| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 7/8 |
| 2006/10/9-10 [Science/GlobalWarming, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44731 Activity:very high |
10/8 Bush diplomacy comes to its logical conclusion:
Threatening three countries, labeling them the "Axis of Evil" and
then invading one of them for no real reason causes the other two
to pursue nuclear weapons to defend themselves. Good job, neocons,
are you actually double agents out to destroy America or are you just
that stupid?
\_ you are unamerican. there is a "relationship" between Iraq and
9/11. And we are making progress in Iraq:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6221366
(NPR: U.S. Monthly Toll in Iraq at Highest Point in 2 Years)
see, we are breaking records!
\_ Except for the fact that all three countries were working on nukes
many years before 2000, this is an excellent analysis. ;-)
\_ missing the point. imagine if we are not stuck in Iraq,
we would of have a lot more options against N.Korea, no?
\_ No, not really. Even with a WWII sized draft size army we
would not invade NK. Current military doctrine is to bomb
from high flying jets/bombers and missiles from Navy TF way
over the horizon, not put a million men on the ground.
\_ And Israel demonstrated how effective that is when they
used it against Hezbollah.
\_ I didn't say it was effective. Anyway, the NK have the
sort of traditional WWII style army which it would
*mostly* work against but that wouldn't matter anyway.
\_ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134625,00.html
WASHINGTON. The chief U.S. arms inspector in Iraq has found
no evidence of weapons of mass destruction (search) production
by Saddam Hussein's (search) regime after 1991.
no evidence of weapons of mass destruction production
by Saddam Hussein's regime after 1991.
U.S. officials also said the report shows Saddam was much
farther away from a nuclear weapons program in 2003 than he
was between 1991 and 1993; there is no evidence that Iraq and
Al Qaeda exchanged weapons; and there is no evidence that
Al Qaeda and Iraq shared information, technology or personnel
in developing weapons.
\_ Yeah no kidding "after 1991". What a weird date to go by.
I wonder what happened at that time? And how exactly do
we know all this? We had to invade to find out. Thanks
for the update.
\_ Um, is this sarcasm? Desert Storm happened in 1991.
\_ Yes that was sarcasm pointing out that "no big surprise
that after 1991 Hussein's ability to produce weapons
was greatly reduced since he just got smashed". And
"being farther or closer" to nukes isn't the point at
all anyway since it was about all 3 countries having
worked on a nuke program long prior to 2000. GWB has
screwed up any number of things like all Presidents
(because they're human) but Iraq, Iran and NK working
on nukes had *nothing* to do with him as the op
falsely claims. Lay blame where it belongs but there's
no need to rewrite history to create fault where none
exists.
\_ So you don't think threatening to invade a country
has anything to do with them working on producing
weaponry? What color is the sky in your world?
\_ The nukes were in development while Bush JR was
in rehab. Go see what the OP said. It flies
in the face of reality. Was Clinton threatening
them? Bush Sr? Reagan? No. So why build
nukes? Lots of reasons but none of them having
to do with Bush Jr. threatening them or the US
in general. Blue. If you want to drag this to
some other topic, that's fine, but what you're
saying has nothing to do with the OP's claims.
\_ They *were* in development, then Iraq
*stopped* working on them. NK *was* working
on them, then *stopped* working on them,
until they were threatened. I honestly
don't know the status of Iran's nuclear
weapon program but it certainly was
accelerated after Bush's threat to Iran.
Do you honestly believe that these countries
slowed down their weapon's research in
response to a credible outside threat?
Is this your serious contention?
\_ Iraq stopped because they got crushed in
GW1, geeze. Iran never stopped as far as
we know. NK never stopped for any lengthy
period of time as far as we know. And in
each case they were started during a
previous administration. This is historic
fact. I make no other contentions in
that regard. As far as Iran goes, btw,
their original reason for the pro-nuke
policy change from their original "nukes
are against the Koran" policy was getting
their ass kicked by Iraqi gas attacks.
That wasn't Jr's fault either. As far as
their speed of research goes, I'm sure
they were already going as fast as possible
because getting them second in the region
doesn't have nearly the same weight as
being first. What gave you the idea they
were just slowly crawling along until the
Great Satan turned his Evil Eye their way?
Is it your contention that NK and Iran and
Iraq had no serious interest in nukes until
the Great Satantic Dictator came to power
in the US and all was rainbows and
chocolate rivers before that? Seriously,
give it a rest. This is all history book
stuff.
\_ Yes, it is my serious contention that
Iraq was not doing any nuclear research
and not only was not making progress
towards developing one, they were
actually going backwards as they
lost skill and capability. This is not
just my contention, it was the finding
of the bipartisan Iraq commission. Do
you dispute those findings? Lots of
countries "have interest" in things.
