From yesterday’s NYTimes:

I.A.E.A. officials say solving the mystery of the P-2 shipments has become one of the most critical issues on which they need answers in the next two weeks, before Mr. ElBaradei issues a report to the United Nations Security Council on April 28.

“Frankly, I don’t know whether he has passed these bomb designs to others,” Mr. Musharraf said. Even under a loose form of house arrest for the past two years, he said, Dr. Khan “sometimes has been hiding the facts.”

Article: Iran Claims Nuclear Steps in New Worry
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/17/world/middleeast/17nuke.html?pagewanted=print

We’ve been at the brink before. Perhaps, it’s just a numbers game. Go to the brink enough time and somebody is going to pull the trigger. Of course, in ‘45 the trigger was pulled and the results were catastrophic, but localized. The next time may not be so localized.

And I love Potters continual use of “illegal war” when this one is now sanctioned by the UN just like Clinton’s in the Caucuses was.

And once agiain, I must point out that in is the UN that says that the world cannot live with a Nuclear Iran.

Talks fail to halt Iran programme

UN nuclear watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei arrives in Tehran
Mr ElBaradei must report back to the UN by the end of April
UN nuclear watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei has failed to convince Iran to freeze its nuclear programme during a brief visit to Tehran.

Our correspondent says that, while there is no sign of a compromise from Iran, there is debate within the country about whether that is the right direction.

Reformists argue that having mastered enrichment, Iran is now in a strong position and can afford to make concessions to the West.

The BBC’s Daniel Griffiths in Beijing says China has so far kept a low profile but it is increasingly keen to be seen as a responsible, international player, and Iran is a perfect opportunity to strengthen those credentials.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4908048.stm

So let me recap:

The international community says, thru the UN that a nuclear Iraq is unacceptable. The reformers in Iraq agree, the Chineese and Russians agree (but not on how to prevent it) yet the moonbat brigade here debates the issue.

Hum . . . .

I’d call this a ‘must listen’.

http://www.cbc.ca/radioshows/AS_IT_HAPPENS/last.shtml

CODEPINK is organizing a campaign including a Mothers Day protest in Washington and letter writing to Laura Bush (pleading with her to reign in her nutcase husband)

http://www.womensaynotowar.org/article.php?list=type&type=100

Everyone knows what we have. We should keep quiet about it. As some higher ups in the military know( and are ready to quit over), nukes should be off the table, out of the discussion.

We think we can pick and choose who is and is not allowed to have even nuclear know-how. This reads as a form humiliation to those who we appear to be against, and, at that it is coming from an obnoxious arrogance. It gets backs up. ( duh) Of course they want to show they can do it, that they can achieve this breakthrough in technology. We should be challenging them to show expertise in other areas, perhaps offering investment.( duh)

The experts seem to agree that Iran wants to talk with us. Can we listen and respond with wisdom instead of puffing ourselves up to show how big we are the way apes do?

I wish Prof. Fukuyama perhaps (or someone) would write a book about “The End of Military Power”". Sharon came to that point in Israel. Our leaders can’t see it yet. Perhaps we are blind at the top.

To speak of Iran in the same breath with the Soviet Union is already to concede far too much to the Iran-hawks: it had (and has) thousands of nuclear weapons (as does the US), and no one is suggesting that Iran will come close to that (even China has only about 200-300 nuclear weapons). There is no mutually assured destruction here; if Iran starts a nuclear war with the US it will be quickly destroyed.

I presume that the leaders of Iran are rational actors. There ought to be very strong reasons brfore we start to question that presumtion; a few reckless and outrageous comments about Israel certainly doesn’t rise to that level.

I should also note that if its the Mullahs (and not Ahmadinejad) who are ultimately in charge (as someone noted in Hersh’s New Yorker piece), then its not really that important what Ahmadinejad says anyway.

Given that the US can live with even a hostile Soviet Union, the whole question of whether the US can live with a new (but hostile) member of the nuclear club seems to buy into the Cheney’s idea that US non-proliferation efforts is foremost concerned about US survival or even protection of its citizens from nuclear attack. This is not true. Instead US efforts in this regard are directed at two primary goals: 1) safeguarding its allies (especially Israel); 2) maintain its level of power, which will be reduced if they can’t, or are less able to, threaten its enemies (beause they have nuclear weapons). (In this particular case we have a third reason as well, namely, pre-empt the possibility of of Israeli military action.)

Er….I would suggest you take along some silver bullets and woooden stakes…so they can’t rise from their crypts again in another administration.

