ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, March 27, 2015

A shot across the bow

At this point, given recent steps like these, I think it is eminently clear that the US government has told the Israeli government to take a hike and is going to reach an agreement with Iran that will permit it to become an acknowledged nuclear power:
In a development that has largely been missed by mainstream media, the Pentagon early last month quietly declassified a Department of Defense top-secret document detailing Israel's nuclear program, a highly covert topic that Israel has never formally announced to avoid a regional nuclear arms race, and which the US until now has respected by remaining silent.

But by publishing the declassified document from 1987, the US reportedly breached the silent agreement to keep quiet on Israel's nuclear powers for the first time ever, detailing the nuclear program in great depth.

The timing of the revelation is highly suspect, given that it came as tensions spiraled out of control between Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama ahead of Netanyahu's March 3 address in Congress, in which he warned against the dangers of Iran's nuclear program and how the deal being formed on that program leaves the Islamic regime with nuclear breakout capabilities.

Another highly suspicious aspect of the document is that while the Pentagon saw fit to declassify sections on Israel's sensitive nuclear program, it kept sections on Italy, France, West Germany and other NATO countries classified, with those sections blocked out in the document.

The 386-page report entitled "Critical Technological Assessment in Israel and NATO Nations" gives a detailed description of how Israel advanced its military technology and developed its nuclear infrastructure and research in the 1970s and 1980s.... Declassifying the report comes at a sensitive timing as noted above, and given that the process to have it published was started three years ago, that timing is seen as having been the choice of the American government.
This appears to be a clear message to the Israelis that since they have nukes themselves, they have absolutely no grounds to complain about anyone else obtaining them. I do find it somewhat amusing that the article claims the US has breached a nonexistent agreement.

If an agreement of the sort that appears to be in the works does in fact take place, it should be interesting to see how all the "Iran is the New Hitler" neocons explain the complete failure of a nuclear Iran to immediately launch the attack on Israel that they have been telling us is imminent for at least the last decade.

Given what is presently taking place in Yemen and Iraq, I would think it is Saudi Arabia that has a lot more to be concerned than the Israelis.

Labels: ,

192 Comments:

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 11:02 AM  

I approve of us tweaking the Israeli's noses.

Blogger Alexander Thompson March 27, 2015 11:06 AM  

Your antisemitism is making you extremely short sighted.

Anonymous Starbuck March 27, 2015 11:08 AM  

I approve of us tweaking the Israeli's noses.

Why?

I would have approved of the USA minding its own business.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 11:10 AM  

Why?

I would have approved of the USA minding its own business.


So would I.

Do you approve of the Israelis minding their own business?

Anonymous Alexander March 27, 2015 11:10 AM  

Whereas approving of tweaking Russia is excellent long-term thinking.

I have seen no evidence that Josh is an anti-semite. Provide evidence or retract.

Blogger Vox March 27, 2015 11:10 AM  

Your antisemitism is making you extremely short sighted.

Your accusation of antisemitism is not only utterly stupid, it is absolutely false. I am one of the very few people who can prove he is not antisemitic thanks to being cleared of the charge by a major Jewish organization. And, of course, I just edited and published two books by Israel's leading military historian.

To point out that Iran is not, in fact, the new Hitler is a simple and straightforward matter of fact. Iran is an enemy of the USA, Israel, and the Sunni Islamic countries. That does not make them either insane or stupid.

It is very clear that the US is in no position to go to war with Iran. It is also very clear that Israel has no intention of going to war with Iran. So, Iran is going to get its nukes. Deal with it.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 11:11 AM  

I have seen no evidence that Josh is an anti-semite. Provide evidence or retract.

Actually I think he was calling vox an anti Semite.

Blogger S1AL March 27, 2015 11:12 AM  

"[T]he Israeli's noses."

They're not *that* big.

Anonymous Luke March 27, 2015 11:12 AM  

Anyone know if there is any kind of exodus taking place among foreign technical employees of Aramco? I know that there was in 1990-92 related to Desert Shield/Storm, and how Aramco essentially tried to trap them there.

Blogger Rabbi B March 27, 2015 11:16 AM  

"[T]he Israeli's noses."

They're not *that* big.

Hey, give us a break . . . air is free!

Blogger Chris Mallory March 27, 2015 11:17 AM  

The Neocons are already in full panic mode. The party line is now that "Muslim Obama has given Iran all of Israel's nuclear secrets". Never mind that Israel stole most of them from the US to begin with.

Blogger dw March 27, 2015 11:18 AM  

Israel allegedly has hundreds of nukes, whereas Iran doesn't have even one. Pakistan has how many? And they're a legitimately crazy country. Same goes for North Korea. Israel could wipe out Iran in an afternoon if they wanted. Iran is no threat to them.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 11:20 AM  

It is very clear that the US is in no position to go to war with Iran. It is also very clear that Israel has no intention of going to war with Iran. So, Iran is going to get its nukes. Deal with it.

This is the reality of the situation.

You can't eliminate Iran's nukes with wishful thinking.

Anonymous Alexander March 27, 2015 11:21 AM  

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. KARMA, yo!

Anonymous Will Best March 27, 2015 11:23 AM  

It is very clear that the US is in no position to go to war with Iran.

This is more of an issue the mind not wanting what the body is capable of. We have the ability to burn it to the ground and salt the earth. But we don't even have the will to spend 3 months toppling the current regime and then handing out hundreds of billions in a futile attempt to get us to like us.

Personally, I would be content to let the Europeans deal with it. They are a decade or more closer to open war with Islam than the US is and much further behind on their military preparedness than we are.

Blogger Plump Pleasant Plumber March 27, 2015 11:25 AM  

Saying that the Jewish lobby has too much influence isn't antisemitic. It's just a plain fact. EVERYONE has known about Israeli nuclear weapons. Since 1987, I believe......pictures of the weapon pits and all, details of boosted fission weapons, etc. Pollard opened my eyes. Look at Israeli cruise missiles, ballistic warheads, etc. They stole the designs. So, Israel has greatly benefitted from our association, haven't they? Remember when they killed our sailors in 1967? You see, I have no use for Obama at all, and less use for the Iranians. No one trusts Obama. He's a proven liar. So, information wasn't really released as it was acknowledged. Pollard should have been executed. This basic problem keeps coming up....Jews really aren't Americans, and they have no intention of helping the country that they live in. I'm referring to the secular movers and shakers, not the ultra orthodox, which present their own problems. Look at what they have done to this country. Open borders, etc.....it's almost like they're marxist infiltrators, isn't it?

Anonymous Salt March 27, 2015 11:26 AM  

Never mind that Israel stole most of them from the US to begin with.

I think we gave them to them. Else the French did.

Anonymous Tallen March 27, 2015 11:26 AM  

Hey, give us a break . . . air is free!

O RLY?

Anonymous cheddarman March 27, 2015 11:27 AM  

Michael Medved shaved his mustache in protest.

Blogger Nate March 27, 2015 11:28 AM  

The fact that the US is even negotiating with Iran is foreign policy disaster... this agreement... which really isn't an agreement as much as it is a complete... unconditional US capitulation... is an epic disaster.

Obama is basically standing up on mountain and screaming to the world "THE US IS A HUGE PUSSY!"

This idiot makes Jimmy Carter look competent.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 11:30 AM  

The fact that the US is even negotiating with Iran is foreign policy disaster... this agreement... which really isn't an agreement as much as it is a complete... unconditional US capitulation... is an epic disaster.

We negotiated with the Soviets throughout the Cold War. What we negotiate might be a disaster, but negotiating in and of itself is not.

Blogger Salt March 27, 2015 11:31 AM  

This idiot makes Jimmy Carter look competent.

Ain't that the truth. I do not see Iran with nukes as stabilizing to the region.

Blogger hank.jim March 27, 2015 11:33 AM  

So Iran will have nukes? Why do we need to have an agreement? The sanctions should continue. This will just weaken the U.S. and Obama is doing whatever it can to be the worst Democratic foreign policy president since Jimmy Carter.

Anonymous Porky March 27, 2015 11:33 AM  

Saeed better be part of this agreement.

