Cause for Concern? (political)

[SteamWake]

I read last week where this oil well had been 'captured' and figured it would be settled peacefully and quickly and moved on.

Today I read this...


AMARA, Iraq (Reuters) - Iraqi and Iranian forces are dug in on either side of a disputed inactive oil well in the sensitive border area, with Iraqis vowing to fight if necessary to fend off another occupation of the well by Iranian soldiers.


http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BP10420091226

To quote a line from a famous movie "Wars have started this way".

[Oberon]

Just what the region needs, another Iraq-Iran war. :damn:

[Skybird]

Iraq is only the secondary target of this Iranian provokation, but the US is the primary one. It's meant to demonstrate to the region the (claimed) lacking US influence in the region, and in Iraq. See it linked to the nuclear row. They want to undermine regional support for an eventual US military action against Iran, by showing that they can seize this well without the US reacting.

Last week the NYT had a report saying that Iran is about - or already has conducted - testing of nuclear fuses that are to be used in a military context only, and have no purpose in any civilian use of nuclear energy. I do not see the timing of both events being random chance only.

[AVGWarhawk]

If Iran is involved there is always a cause for concern.

[Jimbuna]

I wouldn't have thought Iraq was in a militarily fit state atm to protect it's borders against Iran. :hmmm:

[Oberon]

I wouldn't have thought Iraq was in a militarily fit state atm to protect it's borders against Iran. :hmmm:

They're probably waiting for the US to come and back them up.
Catch-22 for Obama, if he goes in then he runs the risk of becoming ensnared all over again in the mess but if he doesn't then he sends the signal through the area that the US cannot be trusted to back you up and Iran will grow bolder. :damn:

[Jimbuna]

They're probably waiting for the US to come and back them up.
Catch-22 for Obama, if he goes in then he runs the risk of becoming ensnared all over again in the mess but if he doesn't then he sends the signal through the area that the US cannot be trusted to back you up and Iran will grow bolder. :damn:

Your probably right :hmmm::yep:

[SteamWake]

They're probably waiting for the US to come and back them up.
Catch-22 for Obama, if he goes in then he runs the risk of becoming ensnared all over again in the mess but if he doesn't then he sends the signal through the area that the US cannot be trusted to back you up and Iran will grow bolder. :damn:

I concur and this is exactly why I find it disturbing.

[Steel_Tomb]

Last week the NYT had a report saying that Iran is about - or already has conducted - testing of nuclear fuses that are to be used in a military context only, and have no purpose in any civilian use of nuclear energy. I do not see the timing of both events being random chance only.

Skybird, where did you read this about the fuses? If this is true, it is a very worrying development indeed! Surely the Iranian's can't keep up the facade of "civilian use only" for much longer?!

EDIT: Sorry just saw, New York Times???

[Skybird]

Skybird, where did you read this about the fuses? If this is true, it is a very worrying development indeed! Surely the Iranian's can't keep up the facade of "civilian use only" for much longer?!

EDIT: Sorry just saw, New York Times???

Yes, NYT. Several German papers also referred to it. I also checked the NYT article itself. It was also on radio.

[Skybird]

P.S. Possible I mixed up the NYT and the WP. You find the story in the WP, and them referencing to the London Times one week earlier. The Times reported a confidential report.

[Skybird]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6955351.ece

Should have done it this way earlier. But why making things easy if you can run them complicated? :D

Just days after this essay made the issue known to the public, Iran seized that oil well (18th or 19th Decembre)