We should not start wars because
of a nations interest in something,
only because it is an actual threat.
Furthermore, it is my contention that
NK was mostly abiding by the terms of
the Clinton sponsored UN guidelines,
where they agreed to halt nuclear
research in return for free nuclear
power. Soon after Bush's "Axis of Evil"
speech, NK renounced the agreement,
broke the seals on the nuclear rods
and turned off the UN nonitor cameras.
The CIA agrees with me, btw, at least
according to The Washington Times,
a paper not usually known for its
pro-Clinton stance:
http://www.csua.org/u/h5f
"North Korea announced last year that
it had a secret program to enrich
uranium for nuclear weapons. It then
expelled international inspectors who
had been monitoring the nuclear weapons\
freeze and restarted the small
5-megawatt reactor. "
\_ Uh, yes, secret NK program. Thanks
for making my point there. As far
as Iraq goes, of course they went
backwards after GW1. What else
would happen? And they had to go
backwards from something, meaning
they had already conducted research.
Man, I thought I was going to have to
go find an actual link when I first
saw how long your post was with a
link and all but all you've done is
support what I've been saying all
along: those 3 countries had nuke
programs while Jr. was in rehab.
Thanks for saving me the hassle of
finding a link. I'll take your WT
link as is. Going home now. Have a
nice evening.
\_ So I guess we agree that I have
made my point: Bush's trash talking
and belligerent warmongering have
resulted in America being less
safe. Thanks for playing. |
| 7/8 |
|
| www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6221366 All Things Considered, October 8, 2006 In September, the number of wounded US troops in Iraq reached its highest monthly toll in nearly two years. Douglas MacGregor discuss what the figures say about the Iraqi insurgency. List of local stations (PDF) Are you a member of your local NPR station? Yes No Would you like to receive information from your local NPR member station? |
| www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134625,00.html In his report, Duelfer concluded that Saddam's Iraq had no stockpiles of the banned weapons, but he said he found signs of idle programs that Saddam could have revived once international attention waned. com does not endorse content on external sites "It appears that he did not vigorously pursue those programs after the inspectors left," a US official said on condition of anonymity, ahead of the report's Wednesday afternoon release by the CIA. US officials also said the report shows Saddam was much farther away from a nuclear weapons program in 2003 than he was between 1991 and 1993; there is no evidence that Iraq and Al Qaeda exchanged weapons; and there is no evidence that Al Qaeda and Iraq shared information, technology or personnel in developing weapons. The White House continued to maintain that the findings support the view that Saddam was a threat. Web site, though some of its conclusions were leaked to the media in advance. Partisans on both sides of the aisle didn't waste time reacting to Duelfer's conclusions. "The Duelfer report is yet another example that there really are two Americas," said Rep. "There's the one that exists in the Bush fantasy world, and then there's the real America. In the Bush fantasy world, they still claim that Iraq was an imminent threat with weapons of mass destruction." "I really don't think (the report) changes anything," Roberts said. "Everybody made the wrong assumption (about the WMD threat)." Duelfer concluded that Saddam's regime hoped to convince the world it had complied with the United Nations resolutions implemented after the first Gulf War and wanted the UN to lift the strict sanctions against the country. Duelfer, a special consultant to the director of Central Intelligence on Iraqi WMD affairs, found Saddam wasn't squirreling away equipment and weapons and hiding them in various parts of the country, as some originally thought when the US-led war in Iraq began, officials said. Instead, the report finds that Saddam was trying to achieve his goal by retaining "intellectual capital" -- in other words, keeping weapons inspectors employed and happy and preserving some documentation, according to US officials. search), which also worked on the report, say it's still not known whether Iraq moved weapons caches to Syria or other countries. The ISG is still poring over thousands of official Baathist documents that have yet to be translated. Currently, some 900 linguists have been hired and are working in Qatar to get the job done. About 35 to 50 "old, decayed" chemical and biological shells have been found in Iraq so far, all of which are said to have been produced in the 1980s. Saddam was importing banned materials, working on unmanned aerial vehicles in violation of UN agreements and maintaining industrial capability that could be converted to produce weapons, officials have said. Duelfer also describes Saddam's Iraq as having had limited research efforts into chemical and biological weapons. Duelfer's report will come on a week that the White House has been defending a number of issues involving its Iraq policy and the war there. search), former US administrator in occupied Iraq, suggested he'd argued for more troops in the immediate aftermath of the invasion, when looting was rampant. A spokesman for Bush's re-election campaign said Bremer indeed differed with military commanders. But a CIA report recently given to the White House found no conclusive evidence that Saddam had given al-Zarqawi support and shelter before the war, according to ABC News and Knight-Ridder. The CIA report did not make final conclusions about a Saddam-Zarqawi tie, but does raise questions about the Bush administration's assertions that al-Zarqawi found a safe