Nuclear Iran is now the world's #1 problem

[xoxoxoBruce]

It's only a movie, Rich.
We (United States of America), don't go mucking about in other peoples national affairs.
We (see above) only offer truth, justice and The American Way as an example of what they might aspire too.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Badgerino

How about North Korea who already have nukes that can reach our shores?

Demonstrated is why Rush Limbaugh must preach without providing details and numbers. Details expose logical and factual errors. N Korea has an ability to launch a missile against Japan. Whether that missile can carry a warhead is questioned. But it is only where extremists promote hype and fear that "N Korea has missiles that can reach our shores". N Korea is far from that threat. Nor is that the intent for developing such weapons.

Meanwhile it is this very limited N Korean ability that only recently anti-missile defense systems are being deployed in Japan. N Korea may have that ability launch a warhead at Japan in some years.

Don't forget reasons why both Iran and N Korea have actively promoted nuclear programs. Now that containment is not American policy - now that America will unlaterally invade nations without justified reasons - now that the US has outrightly stated intent to invade both Iran and N Korea - now that the George Jr administration subverted and destroyed previous programs to politically neotiate peaceful solutions. Why then would any sane nation not build nuclear weapons? Right wing military extemists get the war they want - to justify their anti-humanity perspective. It is why pre-emption is so dangerous to all Americans - and is so empowering to those who promote war.

Iran will go nuclear because only an insane nation in their position would not. The US has announced intentions to invade N Korea and Iran - which is why preemption only promotes rightwing extremist political agendas on all sides at the expensive of good people.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

. . .which is why preemption only promotes rightwing extremist political agendas on all sides at the expensive [sic] of good people.

Which is another bit of evidence, if one was needed, that tw cannot acknowledge the goodness of the right, and that tw is only half bright.

[d1x1e]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Basically, Europe said to Iran, "If you stop all uranium enrichment, and allow UN inspections, we will give you enough radioactive fuel to operate nuclear power plants."

two things

1. they said they would sell them fuel not give them it.
2. put yourselves in their shoes
If the USA were given the following 'offer' by OPEC (but using oil as the barganing chip), namely close down all your US indigenous oil refining and production capacity, disarm your strategic nuclear deterrent and we'll sell you all the oil you want (at a price to be set by OPEC), Would you be rushing to scrap your nukes or for that matter shut down your own oil fields.

you see it's hardly the 'deal of the century' when you frame it correctly is it.

[d1x1e]

Originally Posted by fargon

Dont we still owe Iran an ass kickin, after the events of Apr79.

nope i think what the vincennes did to iran air flight 655 more than made up for that don't you?...

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by d1x1e

nope i think what the vincennes did to iran air flight 655 more than made up for that don't you?...

Most of the people on that plane were fleeing the new regime. Ironically, it played into the hands of the Islamic revolutionary regime by taking out "dissidents" (to use the term loosely) and by providing additional justification for the anti-American sentiment upon which the revolution was based.

It was a huge mistake.

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by Beestie

Most of the people on that plane were fleeing the new regime. Ironically, it played into the hands of the Islamic revolutionary regime by taking out "dissidents" (to use the term loosely) and by providing additional justification for the anti-American sentiment upon which the revolution was based.

It was a huge mistake.

Here is the article on Iran Air flight 655 at Answers.com. I had heard about the medals before but wasn't too sure.

What it comes down to is that we screwed up and took a 'you have to break some eggs' attitude towards the incident. The moral of the story is do not expect justice in a war zone. War is about killing people, and innocent people die. The people who start wars should take this into account and be prepared to deal with the consequences.

Personally, I think we went overboard with the medals. Service ribbons are one thing, but commendations?

Medals awarded
While issuing notes of regret over the loss of human life, the U.S. government has, to date, neither admitted any wrongdoing or responsibility in this tragedy, nor apologized, but continues to blame Iranian hostile actions for the incident. The men of the Vincennes were all awarded combat-action ribbons. Commander Lustig, the air-warfare coordinator, even won the navy's Commendation Medal for "heroic achievement," his "ability to maintain his poise and confidence under fire" having enabled him to "quickly and precisely complete the firing procedure."[5] According to a 23 April 1990 article in The Washington Post, the Legion of Merit was presented to Captain Rogers and Lieutenant Commander Lustig on 3 July 1988. The citations did not mention the downing of the Iran Air flight at all. It should be noted that the Legion of Merit is often awarded to high ranking officers on successful completion of especially difficult duty assignments and/or last tours of duty before retirement.

The incident continued to overshadow U.S.-Iran relations for many years. Following the explosion of Pan Am Flight 103 six months later, the British and American governments initially blamed the PFLP-GC, a Palestinian militant group backed by Syria, with assumptions of assistance from Iran in retaliation for Iran Air Flight 655. [6] The blame was later shifted to Libya.

The Flight 655 incident has often been compared to that of Korean Air Flight 007 interception by the Soviet Air Force in 1983.

Vice President George H. W. Bush declared a month later, "I will never apologize for the United States of America, ever. I don't care what the facts are."