Secret document exposes Iran’s nuclear trigger

Catherine Philp in Washington


Confidential intelligence documents obtained by The Times show that Iran is working on testing a key final component of a nuclear bomb.
The notes, from Iran’s most sensitive military nuclear project, describe a four-year plan to test a neutron initiator, the component of a nuclear bomb that triggers an explosion. Foreign intelligence agencies date them to early 2007, four years after Iran was thought to have suspended its weapons programme.
An Asian intelligence source last week confirmed to The Times that his country also believed that weapons work was being carried out as recently as 2007 — specifically, work on a neutron initiator.
The technical document describes the use of a neutron source, uranium deuteride, which independent experts confirm has no possible civilian or military use other than in a nuclear weapon. Uranium deuteride is the material used in Pakistan’s bomb, from where Iran obtained its blueprint.
“Although Iran might claim that this work is for civil purposes, there is no civil application,” said David Albright, a physicist and president of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, which has analysed hundreds of pages of documents related to the Iranian programme. “This is a very strong indicator of weapons work.”
The documents have been seen by intelligence agencies from several Western countries, including Britain. A senior source at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed that they had been passed to the UN’s nuclear watchdog.
A Foreign and Commonwealth Office spokeswoman said yesterday: “We do not comment on intelligence, but our concerns about Iran’s nuclear programme are clear. Obviously this document, if authentic, raises serious questions about Iran’s intentions.”
Responding to The Times’ findings, an Israeli government spokesperson said: “Israel is increasingly concerned about the state of the Iranian nuclear programme and the real intentions that may lie behind it.”
The revelation coincides with growing international concern about Iran’s nuclear programme. Tehran insists that it wants to build a civilian nuclear industry to generate power, but critics suspect that the regime is intent on diverting the technology to build an atomic bomb.
In September, Iran was forced to admit that it was constructing a secret uranium enrichment facility near the city of Qom. President Ahmadinejad then claimed that he wanted to build ten such sites. Over the weekend Manouchehr Mottaki, the Iranian Foreign Minister, said that Iran needed up to 15 nuclear power plants to meet its energy needs, despite the country’s huge oil and gas reserves.
Publication of the nuclear documents will increase pressure for tougher UN sanctions against Iran, which are due to be discussed this week. But the latest leaks in a long series of allegations against Iran will also be seized on by hawks in Israel and the US, who support a pre-emptive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities before the country can build its first warhead.
Mark Fitzpatrick, senior fellow for non-proliferation at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, said: “The most shattering conclusion is that, if this was an effort that began in 2007, it could be a casus belli. If Iran is working on weapons, it means there is no diplomatic solution.”
The Times had the documents, which were originally written in Farsi, translated into English and had the translation separately verified by two Farsi speakers. While much of the language is technical, it is clear that the Iranians are intent on concealing their nuclear military work behind legitimate civilian research.
The fallout could be explosive, especially in Washington, where it is likely to invite questions about President Obama’s groundbreaking outreach to Iran. The papers provide the first evidence which suggests that Iran has pursued weapons studies after 2003 and may actively be doing so today — if the four-year plan continued as envisaged.
A 2007 US National Intelligence Estimate concluded that weapons work was suspended in 2003 and officials said with “moderate confidence” that it had not resumed by mid-2007. Britain, Germany and France, however, believe that weapons work had already resumed by then.
Western intelligence sources say that by 2003 Iran had already assembled the technical know-how it needed to build a bomb, but had yet to complete the necessary testing to be sure such a device would work. Iran also lacked sufficient fissile material to fuel a bomb and still does — although it is technically capable of producing weapons-grade uranium should its leaders take the political decision to do so.
The documents detail a plan for tests to determine whether the device works — without detonating an explosion leaving traces of uranium detectable by the outside world. If such traces were found, they would be taken as irreversible evidence of Iran’s intention to become a nuclear-armed power.
Experts say that, if the 2007 date is correct, the documents are the strongest indicator yet of a continuing nuclear weapons programme in Iran. Iran has long denied a military dimension to its nuclear programme, claiming its nuclear activities are solely focused on the production of energy for civilian use.
Mr Fitzpatrick said: “Is this the smoking gun? That’s the question people should be asking. It looks like the smoking gun. This is smoking uranium.”

[SteamWake]

Skybird, where did you read this about the fuses? If this is true, it is a very worrying development indeed! Surely the Iranian's can't keep up the facade of "civilian use only" for much longer?!

EDIT: Sorry just saw, New York Times???

What facade? They have been waving this threat around like a banner if nothing else to show the UN "you cant make us do anything nya nya".

Everyone knows that they are developing nukes with intents to use them yet they seem reluctant to take any 'real' action.




and here it comes as predictable as the sunrise...


National Security Council chief of staff Denis McDonough told reporters the administration will revisit its options against Iran in the new year and is gauging the views of U.S. friends and allies about "the next step in the process."


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/29/calling-friends-allies-iran-sanctions/

[Jimbuna]

What use are the UN in this day and age anyway?

Does anyone actually take any notice of what they say?

[Steel_Tomb]

What use are the UN in this day and age anyway?

Does anyone actually take any notice of what they say?


The UN is a lame duck, someone should just take it round the corner and shoot it. Seriously, no one has any respect for it... it's just a system for hypocrisy and bureaucratic bull s**t.

