Nuclear Proliferation & Iraq's WMD

[tomahawk6]

Six nations: Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, UAE and Saudi Arabia seek nuclear power as a cover for nuclear weapons. My guess is that this would be in response to Iran's nuclear program. The future might be an increasingly scary prospect.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2436948,00.html

 

[Yrys]

Speaking of nuclear...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6114458.stm


US closes 'bomb secrets' website
Iraqi unconventional weapons - decommissioned -
The US website contained details of Iraq's weapons programmes
The US government has closed one of its websites
that contained documents found during the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Weapons experts had complained that the site contained d
etails on making nuclear bombs, the New York Times said.

 

[tomahawk6]

Whats funny is that the left's mantra was "Bush lied there were no WMD".These captured documents that have been translated tell a much different story. The NYT thought by printing this story they could hammer Bush for having nuclear weapons documents on the web as being incompetence of the highest order. Cant have it both ways. Their story actually proves that Saddam had an active nuclear weapons program.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/world/middleeast/03documents.html?ei=5065&en=9b92b000e0a064e6&ex=1163134800&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print

 

[tomahawk6]

Ran across this blogger who has been translating these documents. Saddam was spying on the IAEA. Personally I think they were looking the other way. El Baradi has been looking the other way allowing  arab states with nuclear programs to advance their programs. He needs to be replaced along with a total overhaul of the agency.

http://www.iraqdocs.blogspot.com/

 

[dglad]

Six nations: Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, UAE and Saudi Arabia seek nuclear power as a cover for nuclear weapons. My guess is that this would be in response to Iran's nuclear program. The future might be an increasingly scary prospect.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2436948,00.html

But...what about our peace dividend?  You know, all that money and stuff that was supposed to suddenly be freed up at the end of the Cold War, when there was a "new world order" and "a thousand points of light" and all that jazz?  I thought when the Cold War ended, everything would be better....

What a rip off.

 

[tomahawk6]

Many NATO countries did take a peace dividend by reducing their forces. The US was no exception. The Army alone lost 6 divisions.

 

[dglad]

Indeed.  We "enjoyed" our peace dividend as well.  However, it wasn't, as it turned out, much of a bargain.

 

[tomahawk6]

Nuclear proliferation is a reality - or will be when NK and Iran perfects a deliverable weapon. All a country or terror organization will need is the money to acquire the weapons. I see three possible scenarios. The first is a nuclear middle east essentially the Sunni states vs Iran. Religious sect vs religious sect. The second is a terror group exploding small nuclear weapons in major US and European nations. The question is who do you retaliate against ? If you ID the source do you respond with nuclear weapons in retaliation ? Three is an Iranian nuclear attack on Israel.

Of the three scenarios the last is the most likely in say 2-4 years. Israel will respond with nuclear weapons against Iran or it may employ the Sampson Strategy which means they would strike ALL their enemies.

The Sunni oil states could buy nuclear weapons from Pakistan as a counter to Iran rather than start up a nuke program from scratch. If they do this they could have working nuclear weapons before Iran. Russia or China would gladly sell the ballistic missiles.

The worst scenario are the small nuclear weapons that are positioned in major European and US cities that would kill millions of people. Who would we retaliate against and would nuclear weapons be part of the response ? I think folks in the US would approve nuclear strikes in retaliation, but that would essentially kill millions of "innocent" people. It is something we need to get used to.Because its a question of time before nukes are used against civilian population centers by terrorists. It will change the world forever.

http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/009197.php

 

[muskrat89]

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3328416,00.html

This kind of rhetoric seems more prevalent lately. Still sabre-rattling or might there be something to all the huff and puff?