. But neither side completed the deal.
In October 2002, the North Koreans admitted trying to enrich uranium, and the Bush administration stopped deliveries of heavy fuel oil. North Korea then resumed its nuclear weapons program. One by one, other contacts have collapsed:
Last weekend, staff of the U.S.-led Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization abandoned two unfinished nuclear reactors in North Korea. The organization was created under the 1994 agreement to build the plants, but work was suspended in 2003 after North Korea admitted working on uranium enrichment. The organization is expected to fold within a few months, said Charles Kartman, its former executive director.
On Jan. 1, the United Nations World Food Program mission in North Korea, headed by an American, stopped feeding children at the request of North Korea. That country said it doesn't need the aid, which came mostly from the United States and helped save thousands from starving after a famine in the mid-1990s.
In May, the Pentagon suspended a program that had U.S. and North Korean soldiers searching for the remains of Americans missing from the 1950-53 Korean War. The Pentagon cited difficulty in communicating with Americans working in North Korea, but it had not reported any problems in a decade of recovery efforts.
North Korea and the United States were "full of hope" that those links would improve relations between the two nations, said Kartman, who led U.S. talks with the North Koreans during the Clinton administration. Now relations are so bad that "both sides are convinced there is no hope."
Meanwhile, six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons programs are in limbo. In September, the United States, North Korea, South Korea, China, Russia and Japan reached a tentative deal trading North Korea's abandonment of nuclear programs for energy aid, security assurances and promises of a diplomatic thaw.
North Korea undermined the deal by insisting that other countries first agree to provide civilian nuclear reactors, an echo of the 1994 pact. The Bush administration then angered North Korea by forbidding U.S. business with an Asian bank and several North Korean companies suspected of involvement in counterfeiting and other illegal activities. Hill said the North Koreans used the sanctions as an excuse not to return to negotiations. "We always knew that when we went from the stage of laying out principles to implementation, things would get more difficult," he said. He urged North Korea to "show us that you are serious" by declaring its nuclear materials and sites.
Hill spoke before visiting Japan, South Korea and China to try to revive talks, last held in November. He has not visited North Korea.
Despite Hill's efforts, the Bush administration appears willing to let China and South Korea do most of the work, Gregg said. China and South Korea are providing large amounts of food and fuel to North Korea. South Korean companies are employing several thousand North Koreans at companies in a special investment zone just north of the border.
Such "handouts" won't create a successful economy, Hill said. The only way North Korea can prosper, he said, is by giving up its nuclear program.
#1
NorKor General Bok alA DAN RATHER had already stated that North Korea "currently has nuclear weapons", so iff true the Pyongyang protocols and the curr Six-Party Talks ARE DE FACTO FAILURES ALREADY as is illogical to prevent NK from developing nukes which its own Command Generals proclaims NK already has. As wid Radical Islam vv Judaeo-Christianity, Dubya, America, and DemoCapitalism are basically being forced to justify Failed and Failing Leftism-Socialism and Communism for the Lefties,Commies and aligned. AMERICA'S ENEMIES ARE NOT AFRAID TO TAKE THE WORLD WITH THEM TO HELL, AND IN FACT ARE ALREADY PLANNING TO DO JUST THAT IFF AMERICA IS STILL NOT UNDER ANTI-AMERICAN AMER SOCIALISM, OWG AND SWO ALA 2015-2020, AS BOTH RUSSIA-CHINA BELIEVE THAT WAR AGS AMER IS LIKELY TO HAPPEN 2015-2018 OR SHORTLY AFTERWARDS. Chicom Defense Minister Cao Hitian > the holocaust of approx 200M of America's 300M population, plus the loss of approx 1/2 of CONUS America per se, is good and necessary for China, Chinese-specific Communism and Civilization, and the world in general, ergo proving that China nor Commie Socialism is NOT a threat to anyone. Its only 200Milyuhn, people, and holocaust is good for youse and yours anyways - besides, ala CLINTONISM and its precept of Amerika's sacred Commie- and LeftSocialist-majority heartland/mainstream, youse want, nay demand, to be gulagged and exterminated anyway, do you not???
Mehmet Ali Agca, the man who shot Pope John Paul II in 1981, is unfit to do his military service, NTV television quoted a military hospital as saying on Monday, days after he was freed from an Istanbul jail. The decision leaves Agca at liberty, pending an appeal from the Justice Ministry against his early release from prison. "Mehmet Ali Agca is a free person and he can go anywhere he wants," Agca's lawyer Mustafa Demirbag told reporters.
Turkey's army had wanted Agca, 48, to do his missed military service, which is a legal obligation for all Turkish men. His lawyers argued he was not well enough to do a stint in the army. Agca served 19 years in an Italian jail for trying to kill the Pope before being pardoned at the Pontiff's behest in 2000. He was then extradited to Turkey to serve a separate sentence for the murder of a Turkish newspaper editor and for robbery.
Justice Minister Cemil Cicek reiterated on Monday that he planned to appeal against Agca's release. In a televised news conference, Cicek also said the decision to free Agca was a purely legal one in which the government played no part. "We are going to ask the Supreme Court tomorrow to reconsider the case," Cicek said. Turkish media have speculated that Agca could be jailed again for the 1979 murder of liberal newspaper editor Abdi Ipekci and that he could also face other charges. He was imprisoned after killing Ipekci, but escaped with suspected help from sympathizers in the security services.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/16/2006 14:54 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
The Swedish government is under fire from a human rights group for allowing the army to take part in joint exercises with the Russian army. In "Operation Snowflake" Swedish and Russian troops will be working together in exercises on Swedish soil. According to Robdrt HÃ¥rdh, secretary general of the Swedish Helsinki Committee for Human Rights, Russian defence minister Sergej Ivanov has referred to the exercises as "training for fighting terrorism" â a Russian euphemism for the war in Chechnya. The Swedish military says it is a "peacekeeping operation". The Russian soldiers taking part come from the 138th Motorized Rifle Brigade, which according to HÀrdh is guilty of serious human rights abuses in Chechnya.
Writing in Svenska Dagbladet, HÃ¥rdh writes that by holding joint exercises with the brigade, the Swedish government is effectively giving legitimacy to abuses and war crimes. In the article he asks foreigh minister Laila Freivalds whether she thinks that the brigade's participation in Operation Snowflake is compatible with the government's aim that all aspects of foreign policy should protect human rights.
Guess Robdrt's demonstrated that he's a much more sensitive soul than the rest of us. I'm not sure he's accomplished anything else.
#4
Guess Robdrt's demonstrated that he's a much more sensitive soul than the rest of us.
Who are the "rest of you"? Is appeasing Russia really that much better you think, than appeasing Iran?
I'm not sure he's accomplished anything else.
No, indeed not. As long as western government are willing to ally themselves with the devil, honorable individuals that desire to preserve their nations' souls won't accomplish much more than merely preserving their own.
Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the sinktrap. Further violations may result in banning.
Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the sinktrap. Further violations may result in banning.
#10
The thing that bugs me is how it's leftists that are constantly being accused of being "moral relativists", when it's in fact the conservatives here that I've seen constantly, CONSTANTLY scoff at the idea of morality. Mocking it as "displaying more sensitive souls" or "scolding" or whatever.
#11
Met a few ex-(soldiers and KGB) as co-workers after the USSR fell. They were very good engineers and scientists with a keen sense of internal corporate politics. When they moved on the rest of us should have too!
#12
As long as western government are willing to ally themselves with the devil, honorable individuals that desire to preserve their nations' souls won't accomplish much more than merely preserving their own.
I read it, then I read it again and still don't understand. Is this the literal devil, or a metaphor for Russia? I thought the US was the devil. And are the 'honorable individuals' jouranalists or Chechin? or Swedes?
Or is Robdirt the devil for being a money laundering Swede?
Or is this one of those 'everyman' things that sound pretty but are dibertly so vague as to be unactionable?
#13
I read it, then I read it again and still don't understand. Is this the literal devil, or a metaphor for Russia?
For Russia, for China, for Iran, for Nazi Germany. In this context it clearly means Putin's Russia.
I thought the US was the devil
Why did you think that?
And are the 'honorable individuals' jouranalists or Chechin? or Swedes?
Generally they happen to be, you know *individuals*, mocked in Rantburg for trying to make their nations behave honorably.
Or is this one of those 'everyman' things that sound pretty but are dibertly so vague as to be unactionable
I'd think that Rantburg would not mind a rant against appeasement, but clearly appeasement is only bad against the tyrannical imperialist nations America *currently* opposes, it's not at all bad against the tyrannical imperialist nations America doesn't currently have a problem with.
And it's quite "actionable" btw: When people try to make their nation behave honorably -- don't mock them! See how easy that was?
#14
it's leftists that are constantly being accused of being "moral relativists"
I don't know where you get that idea from, Aris. Nothing drives me nuts more than the Left's moralizing and their belief that all that is required is to espouse the morally 'correct' position. Absolving them from having to deal with complexities and ambiguities of the real world and having to achieve beneficial outcomes and avoid harmful outcomes in that real world.
#15
Play nice Ivan and only attack the Swedish army between the operating hours of 9-5 (M-F).
Posted by: ed ||
01/16/2006 6:46 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Well, you never know when those damn Finns are hitting the infidels in Europe.
Anyway, lumping Putin in with Iran is way over the top, Aris. Unless you know something we don't, I doubt that he dreams of wiping Israel off of the map, or nuking the infidels in Europe. He leaves a lot to be desired, but he's not crazy as a sh*thouse rat.
(If any sh*thouse rats are reading this, sorry for the insult.)
#17
Anyway, lumping Putin in with Iran is way over the top, Aris. Unless you know something we don't, I doubt that he dreams of wiping Israel off of the map, or nuking the infidels in Europe.
He's got troops that have divided up and created dictatorships within the sovereign territories of *two* nations, namely Georgia (the dictatorships of Abkhazia and South Ossetia) and Moldova (the dictatorship of Transnistria).
He's supporting all the dictatorships in Central Asia (that's five of them, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan) plus Belarus in Eastern Europ, doing the utmost to help them all stifle democratic dissent therein.