harbor in Baghdad before the invasion -- and raises questions about whether Saddam even knew al-Zarqawi was there. During Tuesday night's debate, Cheney said "there is still debate over this question." But he added: "At one point, some of Zarqawi's people were arrested. " What US forces found: --A single artillery shell filled with two chemicals that, when mixed while the shell was in flight, would have created sarin. US forces learned of it only when insurgents, apparently believing it was filled with conventional explosives, tried to detonate it as a roadside bomb in May in Baghdad. Two US soldiers suffered from symptoms of low-level exposure to the nerve agent. These were part of Saddam's pre-1991 nuclear program, which was dismantled after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Since the 1991 Gulf War, Iraq had been prohibited from having missiles with ranges longer than 93 miles. FOX News' Ian McCaleb, Bret Baier, Catherine Donaldson-Evans and The Associated Press contributed to this report. |
| www.csua.org/u/h5f -> www.washtimes.com/national/20030703-114656-2535r.htm The CIA has revised an earlier intelligence estimate and now believes North Korea has begun reprocessing spent nuclear-fuel rods into plutonium for weapons, US officials said. Reprocessing the 8,000 stored nuclear fuel rods would be a key indicator that Pyongyang has abandoned past commitments to freeze its nuclear-arms program. A review of intelligence on the nuclear-rod reprocessing began in April after North Korea's representative to nuclear talks with the United States and China in Beijing stated that the reprocessing was nearly finished. The CIA review included re-examining intelligence that showed North Korea had imported plutonium secretly from Russia or a former Soviet republic during the 1990s. It could not be learned whether that intelligence was confirmed. A senior US official familiar with the review said the new estimate states that "some" reprocessing could be under way. "If it is, we don't believe it is anywhere near completed," the official said. A senior Asian diplomat also said new intelligence reports indicate that the fuel reprocessing is under way, although not completed. In April, the CIA reported that North Korea was not separating the fuel, although trucks that could move the rods to a reprocessing facility had been seen at the storage facility at the Yongbyon nuclear complex. No reprocessing, however, had been detected before Li Gun, the North Korean negotiator at the Beijing talks last April, stated that it was nearly finished. Mr Li also told Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly in an aside during the talks that North Korea planned to export nuclear weapons or add to its existing nuclear arsenal. US officials view the statement as a threat and say Pyongyang will not blackmail the United States. The United States wants to expand any new talks to include representatives of South Korea and Japan. The fuel rods were taken from a 5-megawatt reactor at Yongbyon and stored in cannisters in a fuel pond that had been sealed by the International Atomic Energy Agency according to the terms of a 1994 agreement between North Korea and the United States to freeze Pyongyang's nuclear program in exchange for economic and energy aid. North Korea announced last year that it had a secret program to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons. It then expelled international inspectors who had been monitoring the nuclear weapons freeze and restarted the small 5-megawatt reactor. The communist government is believed to have enough plutonium for two or three nuclear devices. The plutonium in the fuel rods would give Pyongyang enough for five or six more weapons. Reprocessing takes place at a large facility where the rods are chopped up and dissolved in nitric acid. The material is then treated with a mixture of tributyl phosphate and kerosene in several steps, and a small amount of weapons-grade plutonium is produced. In December, US intelligence agencies detected North Korea's purchase from a Chinese company of 20 tons of tributyl phosphate -- one of the first indicators that the North Koreans were preparing to reprocess the spent fuel rods. Robert Alvarez, a former Energy Department adviser, wrote in the current issue of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists that the North Koreans could take the fuel rods to a cave or other hidden location to conduct the reprocessing. "Work in this kind of makeshift environment would be even more dangerous and definitely more time-consuming -- it would involve handling much smaller batches of rods than the reprocessing plant and using 'hot cells' to extract the tiny fraction of plutonium in the spent reactor fuel," Mr Alvarez stated. The North Koreans will need anywhere from "several months" to more than a year to produce the plutonium, he stated. Secretary of State Colin L Powell told Congress on April 30 that North Korean officials told the United States that they had reprocessed all the fuel rods in storage. "We can't establish that as a matter of fact with our intelligence community, but they said they did it. On Wednesday, according to reports, China and Russia delayed UN Security Council action on a US-sought condemnation of the North Korean nuclear-weapons program. The administration also is pushing South Korea to stop helping to build two light-water nuclear reactors in North Korea -- one provision of the 1994 Agreed Framework aimed at halting the North Korean nuclear program. Asked about the reactor-building effort yesterday, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said: "This is obviously a subject of continuing discussions." North Korea has said it would consider any imposition of sanctions as a declaration of war, and South Korea is resisting US pressure to halt the new reactors. |