Posted by: DanNY ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Bwahahaha, guess they don't want to ever bring up Project Pluto again. Theres your ultimate UCAV bomber/cruise missile right there, goes hypersonic right into enemy territory, has intercontinental range, and a loiter time ranging up to a month, and best of all can drop 10-12 megaton range nukes. PC friendly it was NOT.
#2
The proposed use for nuclear-powered ramjets would be to power an unmanned cruise missile, called SLAM, for Supersonic Low Altitude Missile. In order to reach ramjet speed, it would be launched from the ground by a cluster of conventional rocket boosters. Once it reached cruising altitude and was far away from populated areas the nuclear reactor would be turned on. Since nuclear power gave it almost unlimited range, the missile could cruise in circles over the ocean until ordered "down to the deck" for its supersonic dash to targets in the Soviet Union. Once powered up, the unshielded half-gigawatt nuclear reactor would emit highly lethal radiation in a large radius; such a vehicle could not possibly be human-piloted or reused. Indeed, some questioned whether a cruise missile derived from Project Pluto would need a warhead at all; the radiation from its engine, coupled with the shock wave that would be produced by flying at Mach 3 at treetop level, would have left a wide path of destruction wherever it went. Contrary to some reports, the exhaust of the engine would not itself be highly radioactive. Also, the nuclear engine could in principle operate for months, so a Pluto cruise missile could simply fly a long and winding pattern over enemy territory to cause incredible damage. The SLAM as proposed would carry a payload of many nuclear weapons to be dropped on multiple targets, making the cruise missile into an unmanned bomber. Project Pluto wikipedia ;)
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto
Posted by: Red Dog ||
10/01/2005 2:37 Comments ||
Top||
The Bush administration has postponed punishing Saudi Arabia for restricting religious freedom, giving the U.S. ally six more months to show it has made progress in its treatment of religious minorities. One year ago, the State Department declared that religious freedom was absent in the Arab kingdom. Under U.S. law, the Bush administration could have imposed sanctions such as trade restrictions _ as it has done with some other countries. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice notified Congress last week that she had authorized a 180-day waiver of action against Saudi Arabia "in order to allow additional time for the continuation of discussions leading to progress on important religious freedom issues."
Rice raised the issue last week in a meeting in Washington with the Saudi foreign minister, Prince Saud al-Faisal, and stressed the importance of continuing to work on it, said State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper. Last week, the department notified Congress that Rice had banned commercial export of certain defense articles to Eritrea. The African country was cited a year ago along with Saudi Arabia and Vietnam as having records of serious concern on religious freedom.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Called our bluff, did they?
Posted by: James ||
10/01/2005 10:05 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Bush needs the 6 months to get the damaged refineries in our Gulf up and running and to get drilling in ANWR in place before we let the civil war break out behind the scenes in the magical kingdom. We'd also like to have the Iraqi election secured before all hell breaks out, behind the scenes, to the west.
#3
The number of international "linkages" involving Arabia is enormous. In a way, it is on a par with Iran for being a tough nut to crack, and Bush is not one to either ignore potential for peaceful change or disregard potential for disaster.
It is frustrating from the sidelines only because we can't see the awesome amount of intelligence gathering, analysis and cold calculation going on behind the scenes.
Such incredible patience can sometimes work miracles.
With more than 2,000 contenders registered for Azerbaijanâs upcoming parliamentary elections, observers are predicting a heated campaign. Despite an unprecedented number of independent candidates, long-standing political parties are dominating the campaign... Worth watching. They share a border with Iran, whic is probably heavily involved in trying to manipulate the election.
BRUSSELS - The European Commission has prepared laws to impose a speedy arms embargo on Uzbekistan for refusing to allow an independent inquiry into a massacre in May, an EU official said on Friday. âWe have prepared the legislation for the immediate implementation of an arms embargo,â the official said on condition of anonymity.
No strategic importance to the EU? Check.
No big-time arms sales pending? Check.
No chance Vlad will be angry with them? Check.
Empty, meaningless gesture? Check.
Okay, they're ready to implement the embargo.
The embargo, to be announced by EU foreign ministers when they meet in Luxembourg on Monday, will be accompanied by other measures, including visa restrictions against unnamed Uzbek officials.
The EU has repeatedly condemned the Uzbek authorities for failing to allow an independent international probe [of the violence in Andijan earlier this year], and has threatened and threatened, and threatened for months to take action. âWe want to see the very worrying events in Andijan investigated by an independent, international body,â the official said, but added: âTheir resistance remains as firm as ever.â
According to a draft text to be adopted by the ministers, the union will impose an âembargo on arms, military equipment and other equipment that might be useful in internal repression.â The document, seen by AFP, said the action was necessary âin light of the use of an excessive, disproportionate and indiscriminateâ use of force against civilians.
The EU âhas also decided to implement restrictions in admission aimed at these individualsâ implicated in the repression, the text said. A list of those concerned would be drawn up at a later date.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
They might as well; they'll just be able to buy the Chinese-manufactured versions of French weapons instead otherwise...
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
10/01/2005 9:42 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Fred ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
That country is under the strangest magical spell. Enormous in size, yet tiny population. Literally rocket scientists living right next to peasants who see what rocket science can do and want to do that themselves.
The important thing is the latter. The willingness and the burning desire to improve one's lot is a national recipe for success.
The U.N. atomic watchdog agency took North Korea to task Friday for breaching the nuclear arms control treaty but welcomed its pledge to give up atomic weapons in a resolution that highlights U.S. priorities for future talks with Pyongyang.
Wouldn't want to cheese 'em off, you know. They might become... ummm... unreasonable.
China refrained from co-sponsoring the text in a reflection of its displeasure with a text focusing on Washington's priorities. Still, diplomats noted that the resolution was submitted to the 139-nation International Atomic Energy Agency's General Assembly only after Beijing indirectly signed off on it. Russia — which along with China is one of five nations negotiating with North Korea over scrapping its nuclear arms — also did not co-sponsor the text, showing that it, too, was unhappy with the outcome. The document was adopted by consensus, but has only symbolic value because the meeting has no enforcement powers.
Mmmm... Warm milk! A UN favorite!
But the dispute is significant because it reflects the disagreement on how to proceed at a more important level — future talks among North Korea, China, the United States, Russia, South Korea and Japan. The discussions are meant to build on Pyongyang's commitment to mothball its nuclear weapons. Confirming the differences and outlining Washington's concerns, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Thursday the Americans were insisting any resolution agreed upon in Vienna should not "change any understandings or what was agreed to at the six-party talks."
That's why I couldn't be a diplomat. That paragraph could be written in Albanian and I'd get just about as much sense out of it. And I'm sober at the moment.
A diplomat, who demanded anonymity because the resolution had not been made public, said the text tried to balance U.S. concerns that North Korea commit to honoring the nuclear arms control treaty and less specific Chinese-requested language focusing on rewards to Pyongyang.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
DEBKAfileâs military sources report an important strategic treaty is due to be signed within a few days between Athens and Jerusalem. It will finalize an arms deal running into hundreds of millions of dollars, provide for regular joint military exercises and foster bilateral cooperation in the war on terror. The treaty is drafted on similar lines to Israelâs pacts with Turkey and Poland.
Greek defense minister Spilios Spiliotopoulos will soon visit Israel as defense minister Shaul Mofazâs guest. He will be taken round IDF bases, the military industry complex, air force plants, production lines of the Chariot tank and factories manufacturing military electronics and communications systems.
A few days later, Mofaz will go to Athens for an official signing of the military accords at the head of a large delegation.
DEBKAfileâs political sources report that for decades, Athens kept its distance from Jerusalem as long as Greece was ruled by a left-leaning government that supported the Palestinians against Israel and depended on the Arab states for its trade and support on the Cyprus question.
But the Kostas Karamanlis government is more than willing for a strategic partnership with Israel now that it is part of Europe and its economy is growing fast (income per capita of 13,500 p.a.). On his agenda now is the modernization of Greeceâs security and military systems and their conversion from being geared to hostile relations with Turkey to contending with the Islamic terrorist threat encircling its borders.
Al Qaedaâs Saudi cell and the Lebanese Hizballah have established strongholds in Bulgaria, Macedonia, Bosnia, Kosovo and Albania. Extremist fighters find it easy to slip in and out of Greece.