He's massacred Chechnya.
He's had joint exercises with China which (judging from the accompanying rhetorics) were directed against Taiwan.
He's supported Venezuela, which has become the primary flagship of fascism in Latin America; he has supported Syria; and perhaps you are forgetting about it but Russia has recently been a primary supporter of Iran as well.
So Russia has not threatened *Israel* -- directly that is. What of it? It has not only directly dominated and intimated its nearby nations, it has also given a supporting hand to almost every fascism on the globe.
No, I don't think I'm going over the top at all, when I'm lumping Russia in with Iran. What Russia's fascism lacks in *flashiness*, it more than makes up with in breadth of scope.
#18
The problem with lumps is that they fail to make useful distinctions - ones we can work with to improve matters.
I don't trust Putin farther than I can spit, but he's sane and very calculating. He's still KGB to his marrow I think, but he's no messianic believer that the apocalypse will bring glory and restore communist hegemony. He expects to work, negotiate and scheme for it.
What bothers me about these exercises is the clear message that Sweden disdains working with western Europe in dealing with their simmering muslim immigrant crisis. Set aside theoretical issues of moral superiority and look at it geopolitically - the idea that the Swedes are so stuck in their rejection of other western countries that they are embracing Putin does not strike me as a good sign.
That said, the reality is that a lot of sex slaves and drugs are coming into Europe through Russia and Scandanavia. If I have a chance I'll go dig up my links to stories from the last year or two on this. At a tactical level, cooperation to shut that down would be a Good Thing, especially to whatever degree the drug trade monies might be funding Islamacist groups rather than the eastern European mafias.
But somehow I suspect that Sweden is signalling it will align with Russia against US influence in eastern Europe. And if that's the case this is one more example of Western 'elites' slitting their own - and our own - throats as a result of unwarranted attitudes of moral superiority.
#19
Read the post again, Aris. I did not say Putin was an angel. I knew about all those things you mentioned, and more.
Putin is a bastard. You didn't rise up in the former KGB without being one. That is not in dispute. I know this offends your sense of moral purity, but we cannot ignore him, we cannot stop talking to him, we cannot get in his face every damn time he pulls something slimy.
As tragic as it is for the people he is pushing around (some of whom are my relatives, both by blood and by marriage, thank you very much), America is a touch busy right now and can't drop everything to deal with their problems. Maybe the Greek Army could come to the rescue, since they are kind of sitting around right now....
What I was driving at is that Putin is not crazy enough to start Armageddon. He does not dream of the glory to befall him should he nuke other nations, he does not dream of pushing other countries into the sea, he does not think he is carrying out the divine will of Allah/God/Ahura Mazda/insert-favorite-divinity-here.
Iran *is*. Iran will do that if given half a chance, which the EU seems more than willing to give them. Considering the EU's record in dealing with Bosnia, forgive me for not being at all hopeful that talking to the Mad Mullahs of Tehran is going to accomplish a damn thing.
The only difference is that unless you guys, the EU, get your act together, you're going to face something worse than refugees streaming across your borders. It won't be coming from Russia, either.
To use a term they made famous in Tehran, I think you have your "Great Satans" mixed up.
#20
Good points, lotp, but I was thinking that they were maybe trying to ensure that Russia doesn't cut off the oil lines or mess with their interests in the Baltic Sea.
#21
He's got troops that have divided up and created dictatorships within the sovereign territories of *two* nations, namely Georgia (the dictatorships of Abkhazia and South Ossetia) and Moldova (the dictatorship of Transnistria).
Well, then, do something about him.
Fer crissake, it's like the EU is a bag of defenseless kittens, dependent on the US for keeping the wolves away.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
01/16/2006 9:43 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Well, you never know when those damn Finns are hitting the infidels in Europe.
Anyway, lumping Putin in with Iran is way over the top, Aris. Unless you know something we don't, I doubt that he dreams of wiping Israel off of the map, or nuking the infidels in Europe. He leaves a lot to be desired, but he's not crazy as a sh*thouse rat.
(If any sh*thouse rats are reading this, sorry for the insult.)
He may not be a "wild and craazy guy" the way the Mullahs are, but he's their primary enabler among the nations that have technology.
Whether he does it because he's "wild and craaazy" or not _won't matter anymore_ once we wake up and find out that another World War One has broken out, this time with nuclear weapons.
All the Chechnyan conflict is doing is letting Russia pretend it's "fighting terrorism" while it's selling Iran its Junior Science Atomic Bomb Kit.
Finally, I think y'all are missing an important insight: you don't need to be a devout Moslem (of whatever sect), nor a devout Christian, nor even a devout Marxist, to be a dangerous fanatic. It could be that Putin is one of those guys who doesn't need any scriptures.
Posted by: Phil ||
01/16/2006 9:48 Comments ||
Top||
#23
Yet more Pecksniffian hypocrisy from our resident Tartuffe.
Let me clue you in, Uriah, the goal of "morality" in the public sphere is to identify and deal with real evil, not to pompously inflate Aris Katsaris's dubiously derived self-worth. "Damned if you do and damned if you don't" fails any fair moral test.
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
01/16/2006 9:54 Comments ||
Top||
#24
"The thing that bugs me is how it's leftists that are constantly being accused of being 'moral relativists'"
Yeah, last century they stood by and cheered while 100+ million people were "relativized" into early graves, you morally degenerate punk.
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
01/16/2006 9:56 Comments ||
Top||
#25
Phil,
"All the Chechnyan conflict is doing is letting Russia pretend it's "fighting terrorism" while it's selling Iran its Junior Science Atomic Bomb Kit."
Precisely, but Aris can't make that legitimate criticism of Putin, because he'd have to point 4 fingers back at the EU, which has been doing the same thing for years.
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
01/16/2006 10:00 Comments ||
Top||
#26
I thought Aris said earlier he already despised the Greek government for being part of the general leftist/fascist axis he thought was forming in that part of the world.
(I thought I'd mention that because I am under the impression that Aris won't be posting here anymore, and may not be able to say that himself).
I don't really have time to play today, though. I have an enourmous work backlog.
Posted by: Phil ||
01/16/2006 10:07 Comments ||
Top||
#27
I thought Aris said earlier he already despised the Greek government for being part of the general leftist/fascist axis he thought was forming in that part of the world.
And yet he finds time to insult Americans for not being sufficiently opposed to Putin:
I'd think that Rantburg would not mind a rant against appeasement, but clearly appeasement is only bad against the tyrannical imperialist nations America *currently* opposes, it's not at all bad against the tyrannical imperialist nations America doesn't currently have a problem with.
Mote, beam, and all that.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
01/16/2006 10:18 Comments ||
Top||
#28
Phil, I don't take Putin as being a fanatic. You have to be nuts to be a fanatic, and he's sane. He could be a sociopath, and is definitely greedy. What if....
Maybe, just maybe, Russia's playing a potentially dangerous game with Iran? As in, they are taking the mullah's money (hard currency only....none of that Iranian toilet paper they call cash) to build a nuclear facility. They tell them, as an aside, yeah, you can use this to make a bomb, and offer to sell them plans, equipment, etc. They even throw in a free trip to Stalin World. Take the kiddies for a vacation, why not?
However....they leave out a couple of tiny details that keep the stupid thing from working once it's assembled, or change a few specs. The Iranians build 'em big & pretty, and completely unable to hit a damn thing unless they fall over.
Just to be sure, they pass on the locations to, say, the US or Israel....in case there's a Farsi rocket scientist who can solve the bugs.
Think about it....Russia's right on their border. They would not have much time to react to incoming missiles from that direction. There's no telling when the Iranians might get torked off at them. They know that.
Now, granted, this is all from the Central Florida Strategic Think Tank using patented scientific algorithms (in other words, I'm in my living room, pulling it outta my a$$ and typing it here). It has a NY Times level of possibly being true (approximately 5%, give or take 4.9%).
But it would definitely appeal to Putin's greed, plus the underhanded backstabbing would bring back memories of the good ol' days.
#30
Wow, Aris "redacted", and so early in the day too. Meanwhile, back at the thread...
lotp: "But somehow I suspect that Sweden is signalling it will align with Russia against US influence in eastern Europe."
I hope you're reading too much into this. I'd prefer to think they're just being neighborly to pick up some training and help keep the bear relatively friendly.
Aris: "Is appeasing Russia really that much better you think, than appeasing Iran?"
We're talking about some joint exercises here, not making world-threatening Sweden a ballistic missile and nuclear warhead powerhouse.
#31
I hope you're reading too much into this. I'd prefer to think they're just being neighborly to pick up some training and help keep the bear relatively friendly.
St. Franklin of the Roosevelt who brought us the pyramid scheme of Social Security and a host of other socialist patriarchal government programs, was a real bud with the second greatest butcher of the 20th Century, Stalin [top honors go to Mao]. Moral relativism of course. I'm sure in the marxist universe Franklin is a reactionary conservative, but to most of us, he's occupies a position on the left side of the spectrum.
#34
And if that's the case this is one more example of Western 'elites' slitting their own - and our own - throats as a result of unwarranted attitudes of moral superiority.
You know, a Swede can say exactly the same thing about US alignment with Pakistan, Saudi Arabia et. al. You are also aware that NATO has an office in Moscow, right? In fact, they have an an entire staff there devoted to passing NATO propaganda to the Russians.
Rantburg so far has been too harsh on Russia, in some respects. You have your own problems with US firms selling tech to the Chinese, and you blame the Russians for doing the same thing. You seem to neglect that 95% of the world hates the US. Demanding that Russia not sell its wares to those that can cause problems for the US, is unreasonable, from the Russian point of view.
Regarding Putin, I don't think Russia is ready politically and economically for anyone else other than Putin. Disenchantment with capitalism runs high in Russia, and it is always one step away from moving backward to a full-blown dictatorship or electing some freak like Zhirinovsky. If things do not improve for the people in Russia, there will be some other revolution in the future, and Putin will seem like an angel by comparison.
Posted by: Rafael ||
01/16/2006 11:21 Comments ||
Top||
#35
So, Nimble, what do you suggest? Building an iron curtain around Russia so they can't engage with the West?
