Too late to halt Iran's N-bomb, EU is told

[RickSp]

So Ape, other than to insult me do you have anything to say? Why bother posting at all?

And yes, some progress was made during the Clinton negotiations with North Korea, certainly a lot more progress than was made during the first six years of the Bush administration. All Bush accomplished was bullshit and bravado.

The Bush claims that the North Koreans were secretly enriching uranium might be more plausible if the North Koreans built a uranium bomb. They didn't. They built a plutonium bomb. If they were cheating, as claimed, it didn't accomplish anything. Also, it looks now like the Bush administrations claims about North Korea were as phony as their claims about Saddam's WMD.

Did North Korea Cheat?

Although it is now widely recognized that the Bush administration misrepresented and distorted the intelligence data it used to justify the invasion of Iraq, most observers have accepted at face value the assessments the administration has used to reverse the previously established U.S. policy toward North Korea. But what if those assessments were exaggerated and blurred the important distinction between weapons-grade uranium enrichment (which would clearly violate the 1994 Agreed Framework) and lower levels of enrichment (which were technically forbidden by the 1994 accord but are permitted by the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty [NPT] and do not produce uranium suitable for nuclear weapons)? A review of the available evidence suggests that this is just what happened. Relying on sketchy data, the Bush administration presented a worst-case scenario as an incontrovertible truth and distorted its intelligence on North Korea (much as it did on Iraq), seriously exaggerating the danger that Pyongyang is secretly making uranium-based nuclear weapons.

The Bush claims look pretty silly now that North Korea has tested a plutonium, not a uranium-based bomb.

[xyzer]

Plutonium or uranium? Is there some difference in the basic definition of a destructive weapon? Both work by causing fissionable material to reach critical mass...and explode?
Thats...go BOOOM! for those who don't know?

If these are not both considered WMD then the antiwar leftists have gone off their trolley again? I'm curious at the explanation of Brother Clinton doing so much better in negotiating with that Man the people of N Korea love? This bozo told Clinton he would desist and then secretely kept up development...I guess Clinton and his negotiators realy won after all didn't they...won by leaving the problem to Bush? Common Democrat tactic..brag about success and then leave to be exposed as having accomplished nothing? But knowing that people wont remember your failure because they have a new strawman to blame?
Thats whats called passive passive failure through extreme naivete'! I guess it happens when liars are negotiating? It's related to the distraction of the 'intern syndrome! Negotiations ceased regularly in the 90s when all entrances to the oval office were barred and phones cutoff.for long periods of presidential indulgence.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: xyzer If these are not both considered WMD then the antiwar leftists have gone off their trolley again? I'm curious at the explanation of Brother Clinton doing so much better in negotiating with that Man the people of N Korea love? This bozo told Clinton he would desist and then secretely kept up development...I guess Clinton and his negotiators realy won after all didn't they...won by leaving the problem to Bush?

I hope that we both know that those weapons cold have never been produced without hardware procured from ..., guess where? ... Yep, you guessed it, right here in the good old U S of A.


I'd hate to guess of the allegience of those corporate buffons that were making those deals, and shipping the crates covertly to the enemy. ( Dick Marcinko writes books about his stuff. )


While thats a nice finger pointing talking point you have going there, is basically based is lies, and half truths. Mighta worked on somebody less informed.

[Rainbow]

In an admission of the international community's failure to hold back Iran's nuclear ambitions, the document – compiled by the staff of Javier Solana, EU foreign policy chief – says the atomic programme has been delayed only by technical limitations rather than diplomatic pressure. "Attempts to engage the Iranian administration in a negotiating process have not so far succeeded," it states.

Iran is pushing to develop WMD at all costs.
If Iranian political body wants to take adventage of WMD possession and use it as an "argument", then they are mistaken.

Since "Patriot" is going to be deployed on eventual Iranian WMD's trajectory, U.S. starts pressing Iran to dismantle its nucear weapons. Whether Iran responds to U.S. demands rationally, that will draw the line.

As of today, U.S. along with E.U. watch that event calmly and patiently.

[pikatore]

Quote by: Rainbow As of today, U.S. along with E.U. watch that event calmly and patiently.

Whilst making absurd threats and MOBILISING A MILITARY FORCE TO THE AREA???!!?!? you have a weird sense of what is calm and patient and what isn't.

[pikatore]

Quote by: Rainbow Whether Iran responds to U.S. demands rationally, that will draw the line.

And i suppose that the US has been acting rationally all along. PLEASE.

[Rainbow]

@pikatore

The world we live-in is not an illussion, but reality.
You would find word "mercy" within political menu, hardly.

What are you talking about :
- threats
- mobilizing military force
???
(there is no need for use of capital letters; I can see and read it clearly, enough)

What do you know about eventual Iranian WMD's trajectory ?

[pikatore]

Quote by: Rainbow @pikatore The world we live-in is not an illussion, but reality. You would find word "mercy" within political menu, hardly. What are you talking about : - threats - mobilizing military force ??? (there is no need for use of capital letters; I can see and read it clearly, enough) What do you know about eventual Iranian WMD's trajectory ?

I use capital instead of bold, because im too lazy to click that B button thing.

Threats: Bush has accussed Iran of helping the insurgents in Iraq, and warned that Iran is crossing the line, which more or less means, you are next

Mobilizing miltary force: The US sent several aircraft carriers to the gulf in a strategic position against Iran, basically putting pressure on Iran.

[RickSp]

Quote by: xyzer Plutonium or uranium? Is there some difference in the basic definition of a destructive weapon? Both work by causing fissionable material to reach critical mass...and explode? Thats...go BOOOM! for those who don't know?

TNT or gunpowder? Is there some difference in the basic definition of a destructive weapon?

Well, duh, yes there is.

From the previously cited source:

Did North Korea, then, cheat on the 1994 agreement with the United States, as the Bush administration has insisted? All of the operative provisions of the accord relate to freezing the North's plutonium program and make no reference to uranium enrichment. Pyongyang scrupulously observed these provisions until the Bush administration stopped the oil shipments in December 2002. The agreement does, however, reaffirm a 1991 agreement between North and South Korea that banned "uranium enrichment facilities," making no distinction between HEU and LEU. Pyongyang clearly did violate that accord by pursuing uranium-enrichment efforts (however limited they may turn out to have been) and thus, technically, violated the 1994 Agreed Framework as well.

The only real question is whether the North Koreans cheated by creating Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) which could potentially be used for weapons or merely created Low-Enriched Uranium (LEU) which is only suitable for power plant reactors. Of course all of this is beside the point becuase the North Korean bomb was not a uranium bomb but a plutonium bomb. And yes there is a difference.

The plutonium bombs built by the North Koreans were created during the six years that the Bush administration refused to seriously negotiate. The alleged "cheating" during the Clinton administration, if it happened at all, is just so much smoke being blown by buffoons like Bolton.

Interesting how quickly your rabid neocons turn on your own mad king when he finally does something that is less than stupid.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: pikatore I use capital instead of bold, because im too lazy to click that B button thing. Threats: Bush has accussed Iran of helping the insurgents in Iraq, and warned that Iran is crossing the line, which more or less means, you are next Mobilizing miltary force: The US sent several aircraft carriers to the gulf in a strategic position against Iran, basically putting pressure on Iran.

#1
:-)))

#2
I believe Iran is arming Iraqis with its weapons. (It would suprize me if Iran stays aside, since anybody wants to sell its military equipement these days.)
That is politics.


#3
U.S. Navy carriers have been in that area even prior 2003 events.
There are some U.S. military bases in southern Iraq, as well.