Blogger Rabbi B March 27, 2015 11:33 AM  

"The fact that the US is even negotiating with Iran is foreign policy disaster. . ."

I don't see why this is such a big deal. Iran has assured us over and over that the nukes are for their civilian nuclear energy program.

Blogger Joshua Dyal March 27, 2015 11:34 AM  

Both Saudi Arabia and Iran have a lot to gain by the presence of a relatively strong Israel as long as they're still working against each other. Once that's done, then Israel becomes a liability.

Anonymous MrGreenMan March 27, 2015 11:34 AM  

http://electronicintifada.net/content/how-barack-obama-learned-love-israel/6786 How Barack Obama Learned to love Israel 2007

"But Obama’s gradual shift into the AIPAC camp had begun as early as 2002 as he planned his move from small time Illinois politics to the national scene. In 2003, Forward reported on how he had “been courting the pro-Israel constituency.” He co-sponsored an amendment to the Illinois Pension Code allowing the state of Illinois to lend money to the Israeli government. Among his early backers was Penny Pritzker — now his national campaign finance chair — scion of the liberal but staunchly Zionist family that owns the Hyatt hotel chain. (The Hyatt Regency hotel on Mount Scopus was built on land forcibly expropriated from Palestinian owners after Israel occupied East Jerusalem in 1967). He has also appointed several prominent pro-Israel advisors."

Perhaps they assumed that, by laying the votes of Jewish Americans at his feet, he would love them nearly as much as he loves and takes care of black Americans?

Anonymous Alexander March 27, 2015 11:35 AM  

I think we gave them to them. Else the French did.

My understanding of the matter is somewhat hazy, but that the French cozied up to Israel in an attempt to counter what it saw as too much British influence in the region via the Arab states. There was also an exchange between the Boers and Israel, though I think that was more Israel passing on the knowledge it gained in exchange for raw materials.

Blogger dw March 27, 2015 11:37 AM  

"Obama is basically standing up on mountain and screaming to the world "THE US IS A HUGE PUSSY!""

He's simply doing the only thing he knows how: bend over.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 11:37 AM  

This will just weaken the U.S. and Obama is doing whatever it can to be the worst Democratic foreign policy president since Jimmy Carter.

Given that the only other democratic president since Carter is Clinton, this is a nonsense comparison.

It's like saying W was the best republican president since Reagan.

Anonymous karsten March 27, 2015 11:43 AM  

" I do not see Iran with nukes as stabilizing to the region. "

In fact, it's the only thing that would stabilize the region; or at the very least, get the U.S. to invade some country other than Iran when the next semiannual War to Please the Sacred Jews gets launched.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan March 27, 2015 11:46 AM  

Or just another way to divide the Muslims into their two at war with one another camps

Anonymous Starbuck March 27, 2015 11:47 AM  

Do you approve of the Israelis minding their own business?

I do. As long as the Arab countries minded their own business as well.
I would support the Israelis of ejecting the "Palestinians" out of Israel. Including the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

But alas, we both know that some people just cannot leave others alone. They MUST work hard to control or destroy others.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 March 27, 2015 11:49 AM  

All of you folks who fear a nuclear Iran do realize that Pakistan has had nuclear weapons for over a decade now and that the Taliban is holding up in that country.

And let's not forget the various Taliban sympathizers in that country who would be more than willing to provide the Taliban with nuclear weapons.

Blogger Nate March 27, 2015 11:50 AM  

"We negotiated with the Soviets throughout the Cold War. What we negotiate might be a disaster, but negotiating in and of itself is not."

Hey remember that time the Soviet Union hijacked a plane and held american citizens hostage?

Oh wait... right... that was Iran.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 11:50 AM  

I do.

Ok. When Bibi decided to sabotage American negotiations with Iran, was that minding his own business?

Anonymous Starbuck March 27, 2015 11:52 AM  

It is very clear that the US is in no position to go to war with Iran. It is also very clear that Israel has no intention of going to war with Iran. So, Iran is going to get its nukes. Deal with it.-VD

VD,

How does that go with the Non-Proliferation Treaty? Or would be that what Iran is negotiating to "change" for them? After all, Iran signed the treaty in 1969? or 1968... something like that.

Blogger Nate March 27, 2015 11:52 AM  

"All of you folks who fear a nuclear Iran do realize that Pakistan has had nuclear weapons for over a decade now and that the Taliban is holding up in that country."

My problem is not Iran getting nukes. My problem is the fact that we are negotiating with them at all... and... worse... the capitulation.

Blogger Nate March 27, 2015 11:53 AM  

". When Bibi decided to sabotage American negotiations with Iran, was that minding his own business?"

Obama /= American

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 11:56 AM  

Hey remember that time the Soviet Union hijacked a plane and held american citizens hostage?


They did shoot down Gary Powers.

While we're playing the "remember that one time" game, remember when we overthrew Iran's democratic government and installed the Shah? That was awesome.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 11:58 AM  

Obama /= American

Since Obama is not the one personally negotiating, and in fact American diplomats are, these are American negotiations.

Blogger Nate March 27, 2015 11:58 AM  

"While we're playing the "remember that one time" game, remember when we overthrew Iran's democratic government and installed the Shah? That was awesome."

it was awesome. the Shah was awesome. He lived at my house while he was in exile in America after the goat humping diaper heads threw him out.

Blogger Nate March 27, 2015 11:59 AM  

"Since Obama is not the one personally negotiating, and in fact American diplomats are, these are American negotiations."

Don't be a retard. These diplomats are all Obama shills that were given their posts for raising money for him.

Anonymous Starbuck March 27, 2015 12:00 PM  

Never mind that Israel stole most of them from the US to begin with. Chris Mallory

You got evidence for that assertion that Israel stole nuclear technology from the US? Maybe the USA gave it to them or even sold it to them. Or they bought and stole from all the nuclear powers?

OpenID luagha March 27, 2015 12:01 PM  

I would disagree about Israel's willingness to go to war with Iran. The proxy war has begun in earnest and Israel has strange-bedfellows ties with Jordan and Egypt that could easily be leveraged.

Israel has done its damndest to keep out of Arab on Arab wars knowing that all Arab sides would turn on them. This is an Arab on Persian war, though and is only going to heat up from here.

There are big problems with getting involved in any standard way, problem one being Obama. This release thing is tiny weak sauce compared to what Obama/Jarrett could do in the event of real war action. (Plenty of other problems too, like the Russians, common Muslim sentiment, etc. )

As time goes on, various actions will be required and unlike the US, Israel Is faster about doing what is required. As for me, this would be a great time to attack Hezbollah, which I hear is fighting ISIS occasionally. That gives Israel entry into the proxy war against Iran.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 March 27, 2015 12:03 PM  

My problem is not Iran getting nukes. My problem is the fact that we are negotiating with them at all... and... worse... the capitulation.

All right Nate, what should we be doing instead? As VD pointed out, we are in no position to fight them militarily, so what do we do now?

Anonymous cheddarman March 27, 2015 12:04 PM  

1) Maybe Obama is coming to the realization that American cannot rule the world.

2) The silver lining in this is that it helps weaken the Banksters and the Petrodollar, the two institutions that destroyed what was formerly known as America.

Anonymous Salt March 27, 2015 12:04 PM  

Up next,

Saudi Arabia will not rule out building or acquiring nuclear weapons, the country’s ambassador to the United States has indicated.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 12:06 PM  

Don't be a retard. These diplomats are all Obama shills that were given their posts for raising money for him.

These are multilateral talks. Britain, France, German, China, and Russia are all participating.

Are those diplomats also Obama shills?

Anonymous hygate March 27, 2015 12:08 PM  

"It is very clear that the US is in no position to go to war with Iran. It is also very clear that Israel has no intention of going to war with Iran. So, Iran is going to get its nukes."

Perhaps so, but the US has had an anti-proliferation policy pretty much since the Manhattan project began. We try to keep anyone new from joining the nuclear club. We sometimes fail, but attempting to limit other states acquisition of such a devastating weapon is perfectly rational. The question is not should we try to keep states from acquiring nuclear weapons, but how to do so.

Blogger Tank March 27, 2015 12:09 PM  

Josh


Ok. When Bibi decided to sabotage American negotiations with Iran, was that minding his own business?