The two countriesâ security services first began to work together when Israeli intelligence and private security firms took responsibility for safeguarding some of the installations and events of the 2004 Olympic Games. This cooperation Athens is keen on expanding. The treaty will give Israelâs strategic standing in the Mediterranean and southern Europe its biggest boost since the treaty was signed with Turkey in the 1980s.
ARREST warrants have been issued in Italy for three further alleged CIA agents accused of the âillegal abductionâ of an Egyptian Muslim cleric from Milan two years ago.
In June, prosecutors ordered the arrest of 19 people allegedly involved in the kidnap of Osama Moustafa Hassan Nasr, known as Abu Omar, in Milan in February 2003. Police said he was flown via the US airbase at Aviano in northern Italy to the US base at Ramstein in Germany and from there to Egypt.
Rome acknowledges that Abu Omar was being investigated by Italian police as a terrorist suspect. But they say his abduction was âa serious violation of Italian sovereigntyâ and disrupted its own investigations.
Abu Omar phoned his wife in Milan from Cairo in July 2004 when briefly released, and told her that he had been tortured. He was rearrested but has not yet been charged.
Following the playbook, is he?
Armando Spataro, the Milan prosecutor, said the three CIA agents now being sought included a female US diplomat who he said had been in charge of the operation and âparticipated in it personallyâ.
Italian newspapers named her as Betnie Medero, 38, who arrived in Italy in August 2001 as a second secretary at the US Embassy. The reports said she was now working in Mexico.
And she has diplomatic immunity.
All 22 agents being sought are said to have left Italy, and Signor Spataro said that he was seeking their extradition.
Corriere della Sera, quoting investigators, said that material found on the computer of Robert Seldon Lady, the alleged CIA station chief in Milan at the time, included surveillance photographs of Abu Omar. Investigators said that they had tracked down the alleged agents through mobile telephone and credit card records.
Idiots, idiots, idiots. Who in the world is teaching tradecraft at the Farm these days?
The agents were said to have been part of the CIAâs âextraordinary renditionâ programme, under which terrorism suspects are transferred to third countries without court approval. The US Embassy in Rome would not comment yesterday.
#3
Idiots, idiots, idiots. Who in the world is teaching tradecraft at the Farm these days?
Who has time for that? I'm in it for the cocktail parties! [/sarc imitation of a Clinton-era/now officer]
Something tells me that Porter Goss' cleaning house could be started by replacing many of the (dare I say it?) cowards with Special Activities Division personnel.
Posted by: Edward Yee ||
10/01/2005 14:57 Comments ||
Top||
Underlining her assertion that she runs a "restrictive immigration policy", Minister Rita Verdonk has proposed expelling all newcomers who are convicted of any crime. Under the current law, an immigrant can be stripped of his or her residence permit after conviction for a very serious offence. Verdonk wants to extend the law to cover all crimes, including theft.
Verdonk was to bring her proposal to the Cabinet on Friday, informed sources in the Hague told the media. The Liberal Party minister's plan will not apply to people granted asylum or newcomers who become Dutch citizens.
Liberal Party MP Arno Visser said the idea was a good one. He has called for such measures in the past, saying it is important that foreigners, or vreemdelingen, adhere to Dutch law at all times. According to him, the immigration service (IND) operates a sliding scale under which the chance of a foreigner being expelled declines the longer the person is in the Netherlands.
Labour Party (MP) Jeroen Dijsselbloem said the proposal is too extreme.
Immigration will be the major issue in elections all over the 1st world for the next decade or more.
And the Euros, at least, will always side-step the real issues. They need furriners to keep the country working until all the Euros can collect their pensions. One seriously can't expect the citizens of a dying, socialist continent to vote for measures that make life more uncomfortable.
#1
Ya gotta love it. It's the liberals and the Labour Party crackin down on the 'grints.
Why not start a new parlor game called What Went Wrong.
We all sit around rehashing our dreams of utopia and wonder why it ain't working.
#2
I should not be surprised to see the Euros importing Mexicans and othe South Americans to perform the functions the muzzies have and help relieve our illegal problem.
and just who will continue European culture? Oriana Fallaci? Van Gogh? De Villepin? Expect Euro-civilization to take a couple centuries (like maybe, seven) backwards
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/01/2005 21:09 Comments ||
Top||
In WOT Politix because the attitudes behind this stupidity directly related to Germany's ambivalence about any effective counter to Islamofascism.
The family of troubled Prince Ernst August of Hanover may face illegal gun possession charges after police discovered that 37 items in the family collection of muskets, pistols and rifles were still in working order.
Prosecutor Thomas Klinge said Friday police scientists were still checking the weapons, which are listed in an online Sotheby's catalogue for an 11-day antique auction starting next week at the prince's fairytale Marienburg castle south of Hanover in Germany. Public viewing of 20,000 items including cannons and suits of armour being sold off by the Royal House of Hanover began Friday.
The vendors are two sons of Prince Ernst August, who is married to Princess Caroline of Monaco and who was given a suspended jail sentence by a German court last year for assault. He is descended from the Hanoverian kings of Britain.
The prosecutor said it was illegal to own unregistered guns, even antique ones. Police seized the weapons Tuesday and were investigating who owned them, whether they were covered by any permit and whether they were dangerous.
His Royal Highness my great-great-great-great-great etc. grandfather didn't register the muskets and cannons? What a scandal!!!
#2
There was a time when the Prince of Hanover would have had them all beheaded. If they had any skill left, the least they should do is hire someone to create such a distraction that all is forgotten.
#4
It's about money. Follow the money. The weapons are valuable. Find out were they are going. I bet into some politicians colection. This happens very often. Even here in the US.
The Dutch government is to distribute a brochure door-to-door to outline the threat posed by terrorism and what the authorities are doing about it.
The brochure is part of a nationwide publicity campaign to explain the steps that are being taken and how the public can help, justice and home affairs ministers, Piet Hein Donner and Johan Remkes, said in a joint letter to parliament on Friday.
It has not been announced when the campaign will begin but preparations are underway.
The government has developed the campaign in cooperation with the authorities in Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Utrecht and The Hague. Major transport companies including Dutch
railway NS and Schiphol Airport also had input in the planning.
A survey in August found that 41 percent of the Dutch public would like the government to launch an information campaign about terrorism. A year before only 34 percent felt such a campaign was necessary and the Cabinet decided not to take the idea further at that time.
The latest survey also found that 55 percent of those who took part believed that there would be a terrorism attack in the Netherlands in the foreseeable future. "This is your brain on terrorism"?
Underlining her assertion that she runs a "restrictive immigration policy", Minister Rita Verdonk has proposed expelling all newcomers who are convicted of any crime.
Sounds like an eminently sensible course of action to me...
Under the current law, an immigrant can be stripped of his or her residence permit after conviction for a very serious offence. Verdonk wants to extend the law to cover all crimes, including theft. Verdonk was to bring her proposal to the Cabinet on Friday, informed sources in the Hague told the media. The Liberal Party minister's plan will not apply to people granted asylum or newcomers who become Dutch citizens.
Why not? If you're granted asylum you're being extended the host nation's hospitality. If you abuse that hospitality, why shouldn't they kick your ass out? If you're a naturalized citizen, it's presumably on the understanding you're going to be a good citizen. If you're not, you're a citizen under false pretenses.
Liberal Party MP Arno Visser said the idea was a good one. He has called for such measures in the past, saying it is important that foreigners, or vreemdelingen, adhere to Dutch law at all times. According to him, the immigration service (IND) operates a sliding scale under which the chance of a foreigner being expelled declines the longer the person is in the Netherlands. Labour Party (MP) Jeroen Dijsselbloem said the proposal is too extreme.
#1
Here in the Denver area the term resident is being used instead of citizen. (Residents being illegal aliens.) Our fine city in it's fight to be politically correct wants to accomodate our "residents". We need to expell the illegal aliens, the fact that they are here illegally being against the law.
Posted by: Jan ||
10/01/2005 1:03 Comments ||
Top||
#2
For a moment, I thought this might be here in the US. I'm such a silly blonde sometimes....
Al Qaeda was characterised at a congressional hearing on Thursday as a movement or an ideology rather than an organisation.
Let us pause in the important business of killing the bastards to quibble over words...