The real question is not whether we can live with a nuclear Iran (we can’t LIVE with any nation that has nuclear arms). The real question is whether the US public can live with a government that takes them into another illegal war? The rest of the world can’t, but we don’t seem to have any say in the matter. Do the right thing. Get out into the streets and bring your “leaders” to account.

Idealy Iran would have nukes to counterbalance Israel’s nukes and we would have a stalemate and MAD.

The fact is Iran has no reason to attack the US unless we attack them, in fact Iran has no reason to attack Israel unless Israel attacks them. With Iran also armed with nukes the chance of either one attacking the other is slim to none.

The other fact is this..the US/Isr bid to realign the ME is not because of any nulcear threat but is simply about strongarming our way to “power economics”…the US “wants’ to control the area and Israel “has to have” leverage to survive economically since they can’t make friends and do business the old fashioned way.

And the final fact is, the ME will resist yet another “colonization” by yet another foreign power…so don’t expect this idea of a “democratic empire” in the ME to work.

And the final, final fact is..there is no way you will stop a country in this global day and time from obtaining nukes if they are determined to have them….so what are you going to do?….Nuke every country you don’t want to have nukes?

If I were the Iranian leader, particulary after we just O.K.’ed India’s nuke plans, I would tell the US to go cheney itself….

This whole “Green Peril” thing as the next cold war and hopefully the next World War was crap when the neos thought it up in ‘92 and it’s still crap.

ElBaradei puts pressure on Iran

Mr ElBaradei, who heads the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), is to report back to the UN Security Council at the end of this month on whether Tehran is complying with its demand to stop all enrichment activity by 28 April or face isolation.

On his arrival in Tehran he said he was seeking “more active co-operation” between Iran and the IAEA.

He said he wanted to discuss “how we can bring Iran in line” with demands by the international community that it cease enrichment and take “confidence-building measures”.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4905074.stm

If they try this, we’ll beat them to a pulp. Whatever happened to growing up, and learning to be diplomatic, joining the community of nations and talking through problems?

Does he GET the difference between nuclear and conventional weapons? Do any of these neocons understand what radiation is and does, long term?

One would like to think that cooler, wiser heads would be making policy for our country.

“Using those 50,000 centrifuges they could produce enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 16 days,” Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, told reporters today in Moscow.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000100&sid=aduNTcpDuDd4&refer=germany

I’d like to know how Iran is any more scary and volatile than Pakistan. According to Levy’s book, Who Killed Daniel Pearl, Pakistan is a very scary and volatile place indeed.

Aside from geopolitical considerations, lobbing a nuke into the middle of Eurasia would be a crime against humanity of enormous magnitude.

Iran has every right to have nuclear energy. As for weapons, no, they should not have them. Neither should we. Let’s work toward a bigger and better nuclear non-proliferation agreement.

Well, how about the fact that Iran will be out of oil before the Iranian children born today get old enough to die of old age. The US once had the world’s largest reserves of oil, was once the world’s largest exporter of oil, and was the world’s largest consumer of oil, but today the US is the world’s largest importer of oil, the largest consumer of oil, and is way done the list on reserves, not for lack of trying, and the US can’t even think about exporting oil – rationally the US should export oil to Japan from Alaska and import more from the Persian Gulf, but that isn’t politically acceptable.

I can only assume that you are like me, over the age of 50 and have no worry of a world with oil as a very scarce commodity, and a price that reflects that scarcity.

Of course, I’m am hoping to see a quarter of Florida flooded from a number of Greenland glaciers sliding in to the seas; this isn’t something I hope for out of spite, but as a goal to “live long and prosper”. And to say, “I told you so….”

A new enrichment facility is under construction in Ohio; the construction and piloting started in 2002 with licensing expected in 2007 and full scale production expected in 2011, built at a cost estimated to be 1.7 billion dollars. The plant is based on experience from facility that were in operation during the 60s through 80s, or a quarter of a century of operational experience.

Supporting this operation is the machine manufacturing facility in Oak Ridge that has been doing such for since the 40s to present day. The design work is being done by UT-Battelle which has been working in this area for decades and employs some of the best of US scientists and engineers. Their contract is in excess of $100 million dollars.

So, for $2 billion dollars and over a decade of construction time, and with half a century of experience in building such facilities, the US is constructing a facility that can enrich uranium to fuel nuclear reactors, not make bombs.

Is it realistic to believe that Iran can scale up to bomb making capability in their first go faster than the US can build up a nuclear fuel enrichment plant?

Maybe the Iranians are a lot smarter and harder working than US citizens are?