#36
Engagement and joint military training exercises are two different things. Are you proposing that we treat them like the UK? To me it's a matter of degree and timing. The Russians have been especially unhelpful with Iran's strategic arsenal. There should be a price.
#37
There may be a price to pay, Nimble, but don't expect the Swedes to ring it up on the register.
Look, the Swedes are pretty much irrelevant. They have a 9 to 5, 5 days a week military. It may be of good quality but no one expects them to do anything other than defend their own land. I'm not sure they could take down the Esquimaux at this point. It makes sense, from their point of view, for them to have some engagement with the Rooskies, because that's their biggest threat just over the horizon.
Iran? Nukes? Even if the Swedes saw that as a problem and not as a CIA-inspired conspiracy, they can't do anything practical about it. They'll let the U.S. carry the water on that one, thankyouverymuch, and carp piously from the sidelines.
For all their pontificating, the Swedes have a practical foreign policy -- don't piss off anyone bigger than them, except the US (because we won't hurt them).
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/16/2006 14:11 Comments ||
Top||
#38
I hate to inject this at this point but isn't Sweden supposed to be a "nutral" country? Why are they training with the Rus?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
01/16/2006 16:22 Comments ||
Top||
#40
I think too many people are reading too much into this. I'd be much more willing to believe that Sweden is looking to train with someone who has experience in dealing with islamonazi terrorism, instead of a bunch of appeaseniks who are afraid of offending even the sickest of the sewer rats. Sweden has also been relatively neutral for a hundred years or so, and has managed to keep from being involved in any of Europe's many wars during that period. While I don't believe they're in Russia's orbit, I do believe they're trying to get some real, hands-on experience, even second-hand. Getting it from the United States or Britain, two nations heavily involved in both Iraq and Afghanistan, would look too much like taking sides. The next best thing - in fact the only option left - is Russia.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
01/16/2006 17:37 Comments ||
Top||
#41
If they want to learn how to deal with islamofascists poorly, then it's a good idea.
#42
Sweden is neutral like Switzerland, but has reduced its "army" to no more than 5,000 soldiers able to "fight." The exercises with Russian troops invited are pure folly, but hey reducing the army to 5,000 was already folly.
I served there a long time ago, when the enemy was openly described as Russians. We even had people learning to speak Russian and to torture Russian-speaking prisoners.
#43
Thanks Kalle. I thought I remembered my history. Sweden was NOT invaded by Hitler. Well you know the Welfare state eats all the money for the Army, Navy and Airforce that kept Hitler at bay. Sweden makes good weapons. My Swedish Mauser rifle is 20 times the overall quality of my German one.
#44
Thanks Kalle. It may be folly for the Swedes, but I think they're looking at a way to engage the Russians. Realistically, what other external enemy d they have?
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/16/2006 19:29 Comments ||
Top||
#45
According to the Swedish State TV News program during the 80s, there was no greater enemy than American Imperialism. One would have thought that the Swedish Army would accordingly be ready to defend the country against NATO, or at a minimum against the USA. However it was standard, unofficial strategic planning to count on NATO support against a Russian attack. (Including compatibility of ammo.)
Unofficial military talk was also that the regularly visiting Russian submarines could have been sunk in Swedish waters, but that the social-democrat government ordered the military NOT to do so. I got that from several high-ranking Swedish officers, separately.
Imagine being in the Marines and Navy, and your government orders you to fake inability to catch the enemy during its incursions. Maddening.
#46
yes, Sweden's military is quite small and Kalle, I remember the 80s as well. It's why this caught my attention - that period, plus their serious problems in immigrant-dense places like Malmo, which Swedish officialdom is doing their darndest to avoid noticing.
Not trying to see shadows where there are none and perhaps the explanation that training with the US or UK is too ... provocative ... holds water. OTOH that in and of itself suggests it will be a long time, if ever, before Sweden would ever be an ally or even a neutral in dealing with aggressive Islamacists -- my main concern here.
#47
Well, I think Aris has made some good points regarding Russia, as well as troubling inconsistencies across political landscapes on either side--liberal/conservative--and the moral relativism issues they raise. It's worth thinking about, in any case.
" . . . the idea that the Swedes are so stuck in their rejection of other western countries that they are embracing Putin does not strike me as a good sign." Embracing Putin is never a good sign, except "better the devil you know . . . " This contact also might be due more to relations between the two countries that go back centuries.
"That said, the reality is that a lot of sex slaves and drugs are coming into Europe through Russia and Scandanavia. If I have a chance I'll go dig up my links to stories from the last year or two on this." Please post--would be helpful.
#48
What's your definition of "contribution", Pappy? Because if you thought that all the other comments in this thread "contributed" except my own, then we obviously differ vastly on the meaning of contribution.
Perhaps you define "contributions" as "comments lacking moral content"? If so, I'm afraid I can't oblige. My contributions will *always* contain moral content.
Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers 35 years ago, said Friday that whistleblowers shouldn't be afraid to reveal government secrets in an effort to save people's lives, even if it means going to jail. "Don't do what I did," Ellsberg said. "Don't wait until the bombs are falling in Iran. Don't wait until people are dying. Go to the press and reveal."
Since it's still 1969 in Ellsberg's head, bombs falling anywhere are a bad thing. But wait! I wonder. . . would bombs falling on Cleveland be a bad thing in his estimation? Or bombs falling on San Francisco? I suspect Cleveland would be okay, but San Francisco not okay. . .
Ellsberg told the American Bar Association's Forum on Communications Law that he waited nearly two years before handing over the top secret study of the Vietnam War to The New York Times in 1971. "I wasted 22 months," he said, advising others planning to leak materials to "take your risks and go to prison if it means saving lives." He compared the Pentagon Papers revelations to the recent New York Times disclosures that President Bush had authorized wiretapping the phone conversations of U.S. citizens without court authorization. He also noted that the Times has acknowledged holding that story for a year at the White House's request.
Ellsberg shared the stage at the gathering of some 250 First Amendment lawyers with other players in the Pentagon Papers drama, including former New York Times Executive Editor Max Frankel and former Times attorney James C. Goodale. They gave vivid recollections of key decisions that shaped the historical case. Asked about his newspaper's concerns about exposing a secret government report, Frankel, then the Times Washington bureau chief, said he was more concerned about the consequences of not publishing. "The frame of mind of people at my level was, 'It's a hot story and how do we get it out and damn the consequences,'" he said. "The first instinct and the last instinct is to get it out.
With that particular mindset there's no instinct to protect information that might harm the country as a whole, only a selfish urge to splash a headline. . .
David Rudinstine, dean of the Cardozo School of Law in New York and author of a book on the Pentagon Papers case, also noted that the existence of the Internet has made it harder to keep information from being publicized once it is leaked. "Once it's out there, you can't restrain it," he said.
What a despicable lot. I'm literally at a loss for words.
#1
Yep, the new Repub Nixon Admin got the blame for what was planned or occurred during the Dems Kennedy and LBJ years, even for the now notorious actions of the "Chicago 7" at Convention time. Someone or some nations, i.e. a Few, have to make the decisions for everyone - you know, Laissez Faire Universalism - and just because many Lefties come back from the USSR/Red China disillusioned ergo America has to be like Russia-China + be governed by them. The Lefties want America to be ruled by nations they themselves hate or don't wanna move to.
#3
would bombs falling on Cleveland be a bad thing in his estimation? Or bombs falling on San Francisco? I suspect Cleveland would be okay, but San Francisco not okay. . .
Cleveland = Not Okay. Too many union voters, and the Rock-n-Roll Hall of Fame. Plus Drew Carey.
Austin. Now there's a city that needs to get that smug grin wiped off its face...
even the mosts trusted scum Cronkite is chiming in.
Posted by: Red Dog ||
01/16/2006 9:00 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Sea -
Tell ya what - I think if we took about a half dozen of the most rabid fans out of the Dawg Pound at a Sunday afternoon Browns game and told them, 'No more beer until you conquer North Korea', we'd solve this in about twenty minutes TOPS. :)
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
01/16/2006 9:04 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Reminds me of the Jay Leno joke about Browns fans, just after some of them had pelted the field one game with beer bottles --
"Hey, did you hear that Budweiser is coming out with a new bottle for their beer? It's 44 ounces big. 44 ounces! Or as Cleveland Browns fans call them, 'daisycutters' ..."
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/16/2006 14:23 Comments ||
Top||
Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond argued Friday after returning from Iraq that recent disclosures about American intelligence gathering had blown the cover of key sources and made them targets for assassination.
Bond, R-Mo., is a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. He said defense and intelligence officials also had told him that potential sources of information were refusing to cooperate because they fear for their lives.
"Sources that they've approached to work with them have said, 'I'm not going to work with you because you all can't keep a secret, and if it's known I'm working with you, it's a death warrant,'" Bond said.
Bond was referring to New York Times reporter James Risen's book "State of War" and other disclosures that included the Bush administration's wiretapping and domestic spying.
He added, "There have been some serious impacts that make us much less safe because our intelligence has been compromised drastically."
Bond spoke a day after returning from a weeklong trip to the Middle East. He also visited Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kuwait and Qatar. Bond traveled with three Democrats - Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana and Rep. Harold Ford of Tennessee.
Bond said he had seen progress in Iraq but also continued challenges. Among them is the need for more training of Iraq security forces.
"We understand that we're going to be there for a while," he said. "But our presence there is absolutely essential if we are to avoid the area slipping back into a haven for terrorists."
On the trip, Bond met with his son Sam, a Marine first lieutenant who has been in Iraq for 11 months. The senator said that shortly before his trip, five members of his son's unit had been killed by an explosive device planted by insurgents.
In western Pakistan, where al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden may be hiding, the delegation traveled along the perimeter of hostile territory. They witnessed at a roadblock the impediments to outsiders entering the region.
"It's extremely difficult to go into Osama's neighborhood," Bond said.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/16/2006 00:44 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Los Angeles Times Via Newsday, caught via Polipundit....is that clear? LOL
January 16, 2006
The weapons seizure was modest: 37 revolvers, 1,280 rounds of ammunition and one silencer. But its discovery at a port halfway around the world last May packed a big punch at Rapiscan Systems Inc.