This was stated by Congressman Ed Royce, chairman of the house sub-committee on international terrorism and non-proliferation, in his introductory remarks at a hearing of his subcommittee. Among those who testified was Arnaud de Borchgrave, who in the past has claimed that Osama Bin Laden is living in Peshawar. A follow-up hearing will take place later this year. Royce said, âThe trans-national terrorist threat facing the US is rapidly evolving. Since 9/11, as a result of unrelenting US military pressure, Al Qaeda has had to drastically reconfigure. Many now characterise Al Qaeda as a âmovementâ or âideologyâ, rather than a formal organisation. Some have even described the loose alliance of extremist networks targeting us as a âglobalised insurgencyâ. Some have suggested that US counter-terrorism strategy does not match this evolving threat.â
U.S. counter-terrorism strategy has been evolving. I'll admit that it seems to have lost its focus at times.
The Republican from California said that while the US has had success in dismantling the formal Al Qaeda network, not enough attention has been paid to countering the ideology fuelling this âmovementâ. He feared that radicalism is spreading throughout Africa and Central Asia. Then there are those who point at the lack of a sharp strategy along the lines of the âcontainmentâ doctrine that guided the US during the Cold War. The administration, he noted, has begun a comprehensive review of its counter-terrorism strategy with the intention of updating its National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, released in 2003.
I'd suggest killing them in droves, myself, without mercy and without quarter. Instead, we've been agonizing over the accomodations at Guantanamo...
Posted by: Fred ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
*snicker*
We've wiped out the organization and now they console themselves with the fact that many share their hateful ideology. It's like saying that the KKK is an ideology, not an organization. Yeah, ok. There are lots of bigots, but it's nice that the KKK organization has been effectively wiped out.
#3
This statement is a day late and about a billion dollars short. AQ is a network of networks, for the love of pete. That's why we seem to always be areesting the #2 AQ guy...we arrest one, and poof, there is another waiting in the wings...
#4
1) Communism was (is) an ideology with various communist parties as organizations. Al-Qaeda may very well be an ideology, but there are various organized groups that share that ideology.
Ultimately, it is the actions of the adherents that are important.
2) Mr. Royce should wake up and realize that radicalism has been spreading throughout the middle east, Africa and muslim Asia for over 40 years. We have only been actively opposing it for 4.
3) I propose that we run a test. The U.S. will actively oppose Al-Queda and seek to destroy it everywhere. Europe can seek dialogue and appeasement. We'll see what works.
War Games, Colossus, The Forbin Project, et al. LOL. Spinning mag tapes. Loved how the WOPR hummed and had those flashing lights around the top of the machine. Tron, Enemy of the State, Johnny Mnemonic, Lawnmower Man, Mercury Rising, Minority Report, The Matrix, even Simone... yadda³. Hollyweird paranoid dimwits confusing data and computing and any tech they hear about (meeting Arthur C Clarke's definition of magic to a "T") with diabolical schemes from their personal conspiracy vaults... those dim dark monster-under-the bed places where their fears live... "It became self-aware"... Lol. That be some serious juju.
Data -> Computers -> [Bad Magik Here] -> 1984 / Global Thermonuclear War
Greetings, Professor Falken. Want to play a game?
The very first time I heard true pointless putz paranoia, and recognized it, as such...
I think, I think I am, therefore I am, I think.
Of course you are my bright little star,
I've miles and miles of files
Pretty files of your forefather's fruit
and now to suit
our great computer,
you're magnetic ink.
I'm more than that, I know I am, at least, I think I must be.
There you go man, keep as cool as you can.
Face piles and piles of trials with smiles.
It riles them to believe
that you perceive
the web they weave
and keep on thinking free.
--Graeme Edge (In The Beginning)
Still laughing my ass off, even after all these years. The F/X get better, the plots more convoluted, but the baseless fears are precisely the same. Conspiracists are my favorites. It's sooo easy to set them off and to fuck with 'em - they're always primed to go off. Look out - the MCP has you queued up for deletion, dood.
Love the integration of the various systems and the HUGE added value it brings. More. Just beware of dependencies upon vulnerable distribution channels - and develop alternative paths, methods.
#4
Dang, .com, I hate those 'stream of consciousness' comments. Way too early in the morning for me!
Posted by: DanNY ||
10/01/2005 7:35 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The Singularity cometh.
Posted by: Whiskey Mike ||
10/01/2005 7:58 Comments ||
Top||
#6
You will be assimilated.
Posted by: Borg ||
10/01/2005 9:07 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Seriously, it's about time. We're working on some seriously kool networking stuff.
How about a big lumbering plane that can launch dozens of air-to-air missiles from a safe distance, then the local fighter jocks take control of them when closer and send them to the targets? We could do that. Today.
Heh, I remember that one, saw that as a kid. Only thing I couldn't figure out was why the scientist guy wasn't boinking the female associate who had to come to bed with him to 'exchange information'. But then, this was the 60's.
But you're right, Hollywierd takes the same script, updates it every 20 years or so, and makes a movie. They still work, too.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/01/2005 12:48 Comments ||
Top||
#13
This sounds more like something out of Hyperion. The All-Thing commeth, or something of the sort. Of course I'd be first to volunteer for cybernetic uplink...
The UN atomic watchdog has unanimously called for a nuclear-weapons-free zone (NWFZ) in the Middle East but rejected an Arab call to denounce Israel as a nuclear threat. A general conference of the 139-nation International Atomic Energy Agency on Friday in Vienna also unanimously passed a resolution welcoming North Korea's agreement to abandon nuclear weapons and called upon Pyongyang to let IAEA inspectors back into the country. The IAEA conference rejected discussion of "Israeli nuclear capabilities and threat," as proposed in a resolution by Oman, despite a strong push for this by 15 Arab states plus Palestine.
Israel welcomed the idea of such a zone but said it advocates "achieving regional peace and security not arms control per se," in comments by Israeli atomic energy chief Gideon Frank. Egyptian ambassador Ramzy Ezzeldeiin Ramzy told the IAEA conference that the resolution on a NWFZ invites Israel, believed to be the only nuclear weapons state in the Middle East, "to join the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and to accept that its various facilities be subject to the IAEA safeguards system." Israel has not signed the NPT and neither confirms nor denies reports that it has some 200 atom bombs. Frank said that while Israel felt a NWFZ "could eventually serve as a complement to overall efforts to peace and security in the region" the Jewish state wanted a general peace agreement first in the Middle East.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
The Hamas terrorist militant group accused the Palestinian Election Committee on Saturday of distorting the results of a round of municipal voting to make it appear that Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party â which came out ahead â had swept the poll. Committee head Jamal Shobaki, who released the results to The Associated Press on Friday, told a news conference on Saturday that Fatah won in 51 of 104 municipalities, and Hamas in 13. The remainder were taken by other factions or coalitions. Thursday's vote was the third of four rounds of municipal elections, and was not necessarily a predictor of parliamentary elections in January because local issues and candidates' clan membership figured heavily .
The election committee intentionally avoided announcing that Fatah, headed by Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, ran unopposed in some areas to make it appear its candidates had trounced Hamas, said Sami Abu Zuhri, a Hamas spokesman in Gaza. He said, however, that Hamas would not officially challenge the results. "The announcement by the local election committee was biased," Abu Zuhri said. "It was a maneuver on the part of the election committee to present the numbers in an indirect way to favor one faction, and we will tell our people the truth."
Fatah â under fire for its running a corruption-ridden government â was not expected to make a strong showing in the municipal voting. Hamas, by contrast, has been taking credit for Israel's recent withdrawal from Gaza, and was expected to do well. But the terrorist militant group's public standing suffered after some of its homemade rockets blew up at a rally last week, killing 21 people and wounding dozens of others. Hamas blamed Israel for the explosion, and fired barrages of rockets at an Israeli town that borders Gaza.
Israel responded with airstrikes at Hamas targets and arrest raids, rounding up some 35 Hamas members who were either candidates in the municipal elections or active in the voting. Of those arrested, 17 won the election, Shobaki said. Hamas said the Israeli arrest campaign hurt the group's chances in the municipal vote. Symphathy meter still at 0.0.
#2
You want your own state, you've got to try doing things that governments do
Yeah, what he said! This is the crux of the problem of Palestinian statehood - the fact that there is no such thing as The Palestinians, at least not in a political sense. There is no one person/party/armed group that speaks for all the Paleos. No one to make an enforceable treaty, cut a deal or try to reason with. No one to keep a lid on the traditional Paleo sport of jew-killing.