[Griff]

Just in case the Russians manage to avert WW(#) Condi has the next justification lined up. However, she stressed it was not just Tehran's nuclear policies which were concerning, but also what she described as its support for terrorism. The neo-coms are on the march.

[Undertoad]

So being anti-nuclear proliferation and anti-terror is solely the neo-con position now? I would vote for that woman if those positions were the centerpiece of her campaign, and so would 70% of the nation.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

So being anti-nuclear proliferation and anti-terror is solely the neo-con position now?

No, seeking a broader conflict in the middle-east is the neo-con position.

*clarification* Since increasing nuke proliferation and terrorism are the obvious outcomes of the Bush foreign policy the neo-cons must oppose what you link them to.

[Undertoad]

Right, the ones building the weapons and supporting the terror aren't seeking a broader conflict, but trying to prevent it IS seeking a broader conflict because it's so damn provocative!

Because calling something a "concern" or going to the UN Security Council is so threatening! But calling for the destruction of Israel, well that's just what nations do.

Because proliferation started the moment Bush was elected! And terrorism is not to be fought until it occurs!

/sarcasm out of control

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

So being anti-nuclear proliferation and anti-terror is solely the neo-con position now? I would vote for that woman if those positions were the centerpiece of her campaign, and so would 70% of the nation.

70% of the nation, I would hope, is smarter. The only reason why nuclear proliferation is a problem is due to neo-con - extremist - policies. Tell the ignorant that we must attack to stop nuclear proliferation - and all we then do is encourage nuclear proliferation and satanic mentalities.

Why are countries now building nuclear weapons as fast as possible? Because neo-cons, using a political agenda rather than raw intelligence and the lessons of history, have decided to fix the world. To fix the world in their images of Christianity, democracy, and some mythical nonsense about "righteousness".

History has proven that nuclear non-proliferation and other programs that make a safer world are found in a well proven concept called containment. Pre-emption is simply an excuse to impose our will and our religion on all others - and then call that "good". Pre-emption feeds the naive with a big penis attitude that we are good and righteous. Pre-emption is justified by same principles that created the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades.

BTW, who has subverted the nuclear non-proliferation treaty? The United States. UT often forgets such details when he represents the neo-con mentality - of them is bad and we are good. Meanwhile, back to reality. We have literally rewarded countries who have violated principles of that treaty with nuclear assistance - in direct opposition to what the nuclear non-proliferation treaty is about. Not done until this administration decided to 'preempt' rather than 'contain' what they call 'evil'. Some perverted idea that we are good and they are bad. Tell that to those who learned a lesson called Vietnam. We were right because god was on our side - in Vietnam. What happened? Reality took revenge.

Will N Korea and Iran have nuclear weapons? Of course - as they should because America has declared we will 'fix' them. This neo-con attitude does as Hitler did to gain power in 1930s Germany. It encourages and justified those who never learned lessons from history AND it promotes those - like UG - whose solution to all problems is 'Pearl Harbor' solutions and liberal use of physical confrontation. This is also what brought Hitler to power: 'sound byte' intelligence to the uneducated while disparaging those who better understand lessons of history and what is written here.

Containment works. So well proven that the world's worst war stayed mostly cold. Containment permits politicians to solve problems without resorting to all out military confrontation. Not only is the purpose of war to put a conflict back on a negotiation table. Its consequences should be enough for humans to learn why containment and political solutions is always superior to war. Need we demonstrate how smarter leaders even ended a Balkan problem? Milosevkic was literally negotiated out of power. However, UT's post advocates military solutions by pretending he would deter nuclear proliferation and terror. UT's agenda is what creates both problems.

But again, we only need return to principles even well proven in 500 BC and "Art of War" to appreciate why UT's agenda means more proliferation and more violence.

Neo-con's solution is big sticks used liberally. They always see enemies who are 'too dumb' or 'too evil' to negotiate. So why did George Jr literally destroy an entire N Korean solution? So why is a fanatic religious fringe now uniting to attack America rather then their local secular dictatorships? Why was the WTC and Pentagon attacked? Because neo-cons never bother to learn lessons of history; learn the purpose of war. Neo-cons even failed to plan for the peace in the Kuwait liberation -since they thought only war and confrontation are a solution.

Neo-con's 'god is on our side' mentality has got us into this mess - making it necessary for both Iran and N Korea to even build nuclear weapons. To literally subvert forces inside both nations that were once working for reform and that could have become friendly to the United States.

[WabUfvot5]

Originally Posted by tw

Will N Korea and Iran have nuclear weapons? Of course - as they should because America has declared we will 'fix' them.

I certainly have to disagree with that. Human bungling being what it is I don't trust ANYBODY with TEH BOMB. Not the US, not Iran, not North Korea. Now you may not care if one of those countries blows itself up, but when the radiation spreads... well, I hope you get the point.

(Sidenote: nuclear power is different since you don't have to launch a plant and they designed not to blow up)

[djacq75]

About the only positive thing you can say about war is that it enables the filthy gung-ho rednecks of all nations to kill each other off and thereby improve the species.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Problem is the "filthy gung-ho rednecks" don't go. They send wide-eyed youth that forced the pay the price.