Using equipment built by the Hawthorne, Calif., company, port inspectors in Bombay, India, found the cache at the bottom of a barrel of waste grease inside a cargo container. ewwwww
A month later, during a news conference at Baltimore's port, Rapiscan's Multiple Eagle cargo and vehicle inspection system used there picked up an endorsement from U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Robert C. Bonner. He said the Rapiscan system is a "unique tool in our arsenal of detection technology to protect our country . . . achieving increased security against the terrorist threat, and doing so without shutting down the flow of trade."
By September, Rapiscan had parlayed the events into a $16-million sale of Multiple Eagle systems to a customer that the company declined to identify. It was a moment of clarity in a crowded field where companies have a hard time differentiating themselves from rivals, much less furnishing proof that their products will thwart a terrorist attack.
"The Indian customs officials sent photos of the seizure to us, and most of the engineers had them up on their desks for weeks," said Peter Kent, Rapiscan's vice president of government affairs. "For those who spent years of testing and failing, knowing it was being used and helping to protect against terror was exceptionally motivating."
Rapiscan is among the hundreds of companies that have lined up since the Sept. 11 attacks to sell equipment and software to improve security at seaports, airports and other vulnerable spots. The federal government spent $18 billion from 2001 to 2004 on homeland security, a congressional research report said, but there is no central supplier database. Instead, the companies - from tiny to huge - attend conferences and trade fairs to tout products and hire lobbyists to navigate the government and corporate bureaucracies.
The customers' changing needs have required Rapiscan and others to develop costly technology to respond to new types of threats. Before September 2001, "we had some work with customs duty controls and anti-smuggling work, but the biggest focus was drug interdiction," Kent said. "Now, you are looking for explosives, nuclear materials and chemical threats that do not have to be trafficked in large amounts. You need more sophisticated and higher-performing equipment."
The 400-employee operation came up with high-energy X-ray and thermal-neutron scanners that could see 98 percent of what was inside a cargo container, compared with the ability to see 40 percent to 50 percent. Even more sophisticated equipment is being tested, Kent said.
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/16/2006 18:05 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
oops - prolly should've hit WOT backgr'd..my bad
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/16/2006 18:08 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"Using equipment built by the Hawthorne, Calif., company, port inspectors in Bombay, India, found the cache at the bottom of a barrel of waste grease inside a cargo container."
Arghh! That was Willy's retirement grease!
Posted by: Tibor ||
01/16/2006 22:30 Comments ||
Top||
Powerful members of the UN Security Council agreed Monday that Iran must fully suspend its nuclear program, Britain's Foreign Office said following a meeting aimed at forging a common response to Tehran's decision to resume uranium enrichment activities. Diplomats also announced plans to call for an emergency meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency board of directors on Feb. 2-3 to discuss what action to take against Tehran for removing some U.N. seals from its main uranium enrichment facility in Natanz last week.
The Foreign Office said all five veto-wielding permanent members of the Security Council â the U.S., Britain, France, Russia and China â and Germany had shown "serious concern over Iranian moves to restart uranium enrichment activities." They agreed on the need for Iran to "return to full suspension," according to a statement. Ohhhh Iran... where do I start?? You made some really stupid moves, and I pray/think that your f*cked now. And the best is yet to come for Iran if they continue their current path, because I suspect a military attack by Israel at the end of March or beginning of April.
US intends to pound Pakistan and Iranâs nuclear installations
SLAMABAD: US intends to pound Pakistan and Iranâs nuclear bases through air strikes, former army chief General Mirza Aslam Beg has warned. Talking to Radio Tehran, General Beg said that the US and its western allies had understood that the peaceful usage of atomic energy was the recognised right of Iran on the basis of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. He said that the issue would not be presented before the UN Security Council, however, if it were then the United States would be defeated and Iran would be victorious. He said that Iran and Pakistan should hide their nuclear assets to protect them from possible US air strikes
US does not care for Pakistanâs sovereignty
ISLAMABAD: The United States does not care for the sovereignty of Pakistan and attacks the country whenever it wants, former Inter Services Intelligence director general Gen Hameed Gul has said. Talking to Radio Tehran, he said the United States wanted to hunt Al Qaeda remnants in Pakistan. There has been hot debate and protests on this issue in Pakistan but President Pervez Musharraf was evading it one way or the other, he said. He said that such policies had done great damage to the Pakistan Army and the people. He said the US recently attacked Bajaur Agency and killed 18 people
Posted by: john ||
01/16/2006 16:18 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I would be much comforted if Pakistan's nuclear arsenal suddenly ceased to exist. But I somehow suspect that the maunderings of a former thus-n-such of an acronym talking to one news source, as reported in another, is the kind of thing I should trust my dreams to.
The gloves are off. Or so it seemed on Monday when the Iranian National Security Adviser, Ali Larijani, sought to make an example of India's nuclear status as international double standards. India promptly hit back saying it regretted the reference.
The spokesman for the Ministry of External Affairs, Navtej Sarna, said, "We have consistently maintained that it is a State's sovereign right to enter into treaties and international agreements. Every State must fully comply with its international obligations and commitments and in a transparent manner. This is perhaps the first clear reference to the lack of transparency in Iran's nuclear programme.
"India," Sarna said, "is a responsible nuclear weapon State and has always been in compliance with its obligations under international treaties and agreements."
"We regret this reference to India," Sarna said frostily, indicating that the gloves were off.
Larijani was quoted as saying that the Americans did not trust Iran's nuclear programme because they fear that 10 years hence, Tehran could develop nuclear weapons.
But, in a statement that raised New Delhi's hackles, "compare that to India," Larijani said, in response to a question about why Iran is not trusted. "It (India) does have nuclear weapons but they have extensive relations in the nuclear field. This dual standard is detrimental to international security," Larijani said.
"Why should the world turn international right into a debate about intentions?" Larijani said.
Posted by: john ||
01/16/2006 14:50 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Why should the world turn international right into a debate about intentions?" Larijani said.
Hey, Jerkwad! Read your president's lips, as in "Wipe Israel off of the map." Emkay? Sounds like bad intentions to me. Morons.
KHAR, Bajaur Agency: The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the United States may not have achieved its prime target, the No 2 Al Qaeda leader Egyptian, Dr Ayman al-Zawahri, but the January 13 air attack on Damadola village in Bajaur Agency has certainly left a deep psychological impact on the tribesmen. The tribesmen believe that the attack was a warning not to host âforeign guestsâ in the future. âWe spent the next day and night in fear and when we heard planes we run out of our homes to avoid a second tragedy,â 35-year-old Sadiqullah Khan, whose house was destroyed in the attack, told Daily Times.
A security official in Khar, the regional headquarters of Bajaur Agency that overlooks the Afghan province of Kunar, a hotbed of anti-US militants, said it seemed unlikely that the target was achieved. âThe CIA has sent a clear message to all tribesmen along the Pak-Afghan border that they are aware of all activities and can launch strikes as precise as the Friday attack,â he told Daily Times on condition of anonymity. Sources said that the US had intelligence sources in almost every tribal region.
The January 13 attack was based on âintelligenceâ received from ground agents - both Afghans and Pakistanis. However, the information seemed sketchy according to intelligence experts. âI think the the information about the alleged presence of the high value target was poor. He (the agent) was not sure in which house the Al Qaeda leader was present,â the security official said. Pakistani counter-intelligence was looking for âUS agentsâ in the area and tribal sources said that expulsion of Afghan refugees from tribal areas along the Afghan border was part of the âlook-outâ for US-paid agents.
Damadola is regarded a stronghold of outlawed Tehrik Nifaz-e-Shariah Muhammadi (TNSM) that mobilised thousands of volunteers to fight with the Taliban against the Washington-backed Northern Alliance in Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks in the US. Fahim Wazir, Bajaur Agency chief administrator, does not believe the banned TNSM has widespread support in the area. However TNSM leader Maulana Faqir Muhammad hails from the same village and local tribal leaders do not agree with Wazirâs views.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/16/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The message our IO guys need to get out to the Pak villagers is "if you provide sanctuary to Zaw or Zark or any AQ you and your family will die in the hit".
Posted by 49 Pan 2006-01-14 11:48||
Good to see the boys read RB.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
01/16/2006 0:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
or understand missiles
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/16/2006 0:14 Comments ||
Top||
#3
If they didn't get the message when 7000 of their sons, brothers and cousins didn't return from Afghanistan after 9/11, what make you think 3 destroyed houses will deter them?
Posted by: ed ||
01/16/2006 0:25 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Ed-
What happens a thousand miles from home is Allan's will. What happens outside the front door is a very direct and personal warning to you.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
01/16/2006 7:38 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Michelle Malkin has a nice picture of the missile's remains!
Amnesty International recently launched a new media campaign, focusing on the detention centers at Guantanamo Bay used to hold al Qaeda prisoners. This comes roughly seven months after they compared these centers to the Soviet-era gulags, and shows that Amnesty International still has a soft spot for terrorists.
The target of this campaign is not just the centers, but the military tribunals as well. What this ignores is that many of these detainees are not exactly angels. In fact, some have committed out-and-out war crimes.
One Canadian detainee, Omar Ahmed Khadr, is slated to face a military tribunal for the murder of a U.S. Army medic. Medics are protected under the Geneva Conventions â deliberately killing a medic (or firing at a hospital) is a huge no-no.
An evidence summary for a detainee from Iraq, reported that he traveled to Pakistan with an Iraqi intelligence officer for purposes of launching a chemical mortar attack on the American and British embassies.
In at least a dozen cases, detainees released from Guantanamo Bay have re-joined al-Qaeda on the battlefield. One of these detainees, Rasul Kudayev, planned attacks in the Kabardino-Balkariya, in the Northern Caucasus that killed 45 people.
In these tribunals, numerous efforts are being taken to ensure that the detainees facing tribunals are fairly treated. In the case of Khadr, a recent hearing was held over press coverage of the case. In another instance, efforts are being made to ensure that a detainee who was a close associate of bin Laden has adequate counsel, particularly during portions of the trial where classified evidence is being used.