Right now, the annual Burning Man Festival has more claim to statehood than the Palestinians.
The United States and its allies must act to stop Iran's nuclear programs -- by force if necessary -- because conventional diplomacy will not work, three senior Israeli lawmakers from across the political spectrum warned yesterday. As a last resort, they said, Israel itself would act unilaterally to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear arms.
Iran will not be deterred "by anything short of a threat or application of force," said Arieh Eldad, a member of Israel's right-wing National Union Party, part of a delegation of Knesset members visiting Washington this week. "They won't be stopped unless they are convinced their cities programs will be destroyed if they continue," he said.
Yuval Steinitz, chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, said the best hope was for the United States and other major powers to make it clear to Iranian leaders now there was "no chance they will ever see the fruits of a nuclear program. Threats of sanctions and isolation alone will not do it," said Mr. Steinitz. Well, the EU might be willing to go as far as a Resolution of Condemnation.
Yosef Lapid, head of the centrist opposition Shinui Party in the Knesset, added that Israel "will not live under the threat of an Iranian nuclear bomb. We feel we are obliged to warn our friends that Israel should not be pushed into a situation where we see no other solution but to act unilaterally" against Iran, he said. So we have bi-partisan support. Interesting.
Mr. Steinitz, a member of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's ruling Likud Party, stopped just short of a direct threat to bomb suspect Iranian nuclear sites. Mr. Steinitz said Israeli officials estimate that Tehran is only two to three years away from developing a nuclear bomb and that time was running out for the world to act. "We see an Iranian bomb as a devastating, existential threat to Israel, to the entire Middle East, to all Western interests in the region," he said. "Despite all the different circumstances, we see similarities to what happened in the 1930s, when people underestimated the real problem or focused on other dangers. For us, either the world will tackle Iran in advance or all of us will face the consequences."
The Bush administration has led the diplomatic campaign to pressure Iran, claiming the Islamic regime for two decades has secretly pursued a nuclear arsenal. The board of the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency in Vienna over the weekend concluded Iran had violated international pledges on its nuclear programs and said the matter could be referred to the U.N. Security Council and a Chinese or Russian veto. Iranian officials harshly condemned the resolution and insist the country has the right to pursue a peaceful nuclear program to meet its energy needs.
Israel has acted unilaterally before to halt a nuclear program by a hostile neighbor, bombing Iraq's Osirak reactor in 1981. Widely condemned at the time, not by Me the surprise raid is now credited with dealing a major setback to Saddam Hussein's nuclear ambitions.
Mr. Eldad said Israelis across the political spectrum see Iran as the country's most serious threat and one that cannot be ignored. But he added that unilateral action by Israel was the "worst possible scenario," likely to inflame opinion throughout the Muslim world. Unlike now, of course, where Israel is a ally and trading partner of many arab states. "If we have to do it, we'll do it," he said with a shrug. "If the United States and the world community do it, there is a chance the issue can be contained. If Israel has to do it alone, there is no chance the conflict can be contained."
Mr. Lapid said he was sensitive to criticism that Israel was trying to push Washington into a potentially armed conflict with Iran that many Americans now oppose. "Our mission is to point out the dangers we see, to ourselves and to our friends," he said. "Avoiding speaking the truth does not mean you can then avoid facing the consequences of those facts," he said. The Left never seems to get that.
The lawmakers met with their U.S. counterparts, as well as with senior administration officials, saying they highlighted the Iranian danger in all their meetings. Asked if he thought the message got through, Mr. Steinitz said, "I did not get the feeling we were talking to the walls."
#1
"unilateral action by Israel was... likely to inflame opinion throughout the Muslim world"
If this was the biggest risk, I'd crush Iran right now. I'm more concerned with retaliation against oil production in the Gulf and U.S. troops in Iraq. That's why any pre-emptive attack by the U.S. must be massive and must obliterate Iran's military capability and government in addition to Iran's nuclear sites. Israel, on the other hand, could attack with less risk to U.S. troops and oil. But we have to let them know that we will back them up afterward.
#2
The $64 question is would Israel be able to do this without using nuclear weapons?
One way: only attack critical areas of the nuclear infrastructure, putting the main attack emphasis on destroying the Iranian economy and severely damaging its oilfields and oil infrastructure.
That would mean igniting their oilfields and wiping out their pipelines, refineries, shipping, terminals, and other facilities. The weapon of choice would by sea launched cruise missiles and conventional missiles.
Beyond that, Israel would need significant anti-missile resources, as Iran would retaliate with SHAHAB missiles, some of which they would have to assume would be nuclear. The US would almost certainly have to assist in these shoot-downs, both as insurance that Israel would not use nuclear weapons, and in case the Iranians targeted US forces in Iraq.
By destroying critical areas of Iran's nuclear capability and denying them the resources to buy and build more, they would delay Iran's nuclear weapons program by a decade or more, assuming that they haven't already built some weapons. It would also cause a worldwide oil shortage taking years to fix.
#3
Wipe out their oil facilities and their clients will be your enemies too. Israel just needs to nuke the nuke facilities and some major mullahs. It's a limited lesson that takes out the immediate threat and verifies that Israel really does have the capability to vaporize threats.
#4
Israel "will not live under the threat of an Iranian nuclear bomb."
and this threat is a real one. interesting how iran and muslim nations never felt threatened by Israel's nukes, despite the fact that Israel had nukes for decades.
that's because there is a difference between enlightened democracies and tyrannical theocracies.
#5
Darrell: It is worth far more for both Israel and the US if they don't use any nuclear weapons. As far as "making enemies" is concerned, other than the US, Israel is in the same position as Taiwan. In such a situation, appearance is unimportant and you must stick to practicalities. Don't worry about offending those who despise you already.
The practicality for Israel is that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. If it achieves that goal, not only is Tel Aviv, but US fleets and forces in the region, the Saudi and Iraqi oilfields, and even Europe is threatened.
While Europe will actually dick around even when threatened, the US certainly won't. But the US relies on retaliation, and the Israelis have no intention of letting it go that far. In this position, they now carrot-and-stick the US to help them solve the problem.
The carrot is that the US wants Iran non-nuclear, too, and no longer a threat to the region. The stick is that Israel can threaten to use nuclear weapons--and not just against Iran, but to systematically exterminate vast numbers of people throughout the region. To destroy all of their enemies in one fell swoop. And maybe even to destroy much of Islam in the process. The US would find that alternative abhorrent.
At bare minimum, the Israelis would do all the work against Iran, and just ask the US to provide a missile defense shield for the whole region, against retaliation. After pummeling the Iranian military, mostly its air forces, part of its nuclear infrastructure, and as much of its oil infrastructure as possible, then they ask that the US step in and *end* any futher ballistic exchange.
In a way, both letting the Israelis get away with it, and acting as a safety mechanism to prevent the war from either escalating or even continuing.
Publicly, the Isrealis could ask the US to do this, prevent attacks on Israel, in exchange for vetoing any UNSC actions or resolutions against Israel.
Iran would be left to seeth, facing decades of rebuilding before it could again threaten others.
#9
"As a last resort, they said, Israel itself would act unilaterally to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear arms."
Let me get this straight. Israel is a country that has maintained "nuclear ambiguity" for decades. But there is no doubt Israel has nuclear weapons. The UN called on Israel to put its nuclear facilities under the IAEA safeguards, as the NPT requires. And Israel has yet to sign the NPT. Now theyâre threatening to take out sovereign nations' nuclear facilities unilaterally if Big Daddy US won't. By the way that sovereign nation has signed the NPT. And, to date there still is no "hard evidence" Iran has a nuclear weapons program.
It's exactly this double standard that fosters resentment not only from the Arab world but the International community as well.
#10
damage to their oil/gas infrastructure is undesirable for all except if they hide the nuke production facilities so close it's ineveitable...I don't see that happening
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/01/2005 14:06 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Agreed, this MUST be doe Non-Nuke for success.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/01/2005 14:11 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Why should Israel sign the NPT?
The NPT is a big lie. It expicitly promises that the five nuclear weapon states will disarm.
When Russia or China, or the USA for that matter, signed the NPT, did anyone really expect that they would disarm? What US President could announce that every last nuclear weapon would be gone in say 5 or 10 or 20 years? He would be impeached the next day.
But that is the promise of the NPT.
