Would you nuke Iran's reactors?

[Exterus]

The difficulty and cost of disposing of them?

 

The military dragging its heels over losing one of their favourite toys?

 

The fact that the nuclear "genie" is out of the bottle and the only effective counter to nuclear weapons remains another bigger nuclear weapon?

 

The old excuse about using them to blow up asteroids/get the earth's core spinning/stop a super earthquake/destroy the andromeda strain?

 

That at the end of the day, these days the best way to get respect is to have a bunch of nukes in your pocket?

 

Or just the fact everyone's scared.

 

Take your pick.

And some people actually believe that the human race will manage not to annihilate itself.

[katerina]

 

 

And some people actually believe that the human race will manage not to annihilate itself.

I dont see that happening. It's only a matter of time before someone sets off a huge biological or nuclear attack in the USA. 911 was just a warm-up imho. What i cant figure out is why this hasnt happened. If there able to tag airforce 1, security in this country hasnt improved that much. There's just to much ground to cover and things to watch.

 

sorry about the megaton ref......what i meant was smallest nuclear blast possible that will work. But really what can the world do? Chiracs threatened to use them so what's France going to say "we can use them against terrorists but you cant" and since Irans considered part of the axis of evil. Bush labels them terrorists in his mind....

[Amnot Borg]

AirForce One HAS NOT been tagged. IT was a hoax.

[Guest c4evap]

Let's stop all this shucking and end all the jive...

let's drop what we dropped in '45!

 

c4 :p ~ with tongue firmly in cheek!

[Tenebrae]

Kudos for tagging Airforce One < Chances of being shot/arrested while attempting to.

[katerina]

It's a shame we dont have a better leader then Bush. The man is a real fuckup imho and i just cant see him spinning this right if they decide to nuke Iran.. I mean everyone in the world already pretty much hates us, and the last thing we need is more of that.

[Tenebrae]

Gives you faith in the value of democracy things like this, eh?

[Guest c4evap]

Everyone already thinks all Americans are bags of sh!t...so maybe we should just drop a few and take the oil for ourselves. Doesn't matter how much good we do in the world...everyone still hates us.

 

Oh well...

 

c4 :thinking:

[Antipodean]

Doesn't matter how much good we do in the world...everyone still hates us.

 

 

What good is that exactly? say in the last few years?

 

Did the US, say, DO ANYTHING AT ALL about global warming? no? oh...

 

Did the US, umm, bring democracy and stability to Iraq? ummm... not really

 

Did the US government lie about WMD in Iraq to justify a war that as far as the body of international law is concerned was actually an illegal invasion? Yep, there was that.

 

Did the US manage in that process to transfer ownership of Iraq's oil to US & allied corporations? Pretty much.

 

Has the US used its occupation to deny Iraqi farmers their traditional seed stock exchanges and apply laws that compell Farmers to use sterile GM seed stock from Monsanto ? Yeah... yeah, that happened too...

 

 

So in Iraq alone the US:

 

a) illegally occupied a sovereign nation?

b) did not actually turn Iraq into a stable democratic state?

c) used that occupation to transfer ownershop of goods and resources to US Corporations and introduce laws that overturned traditional practices and favoured US business over the interests of Iraqis themselves?

 

That pretty much sums it up - but what it also summarises pretty much wat every imperialist nation has ever done.

 

It also makes for a really good recruitment campaign for the Osama's of this world - IE: it does more to foster terrorism than it does to fight terrorism.

 

 

And you're puzzled that the world doesn't feel grateful? You're kidding right?

 

 

Oh and by the way, with Iran, so far they have enriched the Uranium isotope U-235 to 3.5% purity - and it requires a purity of at least 90% to do anything nuclear weapons related with it. To take that purity from 3.5% to 90% would require a great deal more technology and infrastructure than Iran currently has in place. Read the latest "New Scientist" magazine (its basically the Aus/NZ/UK version of Scientific American) if you don't believe me....

 

 

SO all this ruckus that the media spin doctors are forcing down our gullets is starting to look like EVEN MORE BULLDUST to justify yet another ILLEGAL invasion to appropriate the oil stocks of yet another sovereign nation...

 

[MrDad]

Doesn't matter how much good we do in the world...everyone still hates us.

 

 

What good is that exactly? say in the last few years?

 

Did the US, say, DO ANYTHING AT ALL about global warming? no? oh... Ironically, neither has Australia, the other Kyoto hold-out.

 

Did the US, umm, bring democracy and stability to Iraq? ummm... not really Closer than it was, but not what it should be.

 

Did the US government lie about WMD in Iraq to justify a war that as far as the body of international law is concerned was actually an illegal invasion? Yep, there was that. A lie is an intentional falsehood. Where's the proof of intention?

