| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| John Bolton: Russia's Loading of Nuke Fuel Into Iran Plant Means Aug. 21 Deadline for Israel |
| 2010-08-15 |
| Excerpt: Once the fuel rods are loaded, Bolton told Fox News on Friday afternoon, "it makes it essentially immune from attack by Israel. Because once the rods are in the reactor an attack on the reactor risks spreading radiation in the air, and perhaps into the water of the Persian Gulf." |
| Posted by:Uncle Phester |
| #12 TOPIX/NEWSMAX > EAGLEBURGER: IRAN NUKES WILL TRIGGER WORLD WAR. Also from TOPIX > RAMALLAH ONLINE > [Juan Cole] AN ISRAELI ATTACK ON IRAN WOULD REDUCE BARACK OBAMA TO A ONE-TERM PRESIDENT. plus * RAMALLAH ONLINE > US REPUBS PLAN ISRAEL-IRAN APOCALYPSE + COLAPSE OF US ECONOMY. * SAME RAMALLAH > MATERIALISM THAT SUSTAINS THE WESTERN DEMOCRACIES IS EXHAUSTING ITSELF: FREDERICK TOBEN. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2010-08-15 23:52 |
| #11 Netanyahu better, linker. After all, it won't hurt Bambi if Iran destroys Israel. In fact, I bet he'll smile. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2010-08-15 20:44 |
| #10 The question remains does Netanyahu and his party have the brass or does B.Hussain own him...? IMHO if they do not react - Iran eventually will. Isn't that what they have promised for years... |
| Posted by: linker 2010-08-15 20:25 |
| #9 Popcorn Fred? |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2010-08-15 19:11 |
| #8 The health effects of radiation from bombing an operational nuclear reactor would be small, although over a large number of people. Studies of Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors, who got much larger radiation doses, show a reduction in life expectancy of less than 4 months. Link |
| Posted by: phil_b 2010-08-15 18:51 |
| #7 Which way do the prevailing winds blow? If they blow the radiation over Russia then what's the problem? |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2010-08-15 16:15 |
| #6 The clock, it is ticking. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-08-15 14:56 |
| #5 What you mean, abu, is that the Japanese would have gone the way of the Ainu they shamed or killed into near extinction. Okinawa was just the tip of the iceberg to what would happen on the main island. The bombings were horrible, but forced even the Military in Japan to accept there was no chance of winning. |
| Posted by: Charles 2010-08-15 03:49 |
| #4 there is a rather compelling argument that residents of Nagasaki and Hiroshima as well as those in the rest of Japan are significantly better today as the result of the bombings 65 years ago this month than they would be if those bombings had not taken place and conventional invasion had taken place instead. |
| Posted by: abu do you love 2010-08-15 02:30 |
| #3 The present day ones, you mean ... Yup. There's a price to be paid for being on the losing side. I strongly desire to see Iran on the losing side, as soon as possible or next week, whichever comes first. |
| Posted by: trailing wife in Germany 2010-08-15 02:25 |
| #2 After all, the residents of Nagasaki and Hiroshima seem to be doing ok. The present day ones, you mean ... |
| Posted by: Steve White 2010-08-15 02:01 |
| #1 It seems to me that if Iran has chosen to take that risk, Iran has chosen to live with the result. Were I Israeli, I would not let the possibility of a few mutated fish keep me from protecting the existence of my people. After all, the residents of Nagasaki and Hiroshima seem to be doing ok. |
| Posted by: trailing wife in Germany 2010-08-15 01:35 |