Amnesty International has also repeated the reports of torture and other mistreatment, reports which have been generally discredited (and in the cases where mistreatment did occur, corrective action was taken). For instance, a detainee was responsible for the Koran-flushing incident. Amnesty International also failed to mention that in some of the cases where abuse was alleged, there was provocation (in one instance, a detainee spat on a female interrogator).
This is also not the only time that Amnesty International has sided with people who could be charitably described as slimy. In 2001, Amnesty International filed suit to get CIA documents pertaining to the 1993 effort to take down Pablo Escobar, the leader of the Medellin drug cartel. Later that year, Amnesty International waged a campaign that ultimately resulted in the release of Ahmed Hikmat Shakir from Jordanian custody. Shakir is an Iraqi national who escorted at least one of the hijackers of the airliner that flew into the Pentagon through Malaysian customs in January 2000, prior to attending the al-Qaeda summit held that same month. When taken into custody in Qatar, Shakir had contact information for the safe houses used in the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center and information on the 1995 al-Qaeda plot to destroy airliners over the Pacific Ocean. Amnesty International has highlighted fifteen detainees in its alerts, and has claimed that eight have been released.
The Amnesty International campaign is one that has been remarkably resilient in the face of facts, and seems to take the word of terrorists at face value â despite the fact that al-Qaeda manuals instruct captured members to falsely claim torture. Given that several detainees, most notably Kudayev, have returned to the fight, the results of Amnesty Internationalâs campaign could have a negative impact on the human rights of innocent people.
Posted by: ed ||
01/16/2006 06:39 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
When did Pablo Escobar become a political prisoner? I must have missed that one.
#4
And AI's concern with the Geneva Convention rights of Specialist Matt Maupin whose government complies with the requirements of the convention [uniform, command chain, etc]? NONE!!!
#5
DB-
No probs - I realized while I was still in that AI had gone over to the Dark Side, and that they were now as permanently and thoroughly anti-American as any of our adversaries ever were. Thruling Trimble makes an excellent point which just backs me up.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
01/16/2006 12:45 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Mike, so you're another recovering former AI member, too? ;)
Remember when they said they wouldn't support Nelson Mandela because he wouldn't give up terrorism?
Iraqi officials were trying to persuade the chief judge in the trial of Saddam Hussein not to resign on Sunday after he announced he would quit in protest at government interference with the court. "The court has dispatched a senior judge today to visit him and try to dissuade him from resigning," one of the trial prosecutors, Mumkidh Taklif Fatlawi, said. "They are afraid of the damage this will do to the credibility of the tribunal."
Quoting an official statement to prosecutors from the court administration, he told Reuters: "Judge Rizgar Amin has tendered his resignation and according to the tribunal statutes it was referred to the Cabinet. The matter is still undecided." The killings of two defence lawyers have already prompted questions over the US-backed decision to hold the trial in the midst of bitter sectarian and ethnic conflict. A source close to Amin told Reuters officials were visiting him in his Kurdish home city of Suleimaniyah and trying to talk him out of quitting but he was reluctant to stay because Shiite leaders had criticised him for being "soft" on Saddam in court. "He tendered his resignation to the court a few days ago ... I am not sure if he will go back on his decision," said the source. "He had complaints from the government that he was being too soft in dealing with Saddam. They want things to go faster." The judge planned to explain his reasons for resigning after chairing the next hearing on January 24, the source said.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/16/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon opened his eyes twice on Monday after family members played a tape of his grandson's voice, aides said, raising hopes the 77-year-old stroke victim may be emerging from a coma. But Hadassah hospital, where Sharon has been treated since suffering a massive stroke on January 4, said relatives observed "eyelid movements" whose medical significance was unclear.
"(Sharon's son) Gilad brought in a cassette with the voice of Rotem, his eldest grandson, speaking to him, and he opened his eyes twice, each time for two or three minutes," one aide said. "They believe it was so short because he is still fuzzy from anesthesia yesterday," the aide said, referring to the tracheotomy, the insertion of a tube into Sharon's windpipe to help him breathe, that surgeons performed on Sunday. "But the doctors didn't see it, so it is hard to determine whether it is serious or whether they are just getting their hopes up."
Posted by: Fred ||
01/16/2006 13:29 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Ehud Olmert will remain Israel's interim prime minister until a March 28 general election, barring a change in the condition of the comatose Ariel Sharon, political sources said on Sunday.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/16/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Israel gave its approval Sunday for Arab residents of East Jerusalem to vote in this month's Palestinian election but followed up a ban on campaigning by Hamas by detaining four of its candidates. A total of 10 Hamas members were held by the Israeli police in Jerusalem after the Islamists made good on their vow to defy the ban.
The Palestinian leadership, whose ruling Fateh faction is facing a tight race with Hamas in the poll, also slammed the uneven playing field being imposed by Israel and urged it allow electioneering to take place unhindered. Israel's acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert formally submitted the proposals to Cabinet colleagues at only their second regular meeting since Premier Ariel Sharon suffered a massive stroke 11 days ago. "I propose to the Cabinet that the election in East Jerusalem be conducted on the same basis as in 1996 and 2005," Olmert told the meeting, in comments carried on Israeli radio.
Palestinians living in East Jerusalem, occupied and then annexed by Israel in 1967, were able to vote in the last parliamentary elections a decade ago and in last January's presidential election in post offices. However Olmert said Israel would not allow Hamas to campaign in occupied East Jerusalem, which Israel considers part of its "undivided eternal" capital, a position not recognised by the international community. "Under no circumstances will we permit Hamas to enter Jerusalem and carry out electioneering," he said.
That's because they don't regard Hamas as a political party, but as a terrorist organization. What's so complicated about that?
Britain, France and Germany are to call an emergency meeting of the UN nuclear watchdog in early February to discuss Iran's nuclear program, the UK Foreign Office has said. If my house was on fire and I called 911 and they said they'd get here in early February, I wouldn't be a happy little buckaroo. "The EU-3 informed the other participants of their intention to call for an extraordinary IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) board of governors meeting on the 2nd and 3rd of February," a Foreign Office spokesman told AFP on Monday. Reuters reports that European powers have also began drafting a resolution to have Iran referred to the UN Security Council next month over its nuclear work, diplomats said, after Russia and the West neared agreement in dealing with Tehran. Iran's resumption of nuclear research has sparked a flurry of Western diplomacy in pursuit of an IAEA vote that could see Iran slapped with UN sanctions. American and EU officials say Iran has failed to prove that its program to develop fuel for civilian atomic energy is not being used as a cover for producing nuclear weapons.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/16/2006 15:17 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
WESTERN governments face defeat in their attempts to stop Iran from pursuing its drive to become a nuclear power. Officials in London and Washington now privately admit that they must face the painful fact that there is nothing they can do, despite deep suspicions that Tehran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons under cover of researching nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
Yesterday a defiant Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said his country would not be deflected from its right to develop nuclear technology by referral to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions. "If they want to destroy the Iranian nation's rights by that course, they will not succeed," he said, adding that Tehran did not need nuclear weapons because they are only used by nations who "want to solve everything through the use of force".
Publicly, the US and Britain, the two countries that have adopted the most hawkish stance, are pressing for international action to stop Iran. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said last week that it was time for the UN to confront Iran's "defiance" over its nuclear programme, while British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw insisted that sanctions were now "on the table".
But behind the scenes there is no stomach for a fight. The US is the only country that could take military action. But with the US military already seriously overstretched in Iraq and with the mid-term congressional elections approaching there is no impetus in the White House or in Congress for another military adventure. "Iran would be a far tougher country to try to attack than Iraq. It is three times as big and has highly motivated armed forces," a Foreign Office diplomat said yesterday.
With military action off the agenda, several senior European officials expressed the view last week that there is widespread pessimism that diplomatic attempts to persuade Tehran to dismantle its nuclear programme stand any chance of success.
Sanctions, too, are being dismissed by government officials. "Sanctions hardly ever work anyway and can harm the people rather than the government," a source close to the Foreign Office said. "Anything else we do is highly unlikely to divert Tehran away from developing nuclear technology."
The crisis over Iran came to a head last week when Iranian nuclear officials broke 52 seals that had ensured for 14 months that three uranium enrichment research facilities could not be used while Tehran negotiated with the International Atomic Energy Authority under an agreement brokered with the EU.
It was a bitter failure by the EU, which had taken the lead over the Americans and put its faith in a policy of "constructive engagement". Led by Britain, France and Germany, the Europeans had offered Iran economic and political inducements if it would abandon its nuclear efforts.
But the policy of trying to steer Iran towards a more moderate course backfired in June when Iranians elected as president the hardline Ahmadinejad. Since then he has outraged international opinion by describing the Holocaust as a myth, calling for the state of Israel to be "wiped off the map", and declaring that Iran would not back down "one iota" from the nuclear path.
The UN is unlikely to fare any better than the EU. The organisation has no armed forces and its structure lends itself to interminable delays.
Though Britain will host a meeting of senior officials from Russia, China, the US, France and Germany tomorrow to try to build a consensus, a board meeting of the IAEA, the UN's nuclear watchdog, will not take place until early next month, even though it is billed as an "emergency" meeting.
EU officials say in public they hope the IAEA will report Iran to the Security Council to impose sanctions.
OPTIONS FOR ACTION
LAND INVASION
With UN approval out of the question, the US would probably have to go it alone, with even loyal ally Britain a non-starter. US forces are already overstretched in Iraq, and with Congressional mid-term elections approaching, there is no stomach in Washington for another foreign military adventure.
AIR STRIKES
More feasible than a land invasion, but the preferred option of only a small group of neo-conservatives in the US administration. The model would be Israel's successful air attack on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor in June 1981. But the political fall-out in the Arab world would be immense.
SANCTIONS
The official preferred option of the US and the European Union. But likely to be stalled in the Security Council by Russia and China. Could be counter-productive since Iran would react by cutting off oil supplies to the West. Another option is limited sanctions against Iran's leaders, such as travel restrictions and the freezing of bank accounts.