Yes, obviously. That is exactly what he was doing.

Anonymous Starbuck March 27, 2015 12:10 PM  

Ok. When Bibi decided to sabotage American negotiations with Iran, was that minding his own business?

Nope, not at all. Listen, not many countries mind their own business. Do you really expect Bibi and Israel to not get into foreign entanglements?

There is only one thing Israel could do that the world would approve of and that would be to die. Every single one of them. That is the ONLY thing the world would approve of. So if the whole world is against you, then you might as well flip the world off and do what is right for Israel. So I don't fault Israel doing what Israel does. I personally would cheer Bibi if he made a press release and told every nation to go fuck themselves.

Anonymous Jack Amok March 27, 2015 12:13 PM  

It is very clear that the US is in no position to go to war with Iran. It is also very clear that Israel has no intention of going to war with Iran. So, Iran is going to get its nukes.

This is what happens when you squander your resources (and willpower) on stuipd shit. When the time comes for something important, you're tapped out.

Anonymous hygate March 27, 2015 12:13 PM  

Since Pakistan is majority Sunni then Saudi Arabia should have no problem acquiring nukes. That should make the world much safer for Christians.

OpenID luagha March 27, 2015 12:14 PM  

On 'where Israel got bomb technology. '

When george Schultz was asked how long it would take for Japan to get the bomb, he said, "They could pull an all-nighter."

Although the answer was really more like six weeks, he said it to indicate that Japan already had all the know how in house. With the skills there, the technical problems are known.

Israel, with its large number of European trained scientists, was the same way. I'm sure they got clues and help, like from the South Africans, and that speeded things up, but thier know how was going to get them there far faster than any Arab nation.

Blogger Nate March 27, 2015 12:14 PM  

"All right Nate, what should we be doing instead? As VD pointed out, we are in no position to fight them militarily, so what do we do now?"

We shouldn't be participating at all. Leave the sanctions and if they manage to make nukes... ok. North Korea did it. Its not the end of the world.

Blogger Nate March 27, 2015 12:16 PM  

"These are multilateral talks. Britain, France, German, China, and Russia are all participating.

Are those diplomats also Obama shills?"

Well Russia and China are on Iran's side. As for the others... who cares? They are bitches.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 12:16 PM  

This is what happens when you squander your resources (and willpower) on stuipd shit. When the time comes for something important, you're tapped out.

I'm not sure this even reaches that level for us.

Blogger JartStar March 27, 2015 12:18 PM  

I suspect the Saudis will get nukes if Iran gets them as they are enemies. Take a look at Operation Decisive Storm in which the Saudis are leading against the Houthis who are supported by Iran.

Blogger ajw308 March 27, 2015 12:19 PM  

There was also an exchange between the Boers and Israel, though I think that was more Israel passing on the knowledge it gained in exchange for raw materials.
Taiwan, the 3rd pariah, worked with Israel and South Africa. That's what helped keep China at bay.

Proof that they succeeded was an oceanic seismic event off the continental shelf near South Africa in a region where there is no fault line.

Anonymous hygate March 27, 2015 12:19 PM  

"not many countries mind their own business"

Exactly, Israel is going to do what is in its own interest. Isn't the complaint of many people who frequent this site that the United States isn't doing what is in its own interest? Why fault Israel for acting in its own interest. If the United States is acting in Israel's interest instead of its own the fault is the United State's.

Anonymous Eric Ashley March 27, 2015 12:21 PM  

If that is a clear message, rather than a hissy fit, it is still a stupid clear message.

Non-existent? The status quo for a long time was 'yeah, Israel has nukes, but no one is admitting it'.

One can only hope that the Israelis decide to do what needs to be done, and flatten major parts of Iran.

As to 'worst foreign policy pres since Carter' is not the same thing. See, Carter is pretty universally acknowledged as the Worst President, especially FP, Evar.

And since we won the Cold War at Reykavik when Reagan told Gorbachev to pound sand....

On the plus side, the c hance of Washington DC getting nuked went up considerably.

Blogger ajw308 March 27, 2015 12:22 PM  

Well Russia and China are on Iran's side.
Nate, Have you ever played Risk or read "Watching the Tigers Fight" in Riding the Red Horse? Those guys don't have sides.

Blogger Noah B March 27, 2015 12:23 PM  

If Russia and China can accept a nuclear Iran, I don't know why the US can't, especially in view of the rapid increase in North American petroleum extraction. Using history as a guide, it is the Sunni countries that have the most to fear from a nuclear Iran.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 12:24 PM  

Isn't the complaint of many people who frequent this site that the United States isn't doing what is in its own interest?

Unless Obama is the one doing it.

Because secret gay Muslim or something.

Blogger Aquila Aquilonis March 27, 2015 12:25 PM  

< touches walle t>

Blogger Noah B March 27, 2015 12:28 PM  

Also, if we were going to attack Iran, Bush had the opportunity to do it years ago when we had a stronger presence Iraq and Afghanistan and Iran's nuclear program was not as advanced. Now that there is practically zero chance of successful military intervention to halt Iran's nuclear program, it's time to end the pointless rhetoric advocating war.

Blogger Noah B March 27, 2015 12:29 PM  

"Because secret gay Muslim or something."

It's hardly a secret.

Anonymous hygate March 27, 2015 12:30 PM  

@Josh

I subscribe to the "ideologue with, at best, average intelligence who got where he is because he was a red diaper baby, a lot of people wanted to vote for a black for president, and McCain was the designated loser" school of though myself.

Blogger IM2L844 March 27, 2015 12:33 PM  

It should be equally interesting to see how all the "Iran deserves a chance" libtards explain the conscious enabling of a nuclear Iran to immediately launch the attack on Israel when Iran follows through on actualizing a desire they've been expressing for decades.

Blogger Noah B March 27, 2015 12:35 PM  

My read is that Obama has no coherent set of beliefs. He just does one random thing after another hoping that the cool kids to like him.

Anonymous WaterBoy March 27, 2015 12:37 PM  

Nate: "Hey remember that time the Soviet Union hijacked a plane and held american citizens hostage?"

No...but I remember that time the Soviet Union shot down a plane and killed American citizen passengers....

Blogger luagha March 27, 2015 12:38 PM  

"How does that go with the Non-Proliferation Treaty?"

It is to laugh. Words on paper.

If the US steps aside for Iran to get the bomb, the only other who would conceivably step up is Israel and it would be hellaciously difficult for them.

Anonymous Starbuck March 27, 2015 12:39 PM  

Also, if we were going to attack Iran, Bush had the opportunity to do it years ago when we had a stronger presence Iraq and Afghanistan and Iran's nuclear program was not as advanced. Now that there is practically zero chance of successful military intervention to halt Iran's nuclear program, it's time to end the pointless rhetoric advocating war.

personally, I don't think the USA will ever attack Iran. Never will. I don't think God would allow it. Proof being that the USA hasn't attacked Iran. That proof will be true until the USA does go to war with Iran.

That's not to say that Iran couldn't attack the USA. God very well could allow that.

Anonymous Starbuck March 27, 2015 12:41 PM  

No...but I remember that time the Soviet Union shot down a plane and killed American citizen passengers....

I do. Also remember the USA killing millions of civilians over the past 50 years.

Blogger Nate March 27, 2015 12:43 PM  

"Because secret gay Muslim or something."

No. Because idiot anti-colonialist african and is more interested in fucking over Great Britain to make his long lost sperm donor daddy proud than anything else.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 12:45 PM  

Dinesh, is that you?

Anonymous Starbuck March 27, 2015 12:54 PM  

Dinesh, is that you?

Who you talking to?

Anonymous Anonymous March 27, 2015 12:55 PM  

"Now that there is practically zero chance of successful military intervention to halt Iran's nuclear program, it's time to end the pointless rhetoric advocating war."

But... but... then the USA-Israel beast would have to get a day job.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 12:57 PM  

Who you talking to?

That was referring to Nate.

Anonymous Anonymous March 27, 2015 1:01 PM  

"But... but... then the USA-Israel beast would have to get a day job."

Of course it could always switch back to thermonuclear war with Russia.