In exchange for this, and for nuclear power tech, other nations signed as non nuclear weapon states.
They were willing to surrender their security and to rely on others to shield them.
These nations then extended the NPT in perpetuity, even though it was quite clear that the nuke powers had no intention to disarm.
Well, tough luck. There is an international convention on treaties that says that states cannot be forced to join treaties.
Israel doesn't want to. Given its history, why should they rely on a piece of paper to keep their people from oblivion?
Posted by: john ||
10/01/2005 14:19 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Perhaps a reasonable ultimatum might be something on the order of:
If a single Israeli city is nuked, so also will Moscow, Peking, Paris and Berlin be nuked.
Posted by: DanNY ||
10/01/2005 14:22 Comments ||
Top||
Given these considerations, I would be strongly tempted to remove my enemies once and for all, so that they couldn't strike in my moment of weakness. The way to do that, of course, is to eliminate their armies, their political structures, and critical infrastructure that they could use to rebuild. This would have to be thorough enough to keep those enemies incapacitated for at least 10 years, because it could take that long to recover Israel's reputation and (more critically) economy and supply situation. So, if I were fairly convinced that Israel was in grave danger of attack in the aftermath of taking out Iran's nuclear capability, I would most likely hit at all of the Arab/Muslim world's military facilities and large units, industrial base, critical infrastructure (including any large cities), and so forth. Some of these attacks would be conventional, but most would be nuclear. And as part of that, I would have to strike Pakistan and eliminate their military and nuclear capability as well, because they are the only Muslim state with a declared nuclear capability, and even if they didn't want to strike directly, there's no guarantee that the ISI wouldn't give weapons to terrorists for revenge attacks.
We're moving into some dangerous times here people...
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
10/01/2005 14:23 Comments ||
Top||
#15
yeah, why don't we wipe out the whole planet ?
Can someone explain to me why a Nuclear Iran by definition would be an enormous threat to Israels security ? Do you guys think they will immediately try to wipe out Israel ? And what about the detterence of a retaliation ?
#17
Iyot (sounds appropriate) - because Iran has already threatened to do so upon completion of their first nuke. Bluff? So sad - we took you at your word.
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/01/2005 14:43 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Can someone explain to me why a Nuclear Iran by definition would be an enormous threat to Israels security ?
1. They have publicly called for Death to Israel in regular military parades under the auspices of the government.
2. They fund, arm and train the most deadly terror network that has killed many Israelis through bombings and suicide attacks.
3. Those groups have as their explicit aim the destruction of the Israeli state.
#19
Can someone explain to me why a Nuclear Iran by definition would be an enormous threat to Israels security ? Do you guys think they will immediately try to wipe out Israel ? And what about the detterence of a retaliation ?
Dec. 2001: RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAEL One of Iranâs most influential ruling cleric called Friday on the Muslim states to use nuclear weapon against Israel, assuring them that while such an attack would annihilate Israel, it would cost them "damages only".
"If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave any thing in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world", Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani told the crowd at the traditional Friday prayers in Tehran.
...
"Jews shall expect to be once again scattered and wandering around the globe the day when this appendix is extracted from the region and the Muslim world", Mr. Hashemi-Rafsanjani warned, blaming on the United States and Britain the "creation of the fabricated entity" in the heart of Arab and Muslim world.
Also: "If one day, the world of Islam comes to possess the weapons currently in Israel's possession -- on that day this method of global arrogance would come to an end. This is because the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground; whereas, it will only damage the world of Islam." -- Former Iranian President Rafsanjani, December 14, 2001.
And Rafsanjani was the "moderate".
Posted by: ed ||
10/01/2005 15:06 Comments ||
Top||
#20
thanks for the swift answers .. I can't help but think it's just a big game of bluf .. I know they are involved in terrorist activities but that's still more or less in a "secretive" way.. Blasting Israel into oblivion is a whole different matter, no matter what Rafsanjani says.. I'm not saying Israel should take the risk, and let Iran acquire nuclair weapons, but I do doubt if taking out the military of Iran & all Arab nations is the right tactic.. I could agree on taking out the nuclear installations, but flat out bombing Iran and it's economy is another matter.
#21
IMO Israel wouldn't take out the other Arab armies or capitols or.... They would simply say - "hey. It was a matter of self-defense. If you can't accept that, then there's more where that came from"
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/01/2005 16:28 Comments ||
Top||
#22
I think the scenario laid out by Anonymoose is the most likely: let Israel do the dirty work under our "passive" defense unbrella. There is no way in Hell that Congress would OK any military action against Iran sufficient to do the job, and there's no way in Hell Bush could get enough political support to make such a case. As far as I can see, a pre-emptive US strike is simply out of the question.
They don't necessarily have to send nukes in a missile. smuggling it into Israel would be easy enough. And there would be plausible deniability. How is that different from the terror they also perpetrate?
#24
Iyot, wouldn't it be tempting for Hezbolla to turn up the terror attacks against Israel with big new weapons backing them ? Do you think that a terrorist organization would step down and take a few decades off to enjoy life ? Of course not. They will be imboldened and agressive and provocative. They will force the fight. That's why they are there. Today it's rockets going over the wall, what will tomorrow bring ?
#25
This is not an intellectual exercise for Israel. There's no triangulation or equivalency or other quaint diploweenie game possible when you know you're ground zero and those targeting you are implacable relentless Islamonutz bent on your total annihilation.
Israel, despite US help, stands alone in the bullseye. Our sentiments and policies wax and wane - they cannot presume it will be solid when the moment of truth arrives. The MM's may shake their tiny Muzzy fists at us and call us Great Satan, but we'll always be #2 on the list, regardless of their capabilities.
Israel has never threatened anyone who wasn't trying to kill them. That they have nukes is below the radar when not being decried by those who hate them - bravado, bluff, and bluster is for fools and cowards. Where nukes are concerned, it's no game. Even moreso if you live in a very tiny land-space - a factor that hugely matters with nukes and other WMD's. A more responsible nuke power cannot be found. Their restraint has been consistently amazing - since 1948.
That said, I've pointed out several times that you don't have to hit everything the MM's have, just the strategic points in the process to bring it to a stop. The more, the better, of course, but it only takes a couple to set it back.
Lastly, gee, should Israel worry about what people will think of them if they act to avoid annihilation? Lol. That's precisely the situation they've faced for 60 yrs. I figure they, literally, have nothing to lose by surviving the MM's - and I'm certain they do too.
Fuck Iran if they get what they are obviously asking for.
#26
exactly .com. The Israelis aren't about to let Nazi's under different management send them under.
Screw Iran, sounds like the Jews are going to give them what they've long had coming.
#27
zactly so, PD and JM - Israel will see that the ME is a smoking hole should the MM's try their games. One would think the rest of the ME would be happy at a surgical strike by the Jooooos, but per Arab logic, no way...
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/01/2005 21:27 Comments ||
Top||
#28
.com: agreement except for the "strategic points" concept. The level of technology is unknown, the dispersal and redundancy are unknown, and the effectiveness of attack will also be questionable. No way of making accurate damage assessment.
It boils down to "how sure can Israel be, and for how long, that the attack worked?" Strategic points just isn't enough.
So between that as a minimum and nuclear annihilation as the maximum, is why I speculate that Israel will shoot for "strategic points" plus the reduction of their oil business. Perhaps also attacking some infrastructure targets that *have* to be repaired at great cost, to burn up their currency reserves.
The idea is that they will be denied the tools they need to re-start their programme for many years. Their "strategic points" will be hard enough to replace, not being able to get the technologies externally any more. But their electrical grid may be damaged, delaying both their nuclear efforts and repairing of their oil infrastructure.
Oil terminals, shipping, burning oilfields, all are terribly hard, time consuming and expensive to rebuild. But they must have that hard currency.
At the same time, they may become terribly belligerent, making enemies around the world in their efforts to attack Israel and the US. They are injudicious in this way (remember the shooting of the British policewoman from their embassy in London). As such, it would be much easier to create a UNSC embargo, until they agreed to play nice.
Of course, once a successful attack had taken place, they would be much less able to mount an aggressive conventional war. The US would be more than happy to smite them if they stray outside of their own country.
A big question is how much and how fast can Israel pull this off? It really has to be a blitzkrieg attack, with aircraft, ballistic conventional missiles and conventional SLCMs all at the same time, plus coordinated ground attacks from all the forces that have been sneaked into the country.