SPORT
Iran could be banned from international sports events. Conservative MP Michael Ancram has called for the Iranian team to be expelled from this year's World Cup. Any such ban would create outrage among the football-crazy Iranians. FIFA, soccer's governing body, said last month that it would not expel Iran.
COMPROMISE
Still on the cards despite the bellicose noises coming from Tehran. The Iranians have a reputation for saying no when they mean maybe. A possible deal could involve Russia making nuclear fuel which could be used only for peaceful purposes on its own territory as part of a joint venture with Iran. Would need a face-saving formula to satisfy Iran's national pride.
Posted by: ed ||
01/16/2006 12:03 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Does anyone else believe that Iran poses LESS of a threat to US national security than is being touted by the media and general commentary? While I anticipate that the MSM and international bodies will attribute our lack of military response to the fact that we "do not have the stomach" to confront Iran, couldn't this simply be a case in which we perceive our interests as suffering less than other affected bodies? Presumably, Iran knows it faces nuclear annihilation if it were to attack our interests in Iraq (or anywhere, for that matter) with a nuclear first strike. Clearly, Iran is already interfering in Iraq to the extent that it can, through covert conventional means. So how, exactly, does a nuclear Iran represent an increased threat to US interests?
Yes, of course it is a terrible precedent to allow nations to pursue nuclear weapons, but that precedent has already been set by Pakistan, India, North Korea, etc.
I'm just positing alternative theories here. I'm not arguing that a nuclear Iran is a GOOD thing, but it does appear to me that the US has delegated the handling of this issue to those who will be most directly affected (e.g. Eurabia). My question is whether that decision may have merit, and whether ultimately Europe (plus Turkey) will be forced into acting, despite their protestations to the contrary.
#2
The "conclusion" is given, that we can't do anything - oh woe is us, then it wanks awhile, then it lays out some options - poo-pooing each in turn. This piece is a phreakin' disaster, not to mention a Mullah wank-fest. Bite me, Scotsman.
#3
You have to remember - this is the *Scotsman*, one of those quagmire-predicting British fishpaper suppliers - and they're *all* fishpaper suppliers - that routinely predict American collapse in every sphere (military, social, economic). Let's take a look at the following Scotsman "news" article from May 2003:
THE war may be over but the battle is far from won. Declaring an end to major combat activity in Afghanistan, US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld has promised a new era of "stabilisation".
But while the message he delivered in Kabul last week may have gladdened the war-weary American public, it has been met with disbelief by the US military.
Although Operation Enduring Freedom - launched 18 months ago in the wake of the devastating September 11 attacks in the US - has come to a close, the American death toll from the conflict shows no sign of abating.
Despite the toppling of the Taliban, killings, explosions, shootings and targeted attacks on US forces are a daily occurrence.
The number of American service personnel who have died in Afghanistan since operation Enduring Freedom began in October 2001 is now 30. But not a single soldier was killed as the result of hostile action in the first three months of the main offensive. Recently the frequency of casualties has risen ominously, and in April alone four soldiers were killed.
In private, US special forces officers are now saying that Afghanistan is in danger of developing into another Vietnam. They see ominous parallels between the heavy-handed attempts at "pacification" which are alienating Afghan villagers and similar ham-fisted actions that turned the Vietnamese against the Americans.
And the situation is made even worse by fatal errors, such as an air strike near Shkin in eastern Afghanistan that was meant for a group of rebels but which hit a house, killing 11 members of a family as they slept.
In Afghanistan, as in Vietnam, the Americans have decided to confront an ideology which is perceived to be a global threat, only to find their vastly superior forces shadow-boxing guerrillas who can take full advantage of local knowledge.
Instead of neighbouring China, which gave help to the Vietnamese, there is Pakistan, whose government is either unable or unwilling to prevent its wild border territory from providing safe havens for al-Qaeda.
Washington is talking about pulling out its troops next year. But the situation will have to improve dramatically if it is not to find itself mired as it was in Vietnam for 10 years, according to analysts.
Andrew Kennedy, head of the Asia Programme at the London-based Royal United Services Institute, says: "The US is in an awkward situation. If it pulled out now it would raise a storm of criticism. Yet its most recent military operation didnât really achieve anything or capture anybody significant.
"If they were to capture Mullah Omar, whom I am convinced is still in Afghanistan, Washington could perhaps declare some kind of closure. But Mullah Omar is still at large."
Kennedy sees the US as trying to avoid the "bunkered-down mentality" that overcame the Russians in Afghanistan as they were increasingly tormented by the Mujahedin.
But in the mainly Pashtun south there is mounting evidence that the ousted Taliban, allies of Osama bin Laden are making a comeback.
One Afghan army commander said: "Six months ago the attacks were sporadic but today there is a new organisation to this Taliban."
And while the Taliban hone their guerrilla tactics, the Americans seem to be getting nowhere. Six weeks ago around 1,000 US Special Forces took part in the largest terrorist-seeking operation for a year, called Operation Valiant Strike.
"Weâre trying to get the leadership," an American official said, referring to the elusive trio, Osama bin Laden, the one-eyed Mullah Omar, and wanted warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. "Somebodyâs going to tell us where they are." But the Americans missed all three, and so far no one has come forward with vital information despite the lavish rewards on offer.
The most recent fatal attack on the Americans, nine days ago near Shkin, was particularly brazen. About 20 rebels opened fire on a platoon of American and Afghan soldiers in broad daylight, killing one American soldier and wounding at least six others before retreating across the border to Pakistan. A second American soldier later died of wounds.
Along with the human cost, the financial cost is mounting too. At the end of February Pentagon officials said that Afghanistan cost $750m a month out of $1.6bn a month the US now spends in its global fight against terrorism. The US has 8,000 troops in Afghanistan as part of an 11,000-strong coalition force from 23 countries.
Equally worryingly, the rebels have adopted a deliberate policy of targeting civilian aid workers for the first time. On March 27 Ricardo Munguia of the Red Cross became the first aid worker to be killed in Afghanistan for five years. He was "executed" after being stopped near Kandahar by gunmen, who made a call by satellite phone to a "commander" who ordered him to be killed.
The next day a leading Taliban commander, Mullah Dadullah Akhund, claimed responsibility for the killing, and said he was acting on the orders of Mullah Omah to destabilise the government.
Since the murder of Munguia, more than 10 international aid agencies have pulled out of Kandahar. Several other areas of Afghanistan are also closed to international aid workers because of insecurity.
In an attempt to win the âhearts and mindsâ war, the US is starting to deploy some of its troops in so-called Provincial Reconstruction Teams in key urban areas to assist in the rebuilding of Afghanistan.
But the teams are dependent on local warlords to provide security and may do little to enhance the Kabul governmentâs authority. Ahmed Wali Karzai, the Afghan presidentâs brother, commented recently: "There have been no significant changes for people. People are tired of seeing small, small projects. I donât know what to say to people anymore."
The US insists it is winning and intends to stay. The question, however, is how long it is willing to see the death toll mount from a guerrilla war many experts believe it is incapable of winning.
The tactic is to distort cautious remarks by American officials and combine them with hostile views by anti-American polemicists. I recommend you save your limited time and read stuff like this no more than once a month, just to remind yourself about how ideology- rather than fact-driven these people are. They *are* stupid and ignorant, but the reason they advance these fatuous arguments is not because they're stupid and ignorant, but because they don't have much other material to work with.
#4
Bottom line is that the Scotsman is not in the news business - it is in the business of printing religious tracts. The fundamentalist Scotsman position is that America is headed for collapse, and every news item out there is an indicator of imminent disaster.
#6
I have a question. One country with the most to fear from a nuclear armed Iran is Russia. Yet Russia seem oblivous to this and assist Iran in their efforts. You'd think the Russians would have learned from their cooperation with Hitler, but apparently they have not. A nuclear armed Iran, with mad mullahs at the helm will turn the Russian terrorist problem into a nightmare overnight and will ultimately result in a very bloody war.
My question is.. how is it that the Russians do not seem to grasp that they have far more to fear than the west? A kindergartner could predict that once armed with nukes that the mad mullahs will turn them toward Moscow. So why do they assist them?
#7
I expect Iran to be an issue in the fall elections and the result to indicate that the US has a bit more stomach than expectedas Bush increases the GOP seats in both houses for the fourth election.
The American people will recognize that the importance of Iran having nuclear weapons is due to the belligerence of the regime. Were Iran a less aggressive country, we might learn to live with their holding nukes as in Pakistan. However, they are sure to use the threat of use of their nukes to influence policy in every country in the Gulf in their favor and toward the extension of violent jihad throughout the world. To fail to act now will only make the ultimate reckoning more expensive, in blood as well as treasure. This will be the national subtext of the election. The people will decide as they did in 2002.
#10
2b: One country with the most to fear from a nuclear armed Iran is Russia. Yet Russia seem oblivous to this and assist Iran in their efforts.
Actually, they're assisting Iran because they figure this will help weaken Uncle Sam. They think of Iran as a buffer state against American ambitions in the region. Note that Iran does not border Russia, now that the Soviet Union has dissolved. In fact, the best possible outcome for Russia would be for the US to fight a war with Iran, weakening both in the process. As far as the Russians are concerned, an American war with China would be better, but Iran will do.
2b: You'd think the Russians would have learned from their cooperation with Hitler, but apparently they have not.
The Soviets did not *cooperate* with Hitler - they actively backed him, and helped him to circumvent limitations (imposed by the terms of the Armistice) on Germany's post-WWI rearmament. Their hope was the same as it is now - to weaken two of their potential adversaries by having them fight each other. In WWII, the Soviets only half-succeeded, since the Germans rolled up Western Europe a little too quickly, and then turned their attention to Eastern Europe.
But they really have little to worry about - as long as Uncle Sam stays involved in the region, Iran's power will be limited by none other than - Uncle Sam. If we step away, Russia is in deep trouble. But they don't think that we will step away - they figure that even if we don't attack Iran, we will restrain them from going after the Gulf states, and getting a monopoly on Middle Eastern oil.