Anonymous SumDood March 27, 2015 1:11 PM  

Poor Josh. So warm and cuddly in his blanket of America-hating indignation, he just can't be bothered to open his eyes and see the world for what it is.

To people like Josh, America is a source of evil in the world, like that time when we rammed the Shah down the Iranian's throats. EXCEPT for the fact that the other contender to lead Iran at that time was a KGB stooge named Mossadegh.

Maybe Josh thinks that the Middle East would have been a much safer place with a Soviet-aligned Iran for all those years. Because that was the alternative.

Of the choices available to America at that time (do nothing, back the Shah, or back the KGB's puppet) we made the best choice for America AND for Iran. Iran was at peace with its neighbors while the Shah ruled. Iran's economy and educational infrastructure were also improving faster than Iran's non-secular neighbors. Outside of Israel, women in Iran under the Shah had more rights than in any other country in the Middle East. I mean, who opposes equal rights for women?

The same general situation presented itself in Chile. A Soviet-backed dictator (while he was elected, he soon started acting like a dictator) named Allende was driving Chile into an economic ditch, and the Chilean military asked for American help to replace him with Pinochet, who made Chile into Latin America's strongest economy throughout the 1990s.

Which outcome is better for Chileans? Another Soviet satellite with its population in chains as they wait in line to buy meager government rations, or a free people with a bright economic future?

I think we all know what Josh's answer will be.

Anonymous Starbuck March 27, 2015 1:16 PM  

I think we all know what Josh's answer will be.

I don't. I can't read his mind. How do you do it?

Anonymous Porky March 27, 2015 1:16 PM  

Of the choices available to America at that time (do nothing, back the Shah, or back the KGB's puppet)

I'll take 'Do Nothing' for $1000, Alex.

Blogger JartStar March 27, 2015 1:20 PM  

IM2L844,

Maybe as a last resort, but that's about the poorest use of nukes for Iran. Instead, by having them they can enact their agenda at will knowing they can't be invaded by conventional forces and MAD with Israel.

Blogger Russell Lemley March 27, 2015 1:21 PM  

http://www.amazon.com/Manufactured-Crisis-Untold-Story-Nuclear/dp/1935982338/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1427476877&sr=8-1&keywords=gareth+porter

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 1:25 PM  

Poor Josh. So warm and cuddly in his blanket of America-hating indignation, he just can't be bothered to open his eyes and see the world for what it is.


I hate America?

Anonymous Alexander March 27, 2015 1:26 PM  

Lots of people do thongs that aren't good for them. Thats no reason to go overseas and spill American blood and treasure. If the Chileans would rather have a strong economy than be a soviet client, they can fight and die for it. Same goes for Iran or anyone else.

So kindly peddle your bait-and-switch elsewhere. You aren't asking "what is better", you're asking "should we die for it".

And if dictator is what's wrong, then how in hell is replacing a dictator with a dictator any better? And if its the commie part that troubles you, then don't try and paper over the fact he was elected by screaming dictator.

Anonymous zen0 March 27, 2015 1:27 PM  

@ Chris Mallory

Never mind that Israel stole most of them from the US to begin with.

This does not even reach the level of Wikipedia

In 1986 Francis Perrin, French high-commissioner for atomic energy from 1951 to 1970 stated publicly that in 1949 Israeli scientists were invited to the Saclay Nuclear Research Centre, this cooperation leading to a joint effort including sharing of knowledge between French and Israeli scientists especially those with knowledge from the Manhattan Project.

And

After U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower announced the Atoms for Peace initiative, Israel became the second country to sign on (following Turkey), and signed a peaceful nuclear cooperation agreement with the United States on July 12, 1955.[31][24] This culminated in a public signing ceremony on March 20, 1957, to construct a "small swimming-pool research reactor in Nachal Soreq", which would be used to shroud the construction of a much larger facility with the French at Dimona.[32]

Revising history to slander people is bad form, old chap.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 1:27 PM  

Maybe Josh thinks that the Middle East would have been a much safer place with a Soviet-aligned Iran for all those years. Because that was the alternative.

Maybe Josh thinks that minding our own business is a sound foreign policy.

I think we all know what Josh's answer will be.

Enlighten me.

What would my answer be?

Blogger Rabbi B March 27, 2015 1:27 PM  

"I hate America?"

Isn't it obvious? SumDood knows your mind far better than you do. Be afraid, be very afraid . . . .

Blogger Nate March 27, 2015 1:30 PM  

"I'll take 'Do Nothing' for $1000, Alex."

Russia got Iran to late to reap the benefits of it.

In reality... if they had gotten their boy in instead of the Shah... I am not remotely sure the cold war would've ended the way it did... when it did.

Anonymous conway twitter March 27, 2015 1:30 PM  

Iran is not the enemy of the American people. The jewish led pro Israel policy of the USA has been meddling in the middle east for decades. Jewish neocons convinced George Bush to invade Iraq, which has led to the deaths of a million plus middle easterners and left depleted uranium in the ground. After all of that, it is natural for the Iranians to be hostile to the U.S. government.

A nuclear deal with Iran would be one of the great successes of the Obama administration.

Anonymous . March 27, 2015 1:31 PM  

Also remember the USA killing millions of civilians over the past 50 years.

Uhhhh.... Who? Where?

("Vietnam" is the wrong answer, btw)

Anonymous JI March 27, 2015 1:32 PM  

Great. Now we're looking at a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.

Anonymous Starbuck March 27, 2015 1:33 PM  

Lots of people do thongs that aren't good for them.

I am guessing those type of thongs must go very deep into the crack so as to not be "good for them".

Anonymous Grinder March 27, 2015 1:34 PM  

So what would you do and why? What would a non-pussy do? I think America should mind its own business.

Blogger IM2L844 March 27, 2015 1:37 PM  

Maybe as a last resort, but that's about the poorest use of nukes for Iran.

This assumes a reasonable and rational perspective. It's not at all clear that's a good wager.

Anonymous WinstonWebb March 27, 2015 1:37 PM  

JIMarch 27, 2015 1:32 PM
Great. Now we're looking at a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.


Don't be such a pessimist. Maybe they'll decide to USE THEM on each other!
Yeah, I'm a "glass half-full" kinda guy.

Anonymous Starbuck March 27, 2015 1:42 PM  

Also remember the USA killing millions of civilians over the past 50 years.

Uhhhh.... Who? Where?

("Vietnam" is the wrong answer, btw)


Vietnam is NOT the wrong answer. We had no business being there. We bombed the crap out of north Vietnam... millions were killed.

Then there was the wars after sept 11... Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, now Yemen. How many civilians have been killed by drones using hellfire missles at weddings or even funerals. This country has gone mad... it's bloodlusts knows no bounds. Why we even kill the unborn is beyond me.

Americans accuse Russians of being evil... but then lots of americans project.
We accuse Iran of being evil... We best be careful, attacking Iran could prove disasterous for the USA. Poking the Russians could be a huge mistake.

Anonymous . March 27, 2015 1:51 PM  

Nope.

Vietnam IS the wrong answer.

We did not kill MILLIONS of CIVILIANS in Vietnam.

We did not kill MILLIONS bombing North Vietnam.

You are fucking ignorant.

Anonymous Mike M. March 27, 2015 1:55 PM  

This could have some very interesting long-term implications. Iran is a headache for both Israel and Saudi Arabia. It's entirely plausible for them to coordinate actions. The key being Jordan...the Jordanians have a track record of being on decent terms with both countries, and King Abdullah is a first-class statesman. I could see an Israeli-Saudi-Jordanian alliance structure tackle the Iranians.

Which would be a Very Good Thing. If nothing else, it allows the United States to play a supporting role instead of doing all the heavy lifting ourselves. It's sound policy to let the locals lead in solving local problems whenever feasible.

Blogger Chris Mallory March 27, 2015 1:58 PM  

"You got evidence for that assertion that Israel stole nuclear technology from the US? Maybe the USA gave it to them or even sold it to them. Or they bought and stole from all the nuclear powers?"

On June 27, 2012, the FBI partially declassified and released seven additional pages [.pdf] from a 1985–2002 investigation into how a network of front companies connected to the Israeli Ministry of Defense illegally smuggled nuclear triggers out of the U.S.* http://original.antiwar.com/smith-grant/2012/07/03/netanyahu-worked-inside-nuclear-smuggling-ring/

Anything more you want, you can Google yourself.