If the CIA is in on it, we will give the signal for the Kurds, Arabs, and Balauchs to rise up with everything they've got, along with any saboteurs and spies we have planted in Tehran. Maximum chaos in minimum time.
#29
If the CIA is in on it, we will give the signal for the Kurds, Arabs, and Balauchs to rise up with everything they've got, along with any saboteurs and spies we have planted in Tehran. Maximum chaos in minimum time.
the new CIA maybe, the old.... I sure hope you're right, moose
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/01/2005 22:55 Comments ||
Top||
#30
Big talk, but not possible without the cooperation of the US. Look at the map. Israel can't get at Iran without flying through either Iraqi or Turkish airspace. And even with F15Is will have to tank going and coming. No way to do that over US controlled airspace without prior coordination and approval. All in all, this is hot air intended for public consumption.
A high ranking UN diplomat ruled out on Friday the possibility of forming a special international court to try those behind the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. The diplomat told The Daily Star that the current talks in the hallways of the UN "are moving away from the option of establishing an international tribunal" to try the perpetrators, adding that "other options are being discussed."
The diplomat said: "If there was going to be an international presence in the trial, I don't think it would be through an international court. I think the talks are heading towards a Lebanese trial with a strong intention to support it by the UN." So far many Lebanese opposition members and officials from Hariri's political party have called for the establishment of a special international court to try the criminals, if caught. The diplomat added the international community "right now feels the need to strengthen and support the Lebanese Judiciary," and an international court would "weaken the credibility of the Lebanese judiciary system." "Two possibilities are being discussed right now; one involves a direct UN presence in the trial, and the other just requires supervision and support by the UN," the diplomat said.
He added: "So far, there have been two examples of such special courts: the court in Sierra Leone, which is a joint national-UN venture; and the second is the trial of Khmer Rouge in Cambodia which took place a while ago, and involved a national court taking care of the trial, but with the UN bringing the support and expertise."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
In the course of the ongoing international investigations into the Hariri killing, sources close to the Lebanese judiciary told The Daily Star that head of the UN probe Detlev Mehlis was "not satisfied with Damascus' level of cooperation." The sources cited examples of Syrian witnesses who were questioned by Mehlis under the supervision of high-ranking Syrian officers "who intimidated the witnesses preventing them from saying anything relevant in fear of being penalized by their superiors." Sources added that Mehlis, who is leaving Lebanon for Vienna within the next two days, "might pay a pop visit to Damascus to re-question witnesses, or summon those witnesses to Europe to debrief them."
Also on Friday, Lebanese investigating Magistrate Elias Eid listened to the deposition of several "secret witnesses," while State Prosecutor Magistrate Saeid Mirza received reports of the primary investigations carried out by the Internal Security Forces investigators with the detained engineer technician Majed Khatib, who works for Lebanon's mobile phone-line company MTC Touch. Based on the deposition and the primary investigations, Mirza will decide whether to free Khatib or press charges against him and issue an arrest warrant. Khatib was detained based on charges of hiding information and "giving contradictory statements regarding several facts including the deletion of information from the company's central data regarding certain phone-lines." According to allegations made by the media, the eight related phone-lines are suspected to have belonged to the perpetrators and were only used before and during the assassination of Hariri.
According to Al-Hayat newspaper on Friday, some Lebanese sources close to the UN probe ruled out the "suicide bomber possibility" in determining how Hariri was killed. Al-Hayat reported that a car filled with explosives was parked on the road which Hariri took. The newspaper also reported that mobile phones in the area were jammed following the explosion, which led to the formulation of the mobile phone-lines theory.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
Accusations and counterattacks continued to engulf the political scene yesterday, one day after a highly charged government session described as "lively" by Premier Fouad Siniora degenerated into a heated and reportedly vulgar row over the country's security sector. In comments on the Cabinet's failure to come to a decision on how to strengthen the precarious security apparatus, Walid Jumblatt indirectly laid the blame on President Emile Lahoud, saying: "The Lebanese people must know who stands in the way of appointing new security chiefs; we hold him responsible for the continued bombing and assassinations."
Youth and Sports Minister Ahmad Fatfat was more direct. "The main reason for the tense situation in Thursday's session of the Cabinet was because Lahoud refused to sign the decree of appointments for the Internal Security Forces and insisted it is his constitutional right."
In response, ministerial sources close to the presidential palace said President Lahoud was surprised by how some MPs and ministers could "distort the facts" by claiming the had president blocked the new security formations. The sources clarified that "Lahoud's position on the security formations and appointments is based on the two issues going through different procedures, and his approval is limited to one of them. "Lahoud accepted the list presented by Interior Minister Hassan Sabaa, and offered to approve it, with the exception of the commander of the police force, whose position was not vacant yet."
I'm liking Lahoud less with every new development in this case...
Posted by: Fred ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Head of Central Command sent to Congress to bolster war support
WASHINGTON - Al-Qaida is the main enemy to peace and stability in the Middle East and the terrorist group is seeking to acquire â and use â weapons of mass destruction there, a top U.S. commander in Iraq told Congress.
âThe enemy that brought us 9/11 continues to represent one of the greatest dangers to this nation,â warned Gen. John Abizaid, the commander of U.S. Central Command.
He was testifying alongside Gen. George Casey, the most senior commander of coalition forces in Iraq, before the Senate and House Armed Services committees. Also to testify Thursday were Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Gen. Richard B. Myers, the outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Effort to bolster support
President Bush sent the group to Capitol Hill to try to convince lawmakers â and their skeptical constituents â that the United States is making progress in the war. The back-to-back hearings in the House and Senate are part of a White House effort to bolster slipping public support for the war.
After weeks of being criticized for his hurricane response, Bush also is trying to put the focus back on issues considered his strengths â the fight against terrorism and Iraq.
The president plans to address the nation Oct. 6, following speeches on Iraq by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Vice President Dick Cheney over the next few days.
Before the Senate panel, Abizaid stressed the difficulty the U.S. and coalition forces face in the region against an enemy driven by their religious beliefs, and said the Al-Qaida threat âshould not be underestimated.â
He said Americans should be assured that people in the Middle East âdonât buy this perverted view of Islam.â
âThey do not want the extremists to win,â Abizaid said.
As usual, AP always displaying their true unbiased journalism, however I actually think it's the US MIL that should not be underestimated.
More hyperbole from the other side : "How dare you treat the Master Race like that!?". Funny comparaison, since IIRC the founders of modern-day Egypt were pretty admirative of the nazis, to the point of modeling their party after them, and after WWII ex-nazis had a hand in forming their army and secret services, with "Mein kampf" being distributed in the barracks.
In the Egyptian government daily Al-Ahram, columnist Mustafa Sami writes that the U.S. Navy detention camp at Guantanamo Bay is like the Nazi camps of the previous century.
The following are excerpts from his column: [1]
"The anti-black racism exposed by Hurricane Katrina is not the only disgrace hounding the Bush administration in the U.S. There is another disgrace that the world is talking about, which concerns the 600 prisoners at the Guantanamo camp, and which has greatly damaged the reputation of the American democracy.
"This can be called the first massacre of the 21st century; it is being perpetrated by the Bush administration against 200 Muslims, mostly Arabs, who have been hunger-striking for the past three weeks. This premeditated crime is taking place before the eyes of the [entire] world, but not a single conscience has awakened to demand that the slaughter be halted and that these prisoners be rescued from death.
"This murderous crime runs counter to all laws, conventions, and moral standards, [yet] none [stand up to] defend its victims. In the future, it will leave its dark marknot only on the forehead of the Bush administration, but also on the faces of several Arab governments â [since] more than 80% of the prisoners and hunger strikers in this concentration camp are their subjects.
"This camp takes us back to the time of Nazi persecution of innocent people in the early 1940s. The U.S., which in the 20th century played a major role with the Allies in closing down the Nazi camps and liberating Europe from the Nazi massacres, has, in the early 21st century, reestablished a detention camp in Cuba, which is very much like the Nazi camps, and where they [incarcerate] those whom they label enemy combatants.
"During the past four years, 10% of the Guantanamo prisoners have committed suicide, which is the highest suicide rate among prisoners anywhere in the world!