 

Did the US manage in that process to transfer ownership of Iraq's oil to US & allied corporations? Pretty much. Perhaps you've seen proof of 'the transfer of ownership'? Please let us see them, too.

 

Has the US used its occupation to deny Iraqi farmers their traditional seed stock exchanges and apply laws that compell Farmers to use sterile GM seed stock from Monsanto ? Yeah... yeah, that happened too...

CLARIFICATION - February 2005 The report jointly issued by Focus on the Global South and GRAIN in October 2004 on Iraq's new patent law has received a lot of attention worldwide. It has also generated a misunderstanding that we wish to clarify. The law does not prohibit Iraqi farmers from using or saving "traditional" seeds. It prohibits them from reusing seeds of "new" plant varieties registered under the law. In practical terms, this means they cannot save those seeds for re-use either. The report has been revised to express this more clearly.

The article that started it all

 

 

 

If you can't back it up, don't present it as fact.

[Antipodean]

Mr Dad: Firstly - my last post was addressing c4evap's incomprehesion that the world has a few bugbears with the US, so the fact that Australia is playing at being Dubya's dirty little bitch on Kyoto and world politics generally is irrelevant.

 

On my second point - you agree, though with reservations, right?

 

On the 3rd point - ok, if you wish to believe that the worlds most powerful intelligence agencies (ie yours) are actually grossly incompetant and that when they gave Colin Powel those crazy boards of his (the ones he used with such conviction in that presentation to the UN) that they were manufactured with no with intent to convince the world to join the US on that caper, but that they quite by accident extrapolated images and information into an ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY of weapons existing in a state of COMPLETE INCOMPREHENSION AND LACK OF UNDERSTANDING of their falsity- that is your choice and it does go some way in explaining the current state of American democracy and government.

 

On Iraq's oil - Ok, the ownership of the oil, as a matter of legal technicality, lies with the Iraqi government -and that the foreign oil giants only exploit Iraq's oil through "production sharing agreements" The use of PSAs in Iraq was proposed by the Future of Iraq project, which has advised the US State Department, prior to the 2003 invasion and they have certainly been championed by oil companies. In any case moves are already afoot for iraqi oil to be privatised. Also please not that Dubya made the following executive order:

 

Executive Order 13303 decrees that "any attachment, judgment, decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other judicial process is prohibited, and shall be deemed null and void," with respect to the Development Fund for Iraq and "all Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein."

 

Whyfor such an order if the Government and its relationship with oil Corporations with regard to their conduct in Iraq, is above reproach? Why do they need protection from the ordinary standards of US law? If it smells like crap and it looks like crap... well, you get the drift...

 

And ok - the specific example regarding Iraqi seed stocks has obviously been reviewed. But it was just one example, wheras you cannot, I'm afraid, deny that before US proconsul Paul Bremer left Baghdad, he enacted 100 orders as chief of the occupation authority in Iraq, the most infamous of which being Order 39, which decreed that 200 Iraqi state companies would be privatised, that foreign companies could have complete control of Iraqi banks, factories and mines, and that these companies could transfer all of their profits out of Iraq. If that's not imperialism - I don't know what is.

 

 

This is all fact.

 

 

And these are all reasons why the US is not making many friends these days.

 

 

 

I also notice that you didn't address my comments with regard to the topic of the thread, namely the distance between all Iran's real capacity to manufacture nuclear weapons and all that US saber rattleing. WHY POSTURE FOR WAR ON SUCH A FALSE PRETENCE?

 

 

AGAIN?

 

 

Um... Oil anybody

[Tenebrae]

I don't know why everyone gets so hung up on oil, the fact that tens of billions allocated to the reconstruction of Iraq - which was thoughtfully given to the corporations instead of the Iraqi government - has "disappeared" should surely be of more immediate concern.

 

As to the lie of WMD, in Britain at least it's a matter of public record that while the government may not have out and out lied, they did grossly distort the facts, exaggerate and misrepresent the case to parliment. Of course, thanks to one of Tony Blair's iniatives all investigations have their outcome decided beforehand. Lucky that.

 

Also - I fail to see how the Falklands War proves that Britain is trigger happy. All soveriegn nations have a right and a duty to protect their citizens. In the case of the Falkland islands, the Argentina junta was just trying to distract from problems at home by siezing a worthless piece of land that had been British for a great deal of time. If you're suggesting that a war of defence makes a country trigger happy, then I think you'll find it may well be an endemic condition.