"This does not even reach the level of Wikipedia
Revising history to slander people is bad form, old chap."

We are discussing weapons, not peaceful uses.

Actually it does reach Wiki:
The CIA believed that Israel's first bombs may have been made with highly enriched uranium stolen in the mid-1960s from the U.S. Navy nuclear fuel plant operated by the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation, where sloppy material accounting would have masked the theft.[71][72] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel
You can check the two footnotes yourself.


Blogger Nate March 27, 2015 1:59 PM  

"Jewish neocons convinced George Bush to invade Iraq, which has led to the deaths of a million plus middle easterners and left depleted uranium in the ground. "

/facepalm

Yeah because Saddam invading Kuwait was totally cool with everyone else but the bad jews.

And Saddam attempting to assassinate Dubya's dad totally had nothing to do with Dubya invading Iraq.

No no.

it was the joos.

K.

Blogger Rabbi B March 27, 2015 2:03 PM  

"No no. it was the joos."

Hardly a thread goes by . . .

Anonymous Starbuck March 27, 2015 2:06 PM  

Vietnam is the right answer...

Blogger Student in Blue March 27, 2015 2:09 PM  

@Rabbi B
Well, you have to admit, it's an easy scapegoat. They find their way into the higher echelons of almost everything it seems.

Whether or not the scapegoat is correct doesn't change the fact it's easy.

Anonymous . March 27, 2015 2:09 PM  

Vietnam is the right answer...

Still flaunting your ignorance.

And still wrong.

Anonymous cheddarman March 27, 2015 2:11 PM  

Nate,

How long 'till you get nukes? It would be a good homeschooling project for you and the kids. Maybe they could have a contest with Rabbi B.'s kids to see who gets one first. Besides, nukes make for good neighbors.

Anonymous Curtis March 27, 2015 2:13 PM  

For the "let's kick Iranian ass" crowd.

How do you suppose we are going to do that?

No. Seriously. I want to hear your master plan.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 2:16 PM  

For the "let's kick Iranian ass" crowd.

How do you suppose we are going to do that?

No. Seriously. I want to hear your master plan.


WE'LL PUT A BOOT IN YOUR ASS IT'S THE AMERICAN WAY!

MURICA FUCK YEAH!

Blogger Student in Blue March 27, 2015 2:19 PM  

Airstrikes. Airstrikes will be how we defeat Iran.

(/sarcasm)

Blogger Rabbi B March 27, 2015 2:19 PM  

"Maybe they could have a contest with Rabbi B.'s kids to see who gets one first."

We would neither confirm nor deny having a program. It would only be WIDELY BELIEVED that such a program exists. You understand . . .

Anonymous Curtis March 27, 2015 2:25 PM  

Ah, come-on! I was thinking D-Day invasion on their gulf coast! And, and, assemble pre-invasion hardware on the Turkey, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, and Azerbaijan borders with Iran! And let us not leave out Armenia!

Ef it! Let's just lob nukes oh hell yeah USA! USA!

Blogger justaguy March 27, 2015 2:33 PM  

I would think that if the current U.S. policy is to accelerate the breaking of the non-proliferation regime a decade or so earlier than its natural demise (meaning nukes could be contained a few years longer if we were willing) then we should certainly shore up our missile defenses a bit as well as improved cruise-missile defense.

Tel-Aviv appears to be a big nuke sink to soak up the first and maybe second rogue nukes, but after that New York and Washington DC look too vulnerable. Europe looks very vulnerable also.

Lastly, the world's defense regime of deterrence will have to change significantly. In other words, who do you think Israel will nuke when the first terrorist or rogue nuke goes off in one of their cities even if they don't have firm proof? Expand that idea to all countries of Europe, much of the Middle East and Asia. Playing out the idea of Iran gets nukes a few years when many many countries have them does not look like a future I want for my progeny.

This future seems inevitable even without the U.S. accelerating the process, but the longer to put it off the better.

Blogger Rabbi B March 27, 2015 2:38 PM  

"Besides, nukes make for good neighbors."

Robert Frost would be proud:

Mending Nukes

Something there is that doesn't love a nuke,
That sends the frozen-ground-swell under it,
And spills the upper boulders in the sun,
And makes gaps even two-hundred million can pass abreast . . . .

. . . .He is all Sunni and I am all Shiite.
My goats will never get across . . .

. . . . Oh, just another kind of Middle Eastern game,
One on a side. It comes to little more:

He only says, 'Good nukes make good neighbors'.




Blogger Kevin Blackwell March 27, 2015 2:41 PM  

Well the Bible says Iran will nuke Israel and fail, but will nuke Saudi Arabia and succeed. So take it for what you want.

Anonymous Sumdood March 27, 2015 2:46 PM  

LOL. One does not need to read minds to accurately interpret what people say, Starbuck.

Josh: "Maybe Josh thinks that minding our own business is a sound foreign policy."

And maybe Josh is dangerously naïve. Along with a few other utopian dreamers here.

"...Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...

What is that old line about appeasement? It's when you feed your friends to the crocodile, hoping he will eat you last.

And, Starbuck, you try to concern-troll us about not poking the big bad Russians. What exactly do you think that Putin is doing to the rest of the world right now? Invading Georgia & Ukraine, flying nuclear-capable bombers next to NATO countries.

At what point do we poke back to let Putin know there are consequences to belligerence?

I eagerly await your response (which I predict will be mealy-mouthed doubletalk).

Anonymous Will Best March 27, 2015 2:49 PM  

My read is that Obama has no coherent set of beliefs. He just does one random thing after another hoping that the cool kids to like him.

So TENS

----

Personally, I am all for a virus approach which will mutate and turn Arabs into an army of super fast mutant zombies.

Though as a backup plan I think rounding up all our SJW's would serve as an adequate warning about how serious we are.

Anonymous zen0 March 27, 2015 2:50 PM  

@ Chris Mallory
actually, it does reach Wiki:

The CIA believed that Israel's first bombs may have been made with highly enriched uranium stolen in the mid-1960s from the U.S. Navy nuclear fuel plant operated by the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation, ....



"may have been" has the corollary "may NOT have been"

I checked footnote 71.

After numerous investigations and reinvestigations the facts remain unclear.

still a maybe/ maybe not.

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 2:51 PM  

Well the Bible says Iran will nuke Israel and fail, but will nuke Saudi Arabia and succeed. So take it for what you want.

Where does the bible say this?

Anonymous zen0 March 27, 2015 2:52 PM  

@ Sumdood

What exactly do you think that Putin is doing to the rest of the world right now?

they started it......

Blogger ray March 27, 2015 2:53 PM  

'Given what is presently taking place in Yemen and Iraq, I would think it is Saudi Arabia that has a lot more to be concerned than the Israelis.'



That's not what the Bible says (and thus what Christians believe). That's a globalist viewpoint.

And seeing's how the U.S. has nukes, she has absolutely no grounds to complain about anyone else obtaining them.

Good luck!

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 2:53 PM  

And maybe Josh is dangerously naïve. Along with a few other utopian dreamers here.

The utopian dreamers are the interventionists, not the non-interventionists.

At what point do we poke back to let Putin know there are consequences to belligerence?

CONSEQUENCES WILL NEVER BE THE SAME!

What's the American National Interest in the Ukraine or Georgia?

Anonymous Curtis March 27, 2015 2:57 PM  

justaguy - They are parking them on the Russian border, just in case Iran lobs a nuke at us and Israel. Wink. Wink-wink.

No one is going to rogue nuke. If it happens, it will happen by severe miscalculation. Or, nothing else to lose. But then, why would someone have nothing else to lose?

To many people are thinking, "Damn! Those Iranians! They're just a bunch of donkey butt stuffer'ers and boy bugger'ers! They'll lob nukes fer sure! They just can't wait for their 72 virgin transvestites!"

You watch, when they get their ICBM's, they will secretly hand one over to ISIS.

I don't know. But you sure got me crapping my pants now.

It's probably going to happen. But I don't it is going to happen as you believe it is going to happen.