"According to American press reports, and statements by camp commanders, the 200 hunger-striking prisoners are in danger of dying, since their health deteriorated in the third week [of the strike]. Despite efforts by those in charge of the camp to force-feed them... while they were bound hand and foot to their beds, their health continues to deteriorate, while they insist on continuing their strike â since death has become the hope and desire of every prisoner.
"Where are the Arab human rights organizations â both civil and governmental â that we read about in the papers every day, and whose number has greatly increased in the past decade? Why aren't they standing up and cooperating with the [similar] organizations in the U.S. and in Europe, and why aren't they demanding that the prisoners be released or brought to a fair trial... after four years of inhuman and immoral torture and abuse? Isn't it the role of these organizations to protect the human rights of the Arab people?"
#1
The first massacre of the 21st century happened four years and 20 days ago.
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
10/01/2005 8:58 Comments ||
Top||
#2
So typical of Muslims to be six months late at adopting the themes of Democratic Senators. Thanks again for aiding & abetting the enemy, Sen. Durbin.
#4
first massacre of the 21st century;
Nazi persecution of innocent people
10% of the Guantanamo prisoners have committed suicide
More muslim blood libel to incite the population to kill Americans. The only thing the mulim murderers in Guantanamo are dying of is atheroscerosis around the year 2050. Can someone tell me why Americans are subsidizing these fuckwits to $2 billion of hard earned money every year so they can set off truck bombs and ram airliners into skyscrapers. Instead, treat these goat fuckers just as they treat Jews.
Posted by: ed ||
10/01/2005 10:13 Comments ||
Top||
The steering committee of the opposition parties decided during a meeting on Friday that the opposition would not hold dialogues with the government in the future, as it had no faith in the ruling parties.
"Nope. Nope. Ain't gonna talk to 'em. It's our way or the highway."
The committee stated that the only way to pull the country out of the crisis was President General Pervez Musharraf resignation from both offices without any further delay.
"Just can't talk to the man, y'know. He's the voice of unreason."
Liaqat Baloch, the coordination secretary of the committee and the deputy general secretary of the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal, said that the committee held President Pervez Musharraf responsible for the constitutional, political and economic problems of the country. He said that the opposition would launch a movement against the government following Ramazan.
I thought they launched a movement against the gummint the day after the 2002 elections?
âThe opposition parties will protest against the government within and outside of the assemblies because of the rigging in the local council elections, the deterioration of law and order, the fuel price-hike and rise in unemployment in the country,â he said. He said that the committee had reviewed a protest campaign against the government, to run in phases, and added that demonstrations, seminars and corner meetings would be part of the campaign.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
KABUL - British Defence Secretary John Reid began a four-day visit to Afghanistan on Friday during which he is expected to discuss plans for an expansion of a NATO-led force into the restive south of the country. During his visit, Reid will hold talks with Afghan Defence Minister Rahim Wardak, President Hamid Karzai and commanders of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force peacekeepers and separate US-led force hunting Taleban and allied militants.
Britain is due to take command of ISAF next May, when an Allied Rapid Reaction Corps is to be deployed, and will be at forefront of a planned expansion of NATO forces into the south, where Taleban and allied militants are most active. British forces are expected to establish a base in the province of Helmand, joining Canadian, US and eventually Dutch troops, as well as smaller numbers from other NATO nations.
However, the exact role of the troops remains uncertain because NATO members France, Spain and Germany have resisted a US call for ISAF troops to take a combat role against the insurgents, while Britain has supported Washingtonâs stance.
The three usual suspects in NATO. I guess Belgium is too small to matter in this particular argument.
NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer will arrive in Afghanistan for talks on Tuesday at the head of a delegation of the North Atlantic Council, the top political decision-making body of the alliance.
Britain has more than 800 military personnel in Afghanistan, serving with both the 12,400-strong ISAF and the 20,000-strong US-led force. British forces include British-led Nepali Gurkha troops in Kabul and Royal Air Force Harrier warplanes in the southern city on Kandahar, as well as troops serving with a Provincial Reconstruction Team in the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif.
Reid met Gurkha troops in Kabul and praised their efforts in helping to maintain security.
As great as the Gurkhas are, aren't they needed at home?
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Imam Yahya Hendi, a Muslim chaplain at Georgetown University in the Unites States, on Friday stressed the need for inter-religious dialogue among Muslims, Christians and Jews to eliminate terrorism. Muslims can promote the true image of Islam through inter-religious dialogues, Imam Hendi told a âMeet the pressâ programme at the Lahore Press Club. He said that all sects within Islam should begin dialogue to create harmony in the Muslim world. He urged the Muslim world and the West to begin dialogue to resolve longstanding disputes. He called Kashmir and Palestine core issues which must be resolved to attain peace. Praising President Musharrafâs address to the Jewish Congress, Imam Hendi said it was a bold step that would result in peace.
Hendi said that dialogue did not mean surrendering basic principles of any religion. He said that suicide bombing was illegal according to Islamic jurisprudence. He condemned the US aggression against Afghanistan and Iraq as well as the organisations preaching suicide bombings.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sounds like he has all bases covered. Cookies and milk or whirlled peas?
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
10/01/2005 1:53 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"...dialogue to resolve longstanding disputes..."
Not proven safe and effective.
"...US aggression against Afghanistan..."
Tell it to Afghan voters and Afghan women.
Former Bangladesh prime minister Sheikh Hasina has called for unity among India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to check the increasing "interference of the United States" in the internal affairs of the developing nations.
Seems like Bangla would have more important things to worry about. But it's fashionable to be opposed to the U.S., I suppose...
"Once India, Pakistan and Bangladesh shed all their differences and come together, they can effectively prevent the US from dictating the developing countries," Hasina told reporters.
And what have we been dictating? Don't slaughter each other? Don't subvert each other? Don't despoil your citizens? Allow them a bit of freedom?
She said that if the three nations wanted to combat poverty, they should increase mutual cooperation on economic issues.
Don't bother establishing laws that guarantee property, or reduce corruption — currently among the most pervasive in the world in Bangla. Just "increase mutual cooperation" and have a nice glass of warm milk.
She regretted that Indo-Bangladesh relations had "weakened" since Prime Minister Khaleda Zia came to power in her country. Hasina was confident that her party would win the upcoming elections in Bangladesh.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sounds like she's the Bangladeshi equivalent to Jimmy Carter.
News flash: The Cold War is over. India has left you and Pakistan in the dust, and now wants to sit at the big people's table.
#2
"Once India, Pakistan and Bangladesh shed all their differences and come together, they can effectively prevent the US from dictating the developing countries," Hasina told reporters.
If she could make India and Pakistan "shed their differences and come together", she can say whatever she wants about the U.S. and I'll salute her.
Unfortunately I think she's just a source for leftist throwaway headlines.
ALGIERS: Algerian President Abdelaziz Boutleflika won almost unanimous support for his controversial plans aimed at ending years of violence in the north African country, referendum results showed Friday. More than 97 percent of voters said 'yes' to the president's Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation, Interior Minister Yazid Zerhouni told a news conference. Turnout was 79.76 percent. Just 2.64 percent of them voted against the charter, the minister added. The president's plans provide for an effective amnesty for many of the Islamic extremists who rose up in 1992 to protest the sudden cancellation of elections the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) was poised to win. The party was subsequently banned. But critics complain the charter grants impunity to the security services also engaged in the ensuing violence that has claimed some 150,000 lives.
I guess the critics are the 2.64 percent, huh?
Posted by: Fred ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Fred ||
10/01/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Felix Akah, a 33-year-old electrician from Cameroon, said he lost his job when the French company he worked for was bought by Americans and he could no longer support his wife and two daughters, aged 1 and 3.
the zionist controlled great satan strikes again sheeez
#3
When I look at a system like this, I immediately ask myself how it could be made better.
My first impression is that this looks like a car without a body. And certainly a car like that would be perfectly functional. But a body would just make it better. Plenty of practical reasons for having one.
Next is its ammunition limitation. Why have four barrels to fire one round each instead of one barrel that can fire 16 or 32 rounds? How is the tech better than an ordinary chain gun?
Third is the use of an electrical trigger instead of a reliable mechanical trigger. Electronics need less maintenance, but are more sensitive to environment. This weapon inherently needs lots of maintenance anyway, so I would prefer reliability and durability over low maintenance.