[MrDad]

Mr Dad: Firstly - my last post was addressing c4evap's incomprehesion that the world has a few bugbears with the US, so the fact that Australia is playing at being Dubya's dirty little bitch on Kyoto and world politics generally is irrelevant.

 

On my second point - you agree, though with reservations, right?

 

On the 3rd point - ok, if you wish to believe that the worlds most powerful intelligence agencies (ie yours) are actually grossly incompetant and that when they gave Colin Powel those crazy boards of his (the ones he used with such conviction in that presentation to the UN) that they were manufactured with no with intent to convince the world to join the US on that caper, but that they quite by accident extrapolated images and information into an ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY of weapons existing in a state of COMPLETE INCOMPREHENSION AND LACK OF UNDERSTANDING of their falsity- that is your choice and it does go some way in explaining the current state of American democracy and government.

 

On Iraq's oil - Ok, the ownership of the oil, as a matter of legal technicality, lies with the Iraqi government -and that the foreign oil giants only exploit Iraq's oil through "production sharing agreements" The use of PSAs in Iraq was proposed by the Future of Iraq project, which has advised the US State Department, prior to the 2003 invasion and they have certainly been championed by oil companies. In any case moves are already afoot for iraqi oil to be privatised. Also please not that Dubya made the following executive order:

 

Executive Order 13303 decrees that "any attachment, judgment, decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other judicial process is prohibited, and shall be deemed null and void," with respect to the Development Fund for Iraq and "all Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein."

 

Whyfor such an order if the Government and its relationship with oil Corporations with regard to their conduct in Iraq, is above reproach? Why do they need protection from the ordinary standards of US law? If it smells like crap and it looks like crap... well, you get the drift...

 

And ok - the specific example regarding Iraqi seed stocks has obviously been reviewed. But it was just one example, wheras you cannot, I'm afraid, deny that before US proconsul Paul Bremer left Baghdad, he enacted 100 orders as chief of the occupation authority in Iraq, the most infamous of which being Order 39, which decreed that 200 Iraqi state companies would be privatised, that foreign companies could have complete control of Iraqi banks, factories and mines, and that these companies could transfer all of their profits out of Iraq. If that's not imperialism - I don't know what is.

 

 

This is all fact.

 

 

And these are all reasons why the US is not making many friends these days.

 

 

 

I also notice that you didn't address my comments with regard to the topic of the thread, namely the distance between all Iran's real capacity to manufacture nuclear weapons and all that US saber rattleing. WHY POSTURE FOR WAR ON SUCH A FALSE PRETENCE?

 

 

AGAIN?

 

 

Um... Oil anybody

 

First point: Kyoto is irrelevant.

 

Second point: agreed.

 

Third point: Your opinion doesn't equal fact, no matter how highly you regard it. I still see no facts backing it up. And yes, I can believe the same intelligence agencies that focused decades of intense scrutiny on Russia and her allies yet failed to anticipate the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union and miss the many clues concerning the Sept. 11th plot could fail so spectacularly in Iraq also.

 

EO13303 prevents German, French, Russian and other entities owed debts by the Hussein govenment from attaching that money to satisfy those debts. Incidentally, it also prevents US citizens from collecting judgements against the Hussein government to them. The main purpose is to give a big, two fingered F.U. to those who didn't join the 'coalition of the willing'.

 

Order 39 doesn't get them oil or mines. Those are excepted. That defeats the point of a war for oil, doesn't it?

 

The US has been working within the confines of the UN in dealing with Iran, just as everyone expects. Besides, France is rattling their saber a hell of a lot louder than the US, don't you think? I suppose it's OK as long as it's not the US? http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7&section=0&article=76579&d=21&m=1&y=2006

French President Chirac’s announcement on Thursday that France would consider using nuclear weapons against any country that launches a terrorist attack against it is political bombshell. Not even George Bush has gone as far as saying that' date=' even though he might like to. Chirac’s threat is alarming. Clearly, had Al-Qaeda flown hijacked planes into the Eiffel Tower or the Montparnasse Tower rather than the World Trade Towers, Chirac might have nuked Kabul. Again, not even George Bush considered that  or if he did, he wisely kept quiet about it.[/quote']

[maybrick]

No.

[GorunNova]

What I said about Bush and the use of nuclear weapons earlier equally applies to Chirac. I seriously doubt the world would be friendly to France if it ever did decide to nuke someone (ANYONE.) Does anyone remember the uproar when they did a nuclear test not all that long ago?

[Antipodean]

Mr Dad: If only you applied the same rigorous standard of scrutiny to your own government in its conduct and affairs that you do to myself... think about it. After all we're talking about your own elected officials spending YOUR taxpayer dollars as well as the worlds biggest war machine vs some stranger on the far side of the world an a sci-fi forum. Certainly an odd double standard.