#12
A nuclear armed Iran is not a direct threat to the west. They are not going to launch missiles against London, Paris or NY. The threat is a regional one. They want to be the regional hegemon. They want to control the Gulf and consequently the world's oil supply. They have similar aims along their northern border in the Caspian basin.
A nuclear armed Iran would be largely immune to military retaliations and would continue to increase it's influnce over Gulf states. Possibly by invasion as it has already with several Gulf islands but more likely by engineering Shiia takeovers of places like Qatar and their resources.
I suggest the endgame for Tehran is to gain control of the oil and gas under the gulf and southern Caspian, much of which is undeveloped due to boundary disputes.
#13
If we step away, Russia is in deep trouble. But they don't think that we will step away.
That is a valid point. But giving a gun to your enemy in the hopes that a policeman will prevent him from shooting you is simply not wise.
#15
The model you should use to understand Iran, is the Soviet Union, for several reasons, not least they have deliberately patterned their 'revolution' and state institutions on the Russian Soviet system.
In general Iranians believe in their revolution, as much as Russians believed in world revolution and the victory of the proletariat, i.e. not much.
That's not to say there aren't true believers and Ahmadinejad may be one of them. But he is not a Stalin in absolute control, he is more like a khruschov(sp?), someone at the top but with power shared amoungst various centers. Even if Ahmadinejad want's to bring armageddon down on Iran, by nuking Israel, I doubt he could at this stage. Perhaps he will amass power the way Stalin did in the 1920's, he is certainly trying. OTOH the recent plane crash wiped out some of his important supporters in the RG and was IMO unlikely to have been an accident.
And BTW, this is the reason Iraq is so important. It's the only possible regional counterweight to Iran in the Gulf. I worry more about Iran getting a chokehold on the gulf than I do about them nuking Israel, becuase I don't think they will try and if they do try chances are Israel's anti-missile systems will stop them.
#1
The only action the UN leadership knows about is in deciding what 5 star resturant they're going to eat lunch today at or what action the visiting assistant secretary for refugees is going to have with that eight year old tonight. Close the damn place down and start over, please.
Iran announced yesterday it would stage a conference to question the authenticity of the Holocaust, a move certain to stir international anger.
The statement follows a series of inflammatory remarks by Iran's hawkish president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has described the murder of six million Jews by the Nazis in the second world war as a myth and called for Israel to be "wiped off the map". He has also suggested an alternative Jewish state should be set up in Europe or Alaska.
An Iranian foreign ministry spokesman said the proposed conference would examine the Holocaust's "scientific aspects and its repercussions". The description echoes Mr Ahmadinejad's characterisation of Holocaust denial earlier this month as a "scientific debate".
It is not clear who will attend. But following a chorus of anti-Zionist rhetoric since the president was elected last June, the announcement will trigger suspicions that the aim is to deny that the Holocaust happened. Last month, Mr Ahmadinejad dismissed it as a concoction invented to justify Israel's existence in the heart of the Muslim world. His comments drew widespread condemnation. At a meeting with President George Bush last week, the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, described Mr Ahmadinejad's position on the Holocaust as unacceptable.
At a rare news conference on Saturday, however, the Iranian president was unrepentant. He described Mrs Merkel and Mr Bush as terrorists and war criminals, who would soon be put on trial for their support of Israel.
Describing the Holocaust as a question that had to be cleared up by scholars, he added: "My question was very clear. On the pretext of the killing of Jews in Europe, are they supporting the aggression and massacres [of Israel]? They will not intimidate me. Instead they have to answer me. If you started this killing of the Jews, you have to make amends yourself. This is very clear. It's based on laws and legal considerations. If you committed a mistake or a crime, why should others pay for it? Those who murdered [the Jews] should permit them to go back to their own fatherlands. That should be the end of it. You shouldn't say that nobody is permitted to say anything about this."
Mr Ahmadinejad initially provoked an international storm by calling for Israel's removal for the map last October.
His remarks repeated what had been official Iranian policy since the 1979 Islamic revolution. Support for the Palestinian cause is a central pillar in the ideology of Iran's Islamic regime, which regards Israel's existence as an affront to Muslims.
However, Mr Ahmadinejad has surpassed previous Iranian leaders in consistently attacking what he sees as the intellectual and moral basis for Israel's existence. Under his more liberal predecessor, Mohammad Khatami, anti-Zionist rhetoric was toned down. Iranian officials said they would respect a Middle East peace settlement as long as it was acceptable to the Palestinians.
Some 6 million Jews died in the Holocaust. However, deniers claim that Jewish deaths during the war were not caused by genocide. The most prominent denier of recent years is historian David Irving, in custody in Austria, where Holocaust denial is illegal. Mohammed Mahdi Akef, leader of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, has also called the Holocaust a 'myth'.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/16/2006 00:40 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
They simply need the German government to attend, and to make one statement:
"Yes, we did, in fact, try to kill all the Jews. This is commonly known as "genocide." We admitted it then, and we don't deny it now."
A growing row between MP Walid Jumblatt and the Hizbullah-Amal alliance threatened to escalate even further over the weekend, urging Premier Fouad Siniora to step in and encourage boycotting Shiite ministers to return to work. In his efforts to end ongoing wrangling, Siniora contacted Speaker Nabih Berri, Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and Jumblatt.
Syria owns Berri and Iran owns Nasrallah. I'm rooting for Wally.
Siniora and Berri will be on the same flight to Kuwait Tuesday; President Emile Lahoud will be traveling steerage separately Monday to pay his condolences to Kuwaiti officials on the passing of the country's emir.
Emile still hasn't taken the hint to vacate the premises. Wonder if they'll change the locks while he's in Kuwait?
Siniora urged both sides to end their inflammatory media campaigns "to save the country more hazards at this sensitive crossroads."
"Can't we all pretend there's nothing wrong? If we do, maybe nothing will be wrong!"
"I am sure we are heading toward conciliation," Siniora said, "because the parties involved have demonstrated willingness to ease the tension. Our main concern is to win back our colleagues in the Cabinet to tackle the challenges facing our country together."
More infighting at the link...
Posted by: Fred ||
01/16/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Red Dog ||
01/16/2006 9:05 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Following statements from Jumblatt over the weekend describing Hizbullah's arms as "deceitful," the resistance issued a harsh reply saying, "Such a description has crossed all red lines and breached values. If shame was personified, it would be named Walid Jumblatt."
Walid vs Hezbollah
tune in tomorrow for the next episode of..
Wally, go figure and go wrinkles.
Posted by: Red Dog ||
01/16/2006 13:06 Comments ||
Top||
A Hizbullah official described U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, David Welch, as a "depraved low employee" in the U.S. administration, and accused the U.S. of interfering in Lebanon's internal affairs.
"Depraved"? He didn't seem depraved when I went to lunch with him. We had the baked babies, if I recall, with a nice beaujoulais...
Talking to The Daily Star Sunday, Sayyed Nawaf Musawi, Hizbullah's officer for external relations, said Welch's visit to Beirut Saturday represented the "worst shape of interference in Lebanon's internal affairs."
A visit? That's interference in internal affairs?
"The price of this visit, which aimed at delivering U.S. instructions for Lebanese officials, was the injury of 15 of Lebanon's students. It was a despicable American step to try and create problems and chaos in Lebanon, and to try and instigate the sectarian feelings and tension in the country," Musawi said.
So lemme get this straight: Welch shows up for talks with Leb officials. Hezbollah and Amal and the rest of the Syrian puppet organizations call out their minions for a few riots. 15 of the little bastards manage to get themselves thumped or hosed, and it's Welch's fault? Isn't that a stretch, even for Arab blame passing?
The Hizbullah official added that the U.S. move represented part of the American plan for the region. "They want to use Lebanon as a bargaining card and instrument of pressure in their plans for the region," Musawi said.
Sounds like he's suffering from delusions of importance...
Welch, who left Beirut for France Sunday morning to meet with leader of Parliament majority MP Saad Hariri in Paris, denied accusation of interfering in Lebanon's internal affairs Saturday, and said following a meeting with Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora: "I doubt that anyone can seriously say that the U.S. is interfering in Lebanese politics ... If anything our motive is to protect Lebanon, not interfere inside Lebanon," he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/16/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
just like Bolton - doing something right when the usual suspects whine and stamp their little feet
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/16/2006 11:33 Comments ||
Top||
Syria risks further UN Security Council action unless it steps up cooperation with the probe into the murder of ex-Lebanese premier Rafik Hariri, a US envoy warned on Saturday, sparking a furious reaction from Damascus. âSyria must cease obstructing the investigation into the assassination of Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and must cooperate unconditionallyâ with the UN probe, said David Welch, the US pointman for the Middle East. âThe United States calls upon the Syrian regime to respond positively to the requests... If Syrian obstruction continues we will not hesitate to refer this matter back to the Security Council.â
The UN commission of inquiry probing the murder of Hariri in a February 14 Beirut bomb blast and the United States have repeatedly demanded Syria steps up its cooperation. The probe asked to interview President Bashar al-Assad but no response has been forthcoming.
I thought he'd said "no" already? He was washing his hair that day, or something...
Last month, the UN Security Council passed a resolution endorsing a six-month extension of the murder probe and renewing its call for Syriaâs full cooperation with the investigation. The resolution also authorised technical assistance to Lebanon to help authorities probe recent murders of anti-Syrian politicians.
âThe declarations of Mr Welch are a new attempt aimed at increasing the morale of anti-Syrian forces who are opposed to the stability of Lebanon,â said a Syrian official, quoted by the state news agency Sana. âThe objective of such declarations is to increase the pressure on Syria which is calling for stability and global peace.â
Welchâs call echoed similar comments by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice earlier in the week, who said Washington intends âto refer this matter back to the Security Council if Syrian obstruction continues.â Speaking after meeting Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora, Welch said the US would reject any âdeals or compromisesâ that would relieve Syria of its obligations, adding that the investigation must be taken to its âultimate conclusionsâ.