Blogger Chiva March 27, 2015 2:59 PM  

"We would neither confirm nor deny having a program. It would only be WIDELY BELIEVED that such a program exists. You understand . . ."

Dang it Rabbi B. Must remember not to drink coffee while reading your comments.

Blogger Noah B March 27, 2015 3:03 PM  

"Where does the bible say this?"

Book of Armaments, Chapter 19

Blogger Rabbi B March 27, 2015 3:10 PM  

"Book of Armaments, Chapter 19'

Yeah . . . right after 'II Opinions' and before "I Hesitations" . . .

Anonymous joe doakes March 27, 2015 3:19 PM  

I have guns, so I have no grounds to object to others having them. Well, except for my mortal enemies who just happen to be mentally ill. Then I have grounds to object. As does Israel and the rest of the civilized world, to Iran.

Anonymous Amok Time March 27, 2015 3:46 PM  

It may be that Israel cozies up to another super power, now that Obama's America is less able to carry coherent policies onto the World stage. Barack has a way of degrading anything he touches or focuses on. I wonder how he functioned for his 50 or so years without having someone kick his bum hard? Or did he only begin his bungling when he had the extreme power of the presidency? Someday, he will have to answer to God and it won't be a pretty sight.

Blogger Danby March 27, 2015 3:50 PM  

Tom Lehrer had this right 45 years ago:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRLON3ddZIw
And the end result, of course:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frAEmhqdLFs

Blogger luagha March 27, 2015 3:53 PM  

"It may be that Israel cozies up to another super power, now that Obama's America is less able to carry coherent policies onto the World stage."

Netanyahu and Putin did have a semi-famous not-so-secret meeting a few years back where Netanyahu disappeared for a while and it turned out he had a secret face-to-face meeting with Putin.

Putin's made it clear how much he likes the way it's turned out with Soviet Jews back in Israel sending business and money back to Russia. It's like a dream come true, isn't it? Get rid of the Jews and they keep paying you!

Anonymous BigGaySteve March 27, 2015 4:07 PM  

"I would have approved of the USA minding its own business." ~

Speaking of minding our business I recall reading somewhere that if they had nukes it would mean we couldn't give them fanatical aid, to the tune of $8billion/yr. Please transfer the aid to the BigGaySteve Guns & Margarita fund. Helping gays who have lost their guns in boating accidents.

"They're not *that* big." There is something else about them that is not that big but I don't think the Ilk would appreciate the knowledge

"No no. it was the joos."~ can we get a clarification to the acceptable number of OOOOOOOs, also see above point.

"Obama is basically standing up on mountain and screaming to the world "THE US IS A HUGE PUSSY!""

Speaking of glass houses, Soros' whole arm can fit up Barry's backside.

"You got evidence...that Israel stole nuclear technology from the US?" ~ If there is not evidence why is Johnny Pollard locked up?

"Because secret gay Muslim or something." ~ I don't consider the Islamic practice of Bacha-Bazi to be gay, just like you wouldn't consider the al-hijra raping of little white girls to be STR8.

"I have guns, so I have no grounds to object to others having them."

I object to violent felons, drug dealers, low IQ moslems & illegal aliens having them. I object to MS-13 bangers having full auto weapons that I couldn't legally buy. I object to Bath House Barry giving Mexican drug dealers free guns but not me. I believe there should be at the very least the same requirements to vote as to concealed carry.

Blogger Eric March 27, 2015 4:19 PM  

Ain't that the truth. I do not see Iran with nukes as stabilizing to the region.

Nope. Say hello to a world with about twenty new nuclear powers as all the Arab countries acquire nukes as a counterbalance to Iran. It's pretty telling countries like KSA weren't worried about Israel's nukes but they're terrified of Iran.

As it happens I don't think we have a reasonable option to stop Iran from getting the bomb, but anyone who thinks that's a good thing is an idiot.

Anonymous WinstonWebb March 27, 2015 4:20 PM  

joe doakesMarch 27, 2015 3:19 PM
I have guns, so I have no grounds to object to others having them. Well, except for my mortal enemies who just happen to be mentally ill. Then I have grounds to object.

joe, you do realize that there are a not insignificant number of leftist voters in the U.S. that believe your desire to own guns is a sign of mental illness and, therefore, believe you should not have the right to own guns, right? Is it circular reasoning? Absolutely. But the see you as a mortal enemy in need of restraint. Sound familiar?

Blogger Eric March 27, 2015 4:31 PM  

Incidentally this has nothing to do with geopolitics. The US released details on Iran's nuclear program because our president is a petulant child in a man's body.

Anonymous Angry March 27, 2015 4:40 PM  

Bottom line is, Obama's actions really are signalling how much Jewish power is waning under the Democrat Party. Non-Jewish Democrats are tired of the outsized influence Jews have. NJD's want to move up in the organization and have their vision of what the Party ought to be dominating the landscape, not to have everything dictated through a Jewish lens.

This is really nothing more than a power struggle between the incompatible factions of the Democratic Party, of which allowing Iran to get a nuke is the latest fu.

But there is a little more to it. Obama probably believes that ISIS is run by Mossad. ISIS military successes are too great not to be influenced by outside help. Most Middle Eastern pound themselves into oblivion, achieving mostly Pyrrhic victories. ISIS simply bucks that trend too well.

ISIS is basically the proxy army of Israel. It does Israel's bidding in two ways. First, it clears out Israel's enemies, like Syria, Egypt, Jordan, etc. Second, because of ISIS's brutality, the moral case for war against it keeps going up. Eventually, when ISIS has expanded to a large enough land area, it can then be defeated by Western militaries.

Israel can then take over the territory left by ISIS.

Obama does not want to see this result, so he is allowing Iran to have a nuke to check Israeli territorial ambitions.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein March 27, 2015 4:51 PM  

Where does the bible say this?

Revelations! I seen it on the internets.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein March 27, 2015 4:54 PM  

No...but I remember that time the Soviet Union shot down a plane and killed American citizen passengers....

FWIW, I remember that time the United States shot down a plane and killed Iranian citizen passengers....

Anonymous Quartermaster March 27, 2015 5:07 PM  

The Saudis knew Israel had nukes, but wasn't really worried about it. They knew the Israelis were rational actors and would not use them unless the Sampson option was invoked, which was quite unlikely. Now that iran is going to get nukes, Riyadh is getting quite nervous, and rightly so.

It is foolish in the extreme for Zer0's maladminstration to declassify the docs they have about Israeli nukes. But I think Zer0's intention is to destabilize the Levant, and he's well on his way towards that goal.

Blogger Eric March 27, 2015 5:48 PM  

Angry, do you really think Israel wants to add Syrian suicide bombers to the Palestinian suicide bombers blowing up pizza joints full of teenagers?

Blogger JartStar March 27, 2015 5:57 PM  

Bottom line is, Obama's actions really are signalling how much Jewish power is waning under the Democrat Party. Non-Jewish Democrats are tired of the outsized influence Jews have.

This is a good point.

Blogger luagha March 27, 2015 6:03 PM  

"First, it clears out Israel's enemies, like Syria, Egypt, Jordan, etc."

You aren't keeping up on the news. Egypt, Israel, and Jordan have been working hand in glove on the Palestinians.
Israel's done flyovers of Boy Assad's house twice now; they could take him out any time they want but they don't because they don't want an ISIS to take his place.
Israel has publically stated that if Isis crosses the border into Jordan they'll get involved because that's where ISIS has to go to get to them (but not until then because their presence on an Arabic battlefield confuses matters too much).

If anyone is 'behind' ISIS it's the US. We're the ones who started shipping arms to supposed 'rebels' fighting Syria's Assad until they metastasized into a shot at an Islamic Caliphate.

And as usual with Obama's actions, the outcome is so horrible that it's nearly impossible to tell if it was stupidity or intent. After all, the US has a history of backing bastards in the Middle East who turn out to be way worse than expected so it's not like the character of this mistake is particularly different.

Yet, Obama does give it that special zing, doesn't he?

Anonymous Frank Brady March 27, 2015 6:07 PM  

I believe it would be helpful if someone would post the reasons they believe the United States should be imposing sanctions on any sovereign nation that has not attacked us. Imposing economic sanctions is an act of war.