 

 

Also while some aspects of your interpretation of EO13303 may be applicable, the Order however is NOT confined to being rude to non "coalition of the willing" nations. It does extend unusual legal protections. The following quote from the order is by no means uncertain in what it decrees...

 

Section 1. Unless licensed or otherwise authorized pursuant to this order, any attachment, judgment, decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other judicial process is prohibited, and shall be deemed null and void, with respect to the following:

 

(a) the Development Fund for Iraq, and (b) all Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein, and proceeds, obligations, or any financial instruments of any nature whatsoever arising from or related to the sale or marketing thereof, and interests therein, in which any foreign country or a national thereof has any interest, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of United States persons.

 

It clearly states, that unless an american is the agrieved party, any legal course of action is hereafter void, if it concerns Iraqi oil & petrol products or the Development Fund for Iraq.

 

Also Order 39 - still remains an imperialist edict transferring no small amount of iraqi goods, and property to private non iraqi interests. Oil or no oil - IT STILL LOOKS BAD FOR THE US IMAGE. That was the point.

[TetsuoShima]

Since this is somewhat related and mostly applicable to politics, let me make some general comment:

 

"Fortunate for politicans, the average citizen is not at all interested in politics, unless it DIRECTLY affects him in an OBVIOUS way".

 

If you need to explain to an average citizen how it affects him, then you'd better give up in advance, since he won't care enough. If the average employer did to his employees what most governments do to their citizens, those employees would all spontaneously quit their jobs and find another employer. No elected government official would ever last longer than a single term if the average citizen actually cared enough how he indirectly gets screwed time and again by his government.

 

But that's just my opinion on politics. Since this discussion basically comes down to politics, I just thought I'd mention it. :)

[garth]

A nice little aside Iran the original subject of this debate has decided a not unexpected response to the overtures preventing their lawful (under the terms of the NPT) right to enrich uranium (as they see it).

Rear Admiral Mohammad-Ebrahim Dehqani stated "We have announced that wherever America does something evil, the first place that we target will be Israel"

So Dubya and co will have to consider that attacking Iran will be the same as the US dropping a bomb on Israel some consequence I doubt Bush and his accolytes had ever dreamed of being reponsible for. I am sure the Rear Admiral doesn't like some of our fellow contributors draw the distinction between the USA and America however if he does we will all have to hope that none of the latin American regimes ever attacks Iran either.

[MrDad]

Mr Dad: If only you applied the same rigorous standard of scrutiny to your own government in its conduct and affairs that you do to myself... think about it. After all we're talking about your own elected officials spending YOUR taxpayer dollars as well as the worlds biggest war machine vs some stranger on the far side of the world an a sci-fi forum. Certainly an odd double standard.

 

 

Also while some aspects of your interpretation of EO13303 may be applicable, the Order however is NOT confined to being rude to non "coalition of the willing" nations. It does extend unusual legal protections. The following quote from the order is by no means uncertain in what it decrees...

 

Section 1. Unless licensed or otherwise authorized pursuant to this order, any attachment, judgment, decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other judicial process is prohibited, and shall be deemed null and void, with respect to the following:

 

(a) the Development Fund for Iraq, and (b) all Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein, and proceeds, obligations, or any financial instruments of any nature whatsoever arising from or related to the sale or marketing thereof, and interests therein, in which any foreign country or a national thereof has any interest, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of United States persons.

 

It clearly states, that unless an american is the agrieved party, any legal course of action is hereafter void, if it concerns Iraqi oil & petrol products or the Development Fund for Iraq.

 

Also Order 39 - still remains an imperialist edict transferring no small amount of iraqi goods, and property to private non iraqi interests. Oil or no oil - IT STILL LOOKS BAD FOR THE US IMAGE. That was the point.

 

What makes you believe I do not? It is arrogant for you to assume otherwise.

[MrDad]

A nice little aside Iran the original subject of this debate has decided a not unexpected response to the overtures preventing their lawful (under the terms of the NPT) right to enrich uranium (as they see it).

Rear Admiral Mohammad-Ebrahim Dehqani stated "We have announced that wherever America does something evil, the first place that we target will be Israel"

So Dubya and co will have to consider that attacking Iran will be the same as the US dropping a bomb on Israel some consequence I doubt Bush and his accolytes had ever dreamed of being reponsible for. I am sure the Rear Admiral doesn't like some of our fellow contributors draw the distinction between the USA and America however if he does we will all have to hope that none of the latin American regimes ever attacks Iran either.

What will they target Israel with? They have no nuclear weapons. It's an empty threat, as such completely irrelevant.