As far as command and control goes, with a higher ammunition capability, I would suggest having four modes of operation. Remote is one, with three pre-programmed firing patterns, so the operator could just push a button and duck from enemy return fire. When it fires its last round it automatically goes into "retreat" mode without further prompting, unless overridden.
Finally, I would mount a close range anti-pers system on the track, in case some enemy tried to charge the weapon and stick a hand grenade in it.
#4
I immediately ask myself how it could be made better.
Shark's teeth nose art.
Posted by: ed ||
10/01/2005 11:29 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Moose:Why have four barrels to fire one round each.. watch the slo mos. 40 mm metalstorm vids
Moose: Next is its ammunition limitation. Why have four barrels to fire one round each instead of one barrel that can fire 16 or 32 rounds? How is the tech better than an ordinary chain gun?
The *different* versions of "metal storm" [rapid fire non-feed pre-packed munitions] have have to be reloaded also. It does *eliminate* parts..receiver parts, bolt etc.
IMO wait and see niche. prolly dubious, but wtf...
Posted by: Red Dog ||
10/01/2005 12:38 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I immediately ask myself how it could be made better.
It should have a 60-1 glide ratio and be VTOL capable.
#7
#4: I immediately ask myself how it could be made better.
I assume it already has a remote TV camera and Controls.
60MM grenade launcher with selective magazine for tear gas, retch gas, HE, Frag, and solid, gives you the capability to knock doors open without destroying the surrounding wall, up to destroying the whole building.
Shotgun, 10 bore, semi automatic and eliminate the other two barrels.
Electric Stun Gun (ZAP)
A solid steel Battering Ram (Think boxing glove on a 2-10 foot telescoping pole, with a rotating turret, nitrogen powered, WHOMP)
Any more and it would be hard to get through a doorway or climb stairs.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/01/2005 12:52 Comments ||
Top||
#8
The WMD version will drop the gun barrels and add loudspeakers. The main weapon load will be a custom-burned CD of Hole's Greatest Hits.
Posted by: Red Dog ||
10/01/2005 13:35 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I immediately ask myself how it could be made better.
Because, clearly, you know what it would take.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
10/01/2005 13:43 Comments ||
Top||
#12
I'm beginning to suspect that Metal Storm is one of those technological inventions that everyone thinks is better than it really is.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
10/01/2005 14:03 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Crawford: cut me some slack. This thing is first generation. Most of us have seen enough military hardware to know what is generally good and what will just get screwed up in the field.
Device after device like this all seems to be designed on the same concept: the police robot. What I am suggesting is that it might be better to have a whole genre of *military* robot, different in concept.
Not just a single SWAT operation that when it's over, it's over; but something more like Fallujah, where the robot is there right alongside the soldiers, advancing to do its job then falling back for ammo and fuel, then back into action. Perhaps for 6-8 hours at a crack.
These different requirements mean that a lot of the robot has to be devoted to durability, rather than new and interesting technology. It also has to be designed with offense and defense in mind.
A simple device that does one thing very well is far better that a high-tech one that just gets in the way. Even if this thing was a single-shot recoilless rifle, it could be priceless for giving direct fires from an uncovered position. But it has to do it over and over again, perhaps in 130-degree heat.
The army thinks robots are the future. Everything about this system is still up for debate, so no feasible idea should be off the table.
The DREAD system looks very interesting (120,000 rounds per minute, silent, no recoil, no flash).
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
10/01/2005 15:56 Comments ||
Top||
#15
I have seen some Metal Storm promotional videos. All very slick. This usually makes me suspicious. Then I was one where the idea was control over use the of civilian use of a firearms was more than implied. These people are not 1st amendment friendly.
#16
I have some direct visibility into FCS development and operational concepts.
Moose, the article linked here doesn't touch on the real power of a variety of the FCS elements. There are ops concepts behind the model pictured above that make a good deal of sense when you see the bigger picture ....
I won't go into most of them, but will say that when you are developing a weapon capable of autonomous movement over a wide variety of terrains, balance and weight are serious considerations.
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.
The Bush administration has postponed punishing Saudi Arabia for restricting religious freedom, giving the U.S. ally six more months to show it has made progress in its treatment of religious minorities. One year ago, the State Department declared that religious freedom was absent in the Arab kingdom. Under U.S. law, the Bush administration could have imposed sanctions such as trade restrictions _ as it has done with some other countries. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice notified Congress last week that she had authorized a 180-day waiver of action against Saudi Arabia "in order to allow additional time for the continuation of discussions leading to progress on important religious freedom issues."
The U.N. atomic watchdog agency took North Korea to task Friday for breaching the nuclear arms control treaty but welcomed its pledge to give up atomic weapons in a resolution that highlights U.S. priorities for future talks with Pyongyang.
Underlining her assertion that she runs a "restrictive immigration policy", Minister Rita Verdonk has proposed expelling all newcomers who are convicted of any crime.
Al Qaeda was characterised at a congressional hearing on Thursday as a movement or an ideology rather than an organisation.
The UN atomic watchdog has unanimously called for a nuclear-weapons-free zone (NWFZ) in the Middle East but rejected an Arab call to denounce Israel as a nuclear threat. A general conference of the 139-nation International Atomic Energy Agency on Friday in Vienna also unanimously passed a resolution welcoming North Korea's agreement to abandon nuclear weapons and called upon Pyongyang to let IAEA inspectors back into the country. The IAEA conference rejected discussion of "Israeli nuclear capabilities and threat," as proposed in a resolution by Oman, despite a strong push for this by 15 Arab states plus Palestine.
A high ranking UN diplomat ruled out on Friday the possibility of forming a special international court to try those behind the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. The diplomat told The Daily Star that the current talks in the hallways of the UN "are moving away from the option of establishing an international tribunal" to try the perpetrators, adding that "other options are being discussed."
In the course of the ongoing international investigations into the Hariri killing, sources close to the Lebanese judiciary told The Daily Star that head of the UN probe Detlev Mehlis was "not satisfied with Damascus' level of cooperation." The sources cited examples of Syrian witnesses who were questioned by Mehlis under the supervision of high-ranking Syrian officers "who intimidated the witnesses preventing them from saying anything relevant in fear of being penalized by their superiors." Sources added that Mehlis, who is leaving Lebanon for Vienna within the next two days, "might pay a pop visit to Damascus to re-question witnesses, or summon those witnesses to Europe to debrief them."
Accusations and counterattacks continued to engulf the political scene yesterday, one day after a highly charged government session described as "lively" by Premier Fouad Siniora degenerated into a heated and reportedly vulgar row over the country's security sector. In comments on the Cabinet's failure to come to a decision on how to strengthen the precarious security apparatus, Walid Jumblatt indirectly laid the blame on President Emile Lahoud, saying: "The Lebanese people must know who stands in the way of appointing new security chiefs; we hold him responsible for the continued bombing and assassinations."
The steering committee of the opposition parties decided during a meeting on Friday that the opposition would not hold dialogues with the government in the future, as it had no faith in the ruling parties. 
Imam Yahya Hendi, a Muslim chaplain at Georgetown University in the Unites States, on Friday stressed the need for inter-religious dialogue among Muslims, Christians and Jews to eliminate terrorism. Muslims can promote the true image of Islam through inter-religious dialogues, Imam Hendi told a âMeet the pressâ programme at the Lahore Press Club. He said that all sects within Islam should begin dialogue to create harmony in the Muslim world. He urged the Muslim world and the West to begin dialogue to resolve longstanding disputes. He called Kashmir and Palestine core issues which must be resolved to attain peace. Praising President Musharrafâs address to the Jewish Congress, Imam Hendi said it was a bold step that would result in peace. 
Former Bangladesh prime minister Sheikh Hasina has called for unity among India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to check the increasing "interference of the United States" in the internal affairs of the developing nations. 
ALGIERS: Algerian President Abdelaziz Boutleflika won almost unanimous support for his controversial plans aimed at ending years of violence in the north African country, referendum results showed Friday. More than 97 percent of voters said 'yes' to the president's Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation, Interior Minister Yazid Zerhouni told a news conference. Turnout was 79.76 percent. Just 2.64 percent of them voted against the charter, the minister added. The president's plans provide for an effective amnesty for many of the Islamic extremists who rose up in 1992 to protest the sudden cancellation of elections the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) was poised to win. The party was subsequently banned. But critics complain the charter grants impunity to the security services also engaged in the ensuing violence that has claimed some 150,000 lives. 