The U.S. stands exposed for what it is, a rapacious hegemon that has killed more innocent non-combatants around the world since 1945 than any other country. Much (perhaps most) of the violence in the world today is a direct result of U.S. attempts to impose its will (on behalf of client interests) upon others by force.

The problem now is that things may have gone too far. The neocons appear to believe their own propaganda. If we could confine the ass-kicking that's about to result to their asses, I'd be fine with it. Unfortunately, as is always the case, they're going to take a lot of innocents and hapless fools with them.

Blogger Plump Pleasant Plumber March 27, 2015 6:18 PM  

The Saudis are corrupt. They've always had someone else do their fighting. Wonder how they'll do against "martyrs"? Will their foreign mercenaries hold the line? What about the Wahabbis in their midst? Will Saudi money buy "reliable Arab partners"?

Anonymous Frank Brady March 27, 2015 6:18 PM  

@Nate

"Yeah because Saddam invading Kuwait was totally cool with everyone else but the bad jews."

In fact, George H. W. Bush sucker punched Saddam Hussein. The Kuwaiti regime (the al Sabah playboys) was slant drilling into Iraq's oil fields. Saddam didn't like it much and moved Republican Guard formations up to the Kuwait Border. George H. W. Bush dispatched a State Department official named April Glaspie to deliver a personal message from the President to Saddam. The message was, in effect, that "The U.S. would not intervene in a quarrel among brothers." Saddam, with whom we'd recently sided in the U.S.-instigated Iraq-Iran war took that as a green light and invaded Kuwait. As they say, the rest is history. All of the subsequent horse shit stems from that event.

Blogger luagha March 27, 2015 6:26 PM  

Where'd you get the 'dispatched April Glaspie' line, Frank Brady? Never seen it put that way.

She was already the Ambassador to Iraq, she wasn't 'dispatched' to do anything in response to anything, she was the person standing there.
It's always been portrayed as her speaking off the cuff about the US not getting involved in a minor border dispute and then finding out, Google-style, that 'minor border dispute' means taking over the entire country.

Anonymous Stilicho March 27, 2015 6:47 PM  

Remember when leftists hated nuclear power and nuclear weapons? Now they're pushing for more of both. In Iran. Not even any mention of molten salt reactors either. They want the dirtiest reactors that can also produce fissile materials. Why do they suddenly hate the environment? The Magic Negro apparently has beaucoup voodoo.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents March 27, 2015 7:21 PM  

Nope. Say hello to a world with about twenty new nuclear powers as all the Arab countries acquire nukes as a counterbalance to Iran. It's pretty telling countries like KSA weren't worried about Israel's nukes but they're terrified of Iran.


This. Fission bombs are 1930's technology, the trickiest part of a fusion device is certainly the fission trigger. As the Persians have learned, the most tedious part of building fission bombs is separation of fissile material. As someone else pointed out, the Saudi's may be able to convince the Pakistani army to lend them a few devices.

The whole point of anti-proliferation was to limit nukes to stable regimes that had an interest in careful control of them. The Brits and French no doubt have systems similar to the US launch modes. The Soviets and Chinese were all about centralized control of important things, and there's no reason to doubt the Putinists are any different. India and Pakistan gave me doubts but apparently both are extremely paranoid of losing control of anything as important as a nuke, so we are in the "so far, so good" status there.

Proliferation beyond the Saudi's gets real problematic. Egypt's army isn't nearly as good at preventative maintenance or security as some might think just for a start. The Turks used to be very tight on such things but AKP has been hammering at the army leadership for years, so I'm not as optimistic about them having nukes.

tl;dr once countries such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, etc. acquire nuclear devices, the chances of one being used goes up, probably way up. I do not expect the Iranians to drop a bomb into Europe via missile, because that's pretty high tech, but it won't be a total surprise if someday a container ship sails into a harbor and goes nova, or an attempt is made to put an EMP burst over North America.

Second the observations regarding the non-Jewish Democrats flexing their muscle. It will be interesting to see how that plays out, because among the Jewish people I personally know membership in the D's is equal to any membership in a congregation or temple. It's quasi religious.

Of course the Wall Street Journal / donor class of the Stupid Party would welcome open-borders SJW Jewish voters (and donors) with open arms...

Anonymous George Washington March 27, 2015 7:48 PM  

I think America should mind its own business

Told Ya.

Anonymous zen0 March 27, 2015 7:56 PM  

> "Book of Armaments, Chapter 19'

I think the actual reference is Vexations 9:11, but only when read according to the Bible Code system.

Bullinger has an extensive exegesis on it, and Wiki says the CIA believes the Kaifeng Jews are reputed to have secret manuscripts that also expound upon it, but no one has seen them.

Anonymous zen0 March 27, 2015 8:00 PM  

> tl;dr once countries such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, etc. acquire nuclear devices, the chances of one being used goes up, probably way up.

I thought we didn't have to worry because space-based particle weapons were in orbit that blow up nukes as soon as they are launched, or is that like the perfect carburator and flying car?

It has to be true or Obama would not be doing this.

Anonymous zen0 March 27, 2015 8:11 PM  

US carrier flees russian subs with Magrav technology developed in Iran

Is it true? I have no idea. something to monitor.

Maybe this is why Iran is getting the Love.

Anonymous dc red dogs March 27, 2015 8:32 PM  

Isaiah, who cared a great deal about future America - and about Israel, and about the nations that, as he prophesied, will only be saved by turning to the Lord of Israel - was very clear about the foolishness of trusting sinful foreign leaders. Isaiah 30, put your trust in the Lord, not in Egypt.
Trusting in Egypt, under this scenario, is not a good thing; it is probably worse, under this scenario, to be Egypt. Anyway, anyone who thinks they are smarter than Isaiah is free to disagree.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus March 27, 2015 9:06 PM  

George Washington: "Told Ya."

Yes you did.

Anonymous Homer Simpson March 27, 2015 9:13 PM  


It has to be true or Obama would not be doing this.


D'oh!

Anonymous Frank Brady March 27, 2015 9:54 PM  

@luagha It's a bit difficult now to sort out what really happened. Several versions of Glaspie's meeting with Saddam have been published, including more than one "transcript" of the meeting. You are correct that Glaspie was the U.S. ambassador to Iraq. One NYT story had her acting as the President's "emissary" to Saddam, conveying a "personal message to him from the President.

One version of the transcript (and there are others that differ radically) has Glaspie telling Saddam, "We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960s, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America."

Blogger Josh March 27, 2015 10:07 PM  

Isaiah, who cared a great deal about future America

No

Anonymous dc red dogs March 27, 2015 10:53 PM  

Josh - you really have no idea of what you are saying, do you ? Isaiah spoke to God, humbly, and God spoke to Isaiah, truthfully.

Blogger JaimeInTexas March 28, 2015 12:02 AM  

Isiah is referring to Israel snd Egypt, nothing more and nothing less, relating to events kn our past.

Maybe Egypt is really these uSA and that is why we are doomed. See, I can play your guessing game as well.

Blogger JaimeInTexas March 28, 2015 12:07 AM  

Nate, what hijacking by Iranians?

The embassy takeover was prddictable and justified. The overthrow of Mossadeh was funded and managed out of that embassy, in Opeartion Ajax. That led into 25 years of Savak repression.

Blogger JaimeInTexas March 28, 2015 12:10 AM  

Iran is a signatory to the NNPT. The problem is that they have beeen subjected to more and progressivaly more demands, well beyond what the NNPT requires.

Blogger Plump Pleasant Plumber March 28, 2015 12:13 AM  

Folks, a basic fission weapon ain't hard to make. Implosion weapons are another thing entirely. A competent machinist, and some folks willing to handle uranium are basically what's needed once you have enough fissile material. You know, a truck type nuclear device....15-20 kilotons. The real bottleneck is weapons grade material. You know, what those high tech centrifuges are producing in Iran.....

Anonymous Frank Brady March 28, 2015 12:17 AM  

Most Americans who have joined the "Hate Iran" brigade at the instigation of the neocons have never heard of Mossadeh and believe history began with the Embassy occupation.