The only time the UN worked, was in 1950 when Korea kicked off... since then it's been a pathetic excuse for dillydallying and red tape.

[UnderseaLcpl]

The UN is a lame duck, someone should just take it round the corner and shoot it. Seriously, no one has any respect for it... it's just a system for hypocrisy and bureaucratic bull s**t.

The only time the UN worked, was in 1950 when Korea kicked off... since then it's been a pathetic excuse for dillydallying and red tape.

Arguably, it was fairly useless even then. Worse, it was still very expensive. That's what happens when nations turn control of national affairs, to any degree, over to a centralized power structure.

The U.N. is a just a federal government as it would appear under magnification. It has all the components of any federal government, but its flaws and failures are made more apparent by its size and the scope of its operations. The E.U. has the same problems, adjusted for the population it governs.

The problem with Iran is that it is full of Muslims, and the problem with Islam is that it is a centralized power structure, wherein the whims of the few dictate the actions and circumstances of the many. Thus, the solution to a threatning Iran seems obvious. We must break their power structure. But how, exactly, do we go about doing that? History has taught us that direct opposition actually reinforces the will of Islam and the extremists who commit violent acts in its name. That is the nature of Jihad. Jihaddists are actively searching for a Holy War, and they are willing to interpret any concerted effort against them as a casus belli. They have, after all, been waiting for over a thousand years to fight a decisive conflict againt the infidel.

Of course, it is difficult to fight a conflict againt an idealistic opponent. So long as their ideals remain, they can prove impossible to destroy. As such, the obvious solution is to destroy their ideals, but that's a tricky proposition in itself. One cannot forcefully dictate the ideals of another. There is no force on the planet that can really quash an ideal, especially when that ideal includes an afterlife full of virgins.

What we must do, then, is to change the ideal by means of leading by example, something we have already tried, but one important exception must be made. We must also crush by example. The main weakness of any theocracy is that it is a centralized power structure. Centralized power structures always eventually fail economically. They simply cannot do otherwise. Economies are not the result of the whims of great men, but the result of everyday, average people making mutually beneficial financial transactions. Knowing this, we must press for a free-market agenda, one that encourages trade, and more importantly, encourages trade to migrate away from oppressive power structures. In so doing we will either encourage change in radical Muslim philosophy or render it impotent by bankrupting it.

I realize that all this sounds a bit silly to those who assume that the West has a dependency on foreign oil. It may seem that we are the ones beholden to the will of oil-rich Middle-Eastern states. The fact is that nothing could be further from the truth. The West has vast oil rserves, from the North Sea to the Gulf of Mexico to the Western United States. We simply do not utilize them to full effect because both private and public oil firms wish to use Middle Eastern oil first. The low standard of living in the Middle East naturally encourages cheaper prices for oil, and even when the price increases due to scarcity, the Western oil firms seek to lock down the competition by means of legislation. Even when gas prices skyrocketed in the US in this decade, it was only the major firms who sought audience with congress and presented a very weak case to drill on protected lands.

Our energy problems are the clear result of a centralized power structure, a power structure that is becoming increasingly centralized because people who are no smarter than Islamic fundamentalists and who are no less beholden to a centralized power structure actually think that the world is some kind of pie and we all must fight for a slice. We have learned time and time again that prosperity is not finite and that free-markets actually increase the size of the "pie" for everyone who participates, but we still have a number of very vocal and ignorant persons who agitate for equal distribution of the slices(of course, some are more equal than others:DL).

We must reject this philosophy and pursue free trade, free minds, and free markets in every way that we can. By doing so we will attract business from every corner of the world and we will gain economic power over totalitarian nations of all kinds. The nations that seek to destroy us will either convert or be rendered impotent by lack of funds, and it matters not which. If the west can control the capital throught the free-market, it will both spread prosperity through natural market mechanisms and condemn nations with centralistic governments to poverty.

What can a totalitarian nation do in the face of the prosperity that a free market breeds? Its own populace is likely to revolt when it sees just how badly it is being screwed over. Either that or it will continue to wallow in failure. It's a win-win solution:DL

The fact of the matter is that people are people, no matter where they live or what culture they are a part of. They will always pursue their own interests to the maximum extent they see as being beneficial. That holds true for states, which are made of people as well. The key to reforming Islam lies within the people who comprise it. We cannot force beliefs upon them; they must change their beliefs by their own volition, and we have the means to make it so, if only we would quit interfering in their affairs and start leading by example, rather then force.