âWe firmly believe that Syria must cease its interference, including through the use of local proxies, in Lebanonâs internal affairs,â he said. Welch earlier met with Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir but has pointedly not arranged talks with pro-Damascus President Emile Lahoud, Lebanese officials said. His visit was marked by anti-US demonstrations led by the Shiite militant group Hezbollah which prompted the use of tear gas and water cannon by police.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/16/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
TEHERAN - Iran said yesterday diplomacy was the only way to resolve the impasse over its nuclear programme but that it would not reverse its widely criticised decision to resume atomic research after a break of more than two years.
As they try to run out the clock ...
âDiplomacy is the only clear answer to the current situation,â Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told a weekly news conference. âThere is no legal basis for referring Iran to the Security Council. But if that were to happen Iran is not afraid,â he said.
"Should we see American cruise missiles and fighter-bombers, then we'll be afraid."
Asefi declined to clarify whether Iran planned to carry out small-scale uranium enrichment - the most sensitive part of the atomic fuel cycle - as part of its research work. âIranâs decision to resume nuclear research activities is irreversible,â he said.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/16/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
If there is no way they are going to reverse their decisions, what do we need to talk about? They are doing their damnest to pick a fight. It might mean $5 gas, but what are our alternatives?
Republican and Democratic senators said on Sunday the United States may ultimately have to undertake a military strike to deter Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, but that should be the last resort.
Keep in mind that a "last resort" tends to become a continuously receding target...
... hey! Where'd the goalposts go? ...
"That is the last option. Everything else has to be exhausted. But to say under no circumstances would we exercise a military option, that would be crazy," Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona said on CBS's "Face the Nation."
Thank you for today's statement of the obvious...
Needed to be said tho, in light of the history of European statements on Iraq and now Iran. And it's a warning to the Chinese and Russians.
Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said there are sensitive elements of Iran's nuclear program, which, if attacked, "would dramatically delay its development. But that should not be an option at this point. We ought to use everything else possible keep from getting to that juncture."
Apparently Evan hasn't been paying attention. We've been doing everything possible to keep from getting to that juncture, which to date has consisted in large part of letting the Euros smite them repeatedly with soft power. So far it hasn't worked, but the Boyz from Brussels are getting it out of their system and eventually they'll be ready to move on to the hard stuff: the Security Council, maybe a stern letter of admonishment. At some point, when the methane's cleared, we'll blockade the Straits of Hormuz. That will cause the Ramsey Clark kiddies to run shrieking through the streets and construct enormous puppets. Evan Bayh and the rest of the Dems will complain that we should have exhasusted all options before taking such a step, even though all options have been demonstrably exhausted.
#2
The PC/PDeniable word of the week is PLUTONIUM, as in iff the MSM-UNIAEA verifies that Iran has no plutonium ergo Iran de facto has no bomb/nuke -URANIUM, etal., as Marvin Martian's infamous EU286 explosive space modulator-r-r-r, undeniably and unconditionally but only coincidently doesn't = does qualify Iran as having the per se capability for a nuke(s). Meanwhile, in Solyent Green-happy North Korea, ala CBSNEWS.com, a Nork General has reportedly informed Dan Rather that North Korea "currently has nuclear weapons", that as long as the USA engages in hostile policies against NorKor WAR BETWEEN NK AND USA "IS INEVITABLE", and will fight any US invasion with any means necessary, or words to that effect. Ala O'REILLY, the policrats and Socialists of the Radical Left that is in curr control of the Dem Party wants America to give up its sovereignty, economy and governing authority to a coalition of international states, which of course in all likelihood will end being membered and dominated by Russia-China. a nuclearized IRAN is just as dangerous and risque' to the regional/global hegemonic ambitions of Russia-China as any similar North Korea is to same, andor at least to CHINA. The war scenario still exists that America and NATO may have to invade Iran just to prevent it from being dominated by Russo-Chinese interventionist milfors. The Lefties as usual will be on all sides, and be for everyone and no one at the same time.
#3
Evan Bayh is, of course, lying through his teeth. Those of us who have been watching for 2.5+ years know that Henry Hyde, and the courageous House Pubs and a very few Democrats who put US Security above partisanship, put together the authorization needed for Bush to act - and DeLay pushed it through. Bayh, and the other like-minded gutless turds in the US Senate BDS Kool Aid Krowd Zoo of Dhimmidonks and RINOs, successfully dithered and obstructed the Joint Resolution (for 18+ months, IIRC) and finally succeeded in pulling all of the teeth and voting for a limp-dick "Sense of the Senate" navel-gazing piece of fluffy stuff which authorizes nothing.
All of the RB posts about what should be done, how to do it, etc -- the lot of them -- rely totally upon President Bush standing alone doing the Right Thing. He must do it alone because of Senate cowardice and partisan games, MSM obfuscation, mischaracterization, BDS memery, and outright lies - such as printing Bayh's lie in this article. The BDS Moonbat Vultures have been waiting for an issue with which they might succeed in impeaching Bush. Major Military action against Iran without express and explicit US Congressional authority will likely be it.
If Bush acts, he does it on his own, at his own peril, and he does it for all - including those who revile him and will damn him regardless of success or failure.
#5
Actually Sea that was right on topic. The dems think we're so safe they can afford to posture without any real consequences. But as the game yesterday showed, there are no sure things - if we are going to get through this crisis re: Iran without the moral, econonomic, political and environmental consequences of a massive military strike, it's going to take all the skill and focus we have got as a nation.
Which, at the moment, doesn't seem to be much if you watch what Congress has been like lately. I agree w/ .com - once again Bush may need to act despite the shortsightedness of many.
I deeply hope it doesn't come to a military strike, although I know anything less is likely not to work. McCain is right that the consequences of our doing that without a coalition really behind it will be significant. And if nuclear weapons are used, it will have many consequences for us. Still, what needs to be done needs to be done.
I do not envy the president, who will indeed bear the burden of whatever decisions he makes - perhaps to the point of prosecution in some world court.
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
01/16/2006 9:27 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Mike - For a brain-bender, check out this PP thread (where that image came from)... bring a salt shaker - artists aren't all that well connected to reality and have a higher than avg logical discombobulation - resulting in a tendency toward conspiracy BS and, well, general freakazoidism, lol... Plenty to laugh at, regardless. ;-)
#9
Apparently Evan hasn't been paying attention. We've been doing everything possible to keep from getting to that juncture, which to date has consisted in large part of letting the Euros smite them repeatedly with soft power.
I've heard rumors they've threatened to break out the comfy chair, and may begin poking Iranian officials with a folded pillow. Officials have, however, denied offering them cake.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
01/16/2006 9:49 Comments ||
Top||
#10
When a party fades to oblivion it does so by pursuing a totally stupid policy to extremes. The Democrats in the civil war, the Republicans in the great depression. I don't know what the whigs did, but I am sure it was equally stupid as was the Federalist fall in 1800. The Democrats are setting themselves up for irrelevance for a long time.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
LAGOS - Several people were killed when suspected ethnic militants stormed a Nigerian oil platform on Sunday, extending a three-week spate of attacks which has hit output in the worldâs eighth largest exporter. Heavily armed men invaded Royal Dutch Shellâs Benisede oil flow station in six speed boats, exchanged fire with troops, torched two housing blocks, damaged oil processing facilities and 
British Premier Tony Blair held here [in London] today a meeting with Prince Saud Al-Faisal, the Foreign Minister. During the meeting, Prince Saud conveyed to the Premier the greetings of the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz and Crown Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz, Deputy Premier, Minister of Defense and Aviation and Inspector General. They also discussed bilateral relations between the two friendly countries, ways of their enhancement in all fields and the developments of the situations in the Middle East particularly at the Iraqi and the Palestinian arenas. The meeting was attended by Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf bin Abdulaziz, Saudi Ambassador to the United Kingdom and Ireland and a number of British officials. Prince Saud also met here today with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. During the meeting, they discussed bilateral cooperation and topics of mutual concern. The meeting was attended by the Saudi Ambassador and a number of officials of the British Foreign Office.
Prime Minister 
GEORGE Galloway's reputation sank even lower yesterday after his spokesman admitted that the Respect MP's appearance on Celebrity Big Brother had turned into a "worst-case scenario". The maverick politician has attracted fierce criticism for choosing to go into the Big Brother house. His standing has suffered following days of controversial antics, which have seen the former Labour rebel impersonate a cat and dress up as a vampire. 
North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il is believed to have left 
The Swedish government is under fire from a human rights group for allowing the army to take part in joint exercises with the Russian army. In "Operation Snowflake" Swedish and Russian troops will be working together in exercises on Swedish soil. According to Robdrt HÃ¥rdh, secretary general of the Swedish Helsinki Committee for Human Rights, Russian defence minister Sergej Ivanov has referred to the exercises as "training for fighting terrorism" â a Russian euphemism for the war in Chechnya. The Swedish military says it is a "peacekeeping operation". The Russian soldiers taking part come from the 138th Motorized Rifle Brigade, which according to HÀrdh is guilty of serious human rights abuses in Chechnya.
KHAR, Bajaur Agency: The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the United States may not have achieved its prime target, the No 2 Al Qaeda leader Egyptian, Dr 
Iraqi officials were trying to persuade the chief judge in the trial of Saddam Hussein not to resign on Sunday after he announced he would quit in protest at government interference with the court. "The court has dispatched a senior judge today to visit him and try to dissuade him from resigning," one of the trial prosecutors, 
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon opened his eyes twice on Monday after family members played a tape of his grandson's voice, aides said, raising hopes the 77-year-old stroke victim may be emerging from a coma. But Hadassah hospital, where Sharon has been treated since suffering a massive stroke on January 4, said relatives observed "eyelid movements" whose medical significance was unclear. 
A growing row between MP 
A Hizbullah official described U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, 
Syria risks further UN Security Council action unless it steps up cooperation with the probe into the murder of ex-Lebanese premier 
TEHERAN - Iran said yesterday diplomacy was the only way to resolve the impasse over its nuclear programme but that it would not reverse its widely criticised decision to resume atomic research after a break of more than two years.
Republican and Democratic senators said on Sunday the United States may ultimately have to undertake a military strike to deter Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, but that should be the last resort.