Blogger Plump Pleasant Plumber March 28, 2015 12:18 AM  

BTW...I believe that the Saudis financed the Pakistani nuclear program. I wouldn't be surprised if they have already ordered deliverable weapons. Problem is, they have such a problem with Wahabbis.

Blogger Plump Pleasant Plumber March 28, 2015 12:23 AM  

Nope, the Iranians have plenty of reason to hate the US. Reza Palatine was a nightmare. The Savak basically tortured and killed at the behest of the Shah. Khomeini fit right in. Persians sure as hell ain't Arabs. Much more militant, and much more decisive.

Blogger Plump Pleasant Plumber March 28, 2015 12:24 AM  

Pahlavi, not Palatine.

Anonymous Frank Brady March 28, 2015 12:25 AM  

@Plump Pleasant Plumber

Today, Reuters carried a story reporting that Iran provided 60% of the funding for the Pakistan nuke program with the proviso that they would be able to order up nukes on short notice should the need arise.

However, the Iranian centrifuges are not enriching uranium to anything approaching weapons grade quality.

Blogger Plump Pleasant Plumber March 28, 2015 12:26 AM  

Pahlavi, not Palatine.

Blogger Plump Pleasant Plumber March 28, 2015 12:26 AM  

Nope, the Iranians have plenty of reason to hate the US. Reza Palatine was a nightmare. The Savak basically tortured and killed at the behest of the Shah. Khomeini fit right in. Persians sure as hell ain't Arabs. Much more militant, and much more decisive.

Anonymous Frank Brady March 28, 2015 12:27 AM  

Ooops. Make that Saudi Arabia that provided the funding to Pakistan. Not Iran. So many countries, so little time! Sorry about that!

Anonymous Angry March 28, 2015 12:37 AM  

Eric,

"Angry, do you really think Israel wants to add Syrian suicide bombers to the Palestinian suicide bombers blowing up pizza joints full of teenagers?"

I am not arguing that this is what Israel is doing. I am arguing that Barack Obama believes that this is what Israel is doing.

Anonymous Angry March 28, 2015 12:40 AM  

luagha,

I am not arguing that Israel is behind ISIS. I am arguing that Barack Obama thinks Israel is behind ISIS. Obama wants Iran to have a nuke to check Israeli territorial ambitions.

Anonymous Curtis March 28, 2015 1:59 AM  

Damn-it! Saddam's forces were pulling Kuwait babies out of incubators and bashing their baby skulls on the floor and eating their baby brains in white bean stew!

Blogger Eric March 28, 2015 4:58 AM  

Angry, I think it's more likely Obama wants Iran to have the bomb because it takes the military option off the table for any US president after him. It's not really any secret he thinks, like Frank here, the west in general and the US in particular are the source of all evil in the world.

Anonymous Discard March 28, 2015 6:43 AM  

Israel would not have had to steal nuclear technology from the U.S. There were/are plenty of Jews involved in American nuclear arms projects over the last 70 years who could have passed along information along while on vacation in Tel Aviv. I would find it hard to believe that they did not do so.

Blogger Eric March 28, 2015 7:20 AM  

Nope, the Iranians have plenty of reason to hate the US. Reza Palatine was a nightmare.

Reza "Palantine"? Did he have Sith lords working for him?

Blogger Plump Pleasant Plumber March 28, 2015 8:43 AM  

My bad....late at night.....Iranian history is quite interesting.

Anonymous Heaviside March 28, 2015 8:54 AM  

>Israel would not have had to steal nuclear technology from the U.S.

Unless they were in a rush to acquire nuclear weapons before some larger power would try to prevent the introduction of them into the near east.

Anonymous Luke March 28, 2015 9:14 AM  

A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents March 27, 2015 7:21 PM

"This. Fission bombs are 1930's technology"

Really? Please name a country that had a fission bomb in the 1930s. The U.S. first exploded one in July 1945, I thought. (That's over halfway through the next decade, by my fingers.)

Blogger rumpole5 March 28, 2015 10:24 AM  

Sometimes going thru the VD comments should entitle the reader to college credits, but the comments to the Mideast/Israel posts always seem to provoke more nuts and wacos than a Georgia pecan grove- goober farm -tin hat factory!

OpenID bc64a9f8-765e-11e3-8683-000bcdcb2996 March 28, 2015 10:46 AM  

"To point out that Iran is not, in fact, the new Hitler is a simple and straightforward matter of fact." (National Socialist workers Party aside)
Correct! Nothing "new" about it at ALL!
How is it that Persia changed it's name, and it's chosen name is Iran?
When did THAT happen?
CaptDMO

OpenID bc64a9f8-765e-11e3-8683-000bcdcb2996 March 28, 2015 10:49 AM  

Oops, sorry, "The Islamic Republic of Iran".
Because words mean something!

Anonymous Frank Brady March 28, 2015 11:45 AM  

@Curtis "Damn-it! Saddam's forces were pulling Kuwait babies out of incubators and bashing their baby skulls on the floor and eating their baby brains in white bean stew!

That sounds vaguely familiar somehow.

@Eric: "Angry, I think it's more likely Obama wants Iran to have the bomb because it takes the military option off the table for any US president after him. It's not really any secret he thinks, like Frank here, the west in general and the US in particular are the source of all evil in the world."

Most assuredly, Obama's "thoughts" and mine don't have the same origins. It isn't the "west in general" or "the US in particular that is the source of all evil in the world." The temporal source of that evil resides with the lying, manipulative, arrogant empire-building hubris-filled politicians and their easily-deceived supporters who imagine they have the right to impose their will upon the world.

Anonymous Discard March 28, 2015 3:11 PM  

Heaviside: I'm referring to things that happened 50 years ago. For example, Edward Teller, "father of the hydrogen bomb" , made several visits to Israel in the 1960's and '70s. The research reactor in the Negev desert has been running at least since the 70s.The Manhattan Project was thick with Jews, some of them outright traitors and Reds. I can't believe that did Israel not benefit from their connections.

Blogger Eric March 28, 2015 4:32 PM  

Israel would not have had to steal nuclear technology from the U.S.

The hard part of building a bomb is acquiring the materials, which is non-proliferation efforts concentrate on that side. If you have the materials and you have physicists you can build a bomb.

As it happens the Israeli nuclear program was most aided by the Europeans immediately after the foundation of the state. The are thought to have had two working devices by 1967, ready to use in the war if necessary.

Anonymous zen0 March 28, 2015 5:40 PM  

Speaking of Jews and Nukes:



Rabbi warns of civil war in US

Anonymous The other robot March 28, 2015 9:17 PM  

Obama has locked the door

Anonymous Heaviside March 28, 2015 11:30 PM  

>I'm referring to things that happened 50 years ago. For example, Edward Teller, "father of the hydrogen bomb" , made several visits to Israel in the 1960's and '70s. The research reactor in the Negev desert has been running at least since the 70s.The Manhattan Project was thick with Jews, some of them outright traitors and Reds. I can't believe that did Israel not benefit from their connections.

I don't disagree, but my point was that there was time pressure on them to get the bomb ASAP, before a larger power could find out about the program and apply pressure to the Israelis to make them stop.

Anonymous Discard March 29, 2015 1:54 AM  

Heaviside: I think that the only country in a position to pressure Israel to stop their nuclear weapons program was us, and "we" chose not to. I don't think it possible that we didn't know. I also think that the reason we intervened so directly on Israel's side in 1973 was so that they would not feel the need to nuke anybody.
I have no specific evidence to back this up, other than having been a regular newspaper reader for 50+ years.

Anonymous SumDood March 29, 2015 7:50 AM  

Frank, Plump, Jaime:

KGB-stooge Mossadegh got what he deserved. And your one-sided portrayal of the Shah reveals your ignorance as well as your bias.

Venezuela has taken the same path as Mossadegh's Iran and Allende's Chile, with the same result: economic collapse and political instability. I have no doubt that when the Venezuelans reach their limit of patience and break out the torches & pitchforks, you clowns will find a way to blame America for Maduro's fate.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus March 29, 2015 9:41 PM  

zen0: "Rabbi warns of civil war in US"

"may his blood be avenged"

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts