Top Leaderboard, Site wide
July 22, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed





War of the Whales


Truthdig Bazaar
Africa’s World War

Africa’s World War

By Gerard Prunier
$18.45

The Mitfords

The Mitfords

By Charlotte Mosley
$26.37

more items

 
Report

Stealth Superpower: How Turkey Is Chasing China in Bid to Become the Next Big Thing

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Jun 13, 2010
Flickr / MichalFoto (CC-BY-ND)

By John Feffer

(Page 4)

Mediation Central

A friend to all sides, Turkey is offering its services as a diplomatic middleman, even in places where it was persona non grata not long ago. “Not many people would imagine that the Serbians would ask for the mediation of Turkey between different Bosniak groups in the Sandjak region of Serbia,” observes Sule Kut, a Balkans expert at Bilge University in Istanbul. “Turks were the bad guys in Serbian history. So what is happening? Turkey has established itself as a credible and powerful player in the region.”

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
It’s not just the Balkans. The new Turkey is establishing itself as Mediation Central. Teaming up with Brazil, Turkey fashioned a surprise compromise meant to head off confrontation with Iran over its nuclear program (which the Obama administration managed to shoot down).  Along with Spain, it initiated the Alliance of Civilizations, a U.N. effort to bridge the divide between Islam and the West. It also tried to work its magic in negotiating an end to the blockade of Gaza, removing obstacles to the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq, bringing Syria and Israel together, resolving the brouhaha around the cartoon depiction of Mohammed, and hosting U.N. meetings on Somalia.

“Zero problems with neighbors” is a great slogan. But it’s also a logical impossibility. Turkey can’t embrace Hamas without angering Egypt and Israel. It can move closer to Russia only at the potential expense of good relations with Georgia. Rapprochement with Armenia angers Azerbaijan.

Nor was Ankara’s attempt to transcend zero-sum thinking an easy task during the “with us or against us” years of the Bush administration. In addition, there are the periodic tensions that arise around U.S. congressional resolutions on the Armenian genocide, still a touchy issue in Turkey.  Washington has indicated its growing unhappiness with Turkey’s increasingly active role in the Middle East, particularly its overtures to Syria. As a result, Turkey has had to finesse its relationship with the U.S. in order to remain a key NATO ally and a challenger to American power in the region.

As with China, the United States is willing to work with Turkey on some diplomatic issues even as it finds the country’s growing influence in the region a problem. In turn, Ankara, like Beijing, is trying to figure out how it can best take advantage of the relative decline in U.S. global influence even as it works closely with Washington on an issue-by-issue basis.

The greatest challenge to Turkey’s zero-problems paradigm, however, is its ever more troubled relationship with Israel. The U.S.-Turkey-Israel troika was once a solid verity of Middle Eastern politics. A considerable amount of bilateral trade, including military deals, has linked Turkey and Israel, and that trade increased dramatically during the AKP era.

But Israel’s 2008 invasion of Gaza—and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s subsequent excoriation of then-Israeli president Shimon Peres at the World Economic Forum in Davos—began a process that is tearing these former allies apart, while boosting support for Turkey in the Arab world. In October, Turkey cancelled Israel’s participation in a military exercise, throwing lucrative military contracts between the two countries in jeopardy. In the wake of the recent Gaza-aid debacle in international waters, the rift threatens to become irreparable. When Israeli commandos seized a flotilla of ships attempting to break the Gaza embargo, killing nine Turkish citizens, Turkey spoke of severing diplomatic relations.

With Israel increasingly isolated and American mediation efforts seriously compromised, only Turkey is emerging stronger from what can now only be seen as the beginning of a regional realignment of power. Once viewed with suspicion throughout the area where the Ottomans ruled, Turkey may now be the only power that has even a remote chance of one day brokering peace in the Middle East.

Return to Ottomanism?

Neo-Ottomanism is not exactly a popular phrase in Turkey today. The leadership in Ankara wants to be clear: they have no intention of projecting imperial power or reestablishing the modern equivalent of the Ottoman caliphate. However, if you look at the friendships that Turkey has cultivated and the trade relations it has emphasized—Syria, Armenia, Greece, Palestine, Iraq, Libya, the Balkans—you can see a map of the old Ottoman empire reassembling itself.

In other words, just as the AKP has turned geography to its advantage, so it is transforming an imperial albatross into the goose that lays golden eggs (in the form of lucrative trade deals). In a similar way, China has tried to revive its old Sinocentric imperial system without stirring up fears of the Chinese army marching into India or the Chinese navy taking over the South China Sea, even as it—like Turkey—also establishes friendly relations with old adversaries (including Russia).

Still, even this amiable version of neo-Ottomanism can raise hackles. “We want a new Balkan region based on political values, economic interdependence, and cooperation and cultural harmony,” Foreign Minister Davutoglu said nostalgically at a conference in Sarajevo in October. “That is what the Ottoman Balkans was like. We shall revive such a Balkan region… The Ottoman centuries were a success story, and this should be revived.” A furor followed among some Serb commentators, who viewed this romanticized version of history as evidence of a Turkish desire to Islamicize the Balkans.


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By Shingo, June 25, 2010 at 6:19 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 25 at 5:57 pm
“Hillary Clinton? Now you’re using the same government that you say is out to get Iran for vengeance sake as proof that Iran does not pose a threat.”

Yes it is surprising how political leaders in Washington and Tel Aviv occasionally fall victim to a slip of the tongue and let the truth come out.

By nemesis2010, June 25 at 5:57 pm
“What I’ve demonstrated is that the West has open access to 8 of the top 11 “proven” reserves in the world. And Mexico is 3rd in “PROVEN” reserves followed by Iran. With that kind of access one does not risk a WWIII –not yet.”

6 of the 11, and as for Mexico, it depends on who you believe:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves
By nemesis2010, June 25 at 5:57 pm
“Your puerile attempts to paint me as a right-winger is one of the major reasons you’ve been bitch-slapped all over this thread for more than a week.”

If that’s what you want to believe and you’re into that kinda thing, good for you, but all your bitch-slapping hasn’t helped you make your case.  I suspect that you’re simply running out of steam , opr bored with the topic, and want to declare yourself the winner in the debate.

By nemesis2010, June 25 at 5:57 pm
“You have been proven wrong on most of your assessments especially that of an Iranian bomb having to be a gun type and thus too heavy a payload for its missile capacity.”

Sorry, but you haven’t made that case at all.  No gun type weapon has ever been delivered by a missile and further to that, no Iranian missile has ever been produced to deliver any kind of nuclear warhead.

By nemesis2010, June 25 at 5:57 pm
“I’m going to reiterate for you something that I’ve made clear on many different occasions. I’m neither a right-winger nor a left winger. I, unlike you and many other of the so-called left and right, do not believe in fantasy.”

That’s an argument many right wingers like to make, like the way right wingers deny their right wingers and insist they are libertarians.

You might think you’re fooling people becasue you’re willing to criticize right wing politics, but you’re no different to any other right wing poseur.

Report this

By Shingo, June 25, 2010 at 6:03 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 25 at 6:00 pm
“We don’t have to invade Iran in order to maintain access to the world’s oil supplies.”

But we do have to controlled governments of those states, and Iran/Venezuela and Russia, between them, sit on half the world’s sources, are not among them.

By nemesis2010, June 25 at 6:00 pm
“Hell Shingo, if Iran has reserves next to the Iraq border they can directional drill and harvest much of it before Iran would even be aware of what the hell was going on.”

That’s truly bizarre.  Most of the border region and the south of Iraq is Shiite territory and completely controlled by Iran. To suggest that this could happen without the Iranians knowing all about it, or happen at all, it pure fantasy.

As for refining technology, the same technology is common knowledge through the world.  Russia have it, Europe has it.  It’s just a mater of building more refineries.

By nemesis2010, June 25 at 6:00 pm
“The U.S. has the largest coal reserves in the world followed by Russia, China, Australia, and India.”

There’s coal and then there’s coal.  The US reserves are of such poor quality that no one wants it.

By nemesis2010, June 25 at 6:00 pm
“Care to guess where the world’s largest natural gas reserves are? North America!”

Rubbish. Try Russia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_gas
Do you make this shit up as you go along?

By nemesis2010, June 25 at 6:00 pm
“The future is going to be nuclear power. There is a direct correlation between per capita electrical use and standard of living. It is of utmost importance that the third world has access to cheap power.”

True, which is why it’s so irritating to hear Iran haters like Marshall insisting that Iran doesn’t need nuclear power with all the oil it has.  Of course,  our reliance on oil isn’t just about energy. We rely on oil for countless products like rubber, plastics, cleaning products, you name it.
a
By nemesis2010, June 25 at 6:00 pm
“There are more than 5,000 independent oil firms spending billions annually in R&D and that rate of success is going to increase.”

Sure, but the rate at which new sources are being discovered is dropping rapidly.
Oil is a finite resource.  It’s not rocket science to realize that it will no longer be around one day.

Report this

By Shingo, June 25, 2010 at 5:40 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 25 at 6:02 pm
“This is where you screw up most, due to your myopic, America-hating, left wing view. Earlier you come here telling us that our intelligence agencies got it all wrong in Iraq and that that proves how inadequate and unreliable they are. Now you come here and say that they knew all about Pakistan and turned a blind eye to Kahn in order to sell F-16s. I can believe that. But your problem is that you want your cake and to eat too.”

I take your point, but the two examples are completely opposites.

On one hand, history has demonstrated that the Iraq debatable was a lie and we have been privy to plenty of evidence to suggest that the intelligence was politicized and that the intelligence community took one for the administration.

In the case of Pakistan, it is pretty obvious that the Pentagon lied when it declared that F-16’s could not be modified to carry nukes, when they sold them to Pakistan in the first place.  The Dutch prime minister’s testimony is consistent with the suggestion that the US intelligence agencies were aware of what AQ Khan was up to.

When it comes to Iran, our intelligence agencies have stated since 2007, that there is no evidence of a nuclear weapons program,  I son;t know where you get the idea that I said they don’t know what they’re talking about”.  If you look back, I have cited of numerous occasions, the February 2010 Threat Assessment which maintains the 2007 NIE conclusions.

By nemesis2010, June 25 at 6:02 pm
“When asked what motive would the U.S. and Israel have to want to attack Iran you would have us believe that it is something as puerile as payback for 1979!”

Again, that’s another lie.  I stated that the reason Iran was even on the radar was because of oil and gas, which you denied, in spite of the fact that we have been screwing with that country since 1953 and beyond

Report this

By Shingo, June 25, 2010 at 3:59 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 25 at 6:11 pm
“Islam, like Christianity, Judaism, and Hinduism, is belief in fantastical myth. The danger that mankind faces is that we have basically five nuclear powers; 4 totally incompatible religious belief systems and 1 politically ideological system which is much like those religious systems with their divine being the State”

I’m no fan of religion, and am essentially an atheist (though my catholic upbringing makes it hard to shake of the entrenched notion of the existence of God), but the reality is that the greatest crimes against humanity in the last century, have been carries out by atheist societies, not religious ones.

By nemesis2010, June 25 at 6:11 pm
“Currently, the group that threatens the world most is Islamic.”

As I pointed out a few days ago, the absurdity of this statement is illustrated by your own statement that 9/11 was Islam’s best shot and it came nowhere near threatening the world.

I’m not so sure that Israel can be easily contained given it’s nuclear arsenal and it’s blatant contempt for world opinion.  While I realize that the statements from a former Professor of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem is not evidence of Israeli policy, the claim that Israel has nukes aimed at Europe and is prepared to launch an attack should Israel collapse.

By nemesis2010, June 25 at 6:11 pm
“Saying that Islam, at the moment, poses the main threat to civilization and peace is not to say that Islam can conquer us. What that threat can cause, and herein lies the real danger, is for Christian, Jews, and Hindus to counter its attack as their fear of the threat that Islam presents is heightened. There are more than enough professed Christians in the U.S. to vote into power, leaders who will side with them and try to make this a Christian theocracy lite. The lesson of history is that we do not learn the lessons of history”

I see.  This is truly Orwellian territory you’ve wandering into here.  So what you’re essentially saying is that while Islam itself can’t hurt us, it poses a threat to humanity because the nutty Evangelical Christians in the US want to start a war with Islam.  I wonder how that defence would go down in a rape case?

Most disturbingly, that argument was used by Cheney while he was in office with regard to Iran.  Iran were a threat because we might attack them.  The more you reveal about yourself, the closer stronger your kinship with Cheney’s necons emerges.

The theory of the Type 0 and Type 1 societies is smacks of arrogance, and dare I say,  a religious like belief in providence. In spite of thousands of years of human existence and societies evolving, we’re supposed to believe that our own generation or lifetime is supposed to be the most revenant and crucial of all.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 25, 2010 at 2:11 pm Link to this comment

I.

By Shingo, June 23 at 10:11 pm

”Spoken like a true Imperialist.  Unfortunately for Islamophobes like yourself, not only do such entities exist, but our government happens to be in bed with them, though I happened to agree that our country has long been run by fools.”


I’m neither an imperialist nor an Islamophobe. You need to construct that straw man in order to try and discredit the facts that I’ve presented for more than a week and that clearly prove, time and again, your errant position on both what technology Islamic nations seek and need and also on Iran’s ability to construct—however improbable—a uranium implosion bomb using technology that has been with us since 1966.

Islam, like Christianity, Judaism, and Hinduism, is belief in fantastical myth. The danger that mankind faces is that we have basically five nuclear powers; 4 totally incompatible religious belief systems and 1 politically ideological system which is much like those religious systems with their divine being the State. Those 4 incompatible religious groups are Christian, Judaic, Hindu and Islamic, and each one of them are notorious for their internecine violence. The politically ideological threats are principally from China and its little bitch, North Korea. Russia can end up falling into one of the two categories; religious or political. 

Currently, the group that threatens the world most is Islamic. Christianity, albeit trying to raise its ugly head once again, has been constantly held in check since the end of the Dark Ages. Judaism is small in number compared to the other 3 and poses less of a threat because Israel can be easily contained. Hindus’ main beef is with their Islamic cousins in Pakistan. Most don’t realize that there are more Muslims in India than in Pakistan so there is also potential for internecine Muslim on Muslim violence because of nationalist sentiments.

Saying that Islam, at the moment, poses the main threat to civilization and peace is not to say that Islam can conquer us. What that threat can cause, and herein lies the real danger, is for Christian, Jews, and Hindus to counter its attack as their fear of the threat that Islam presents is heightened. There are more than enough professed Christians in the U.S. to vote into power, leaders who will side with them and try to make this a Christian theocracy lite. The lesson of history is that we do not learn the lessons of history.

As for imperialism, if we are indeed in a transition from Type 0 to Type 1 there is no empire. There is only planet government.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 25, 2010 at 2:07 pm Link to this comment

II.

In summation: We do not know who the real power brokers behind the scenes are. We really don’t know what their ultimate goals are and what their plans on how to achieve those goals are. We, at best, look through a glass darkly. The fact that throughout human history the few have always dominated the many is in itself remarkable and proof positive that the adage of divide and conquer serves the ruling elite well. 

With this I bid you adieu… I’m through with this topic. I thank you for your input because it made me investigate information that I had heretofore neglected to investigate. My position from the beginning stands, Islamic cesspools, notorious for their human rights abuses and religious abhorrence of enlightenment (knowledge) and individual freedom and liberties, not only need and seek Western knowledge and technology, but also see an improvement in the economic and social lives of many millions of oppressed Muslims, because of Western influence.

Albeit I’ve learned a lot about Iran’s capabilities, based on what I have access to I still agree with those who say that Iran is about 10 years from being able to build a nuclear bomb. Since experts were saying that 5 years ago, that would be about 2015. It is of no little consequence that Israel launched, this past week, a satellite whose sole purpose, reportedly, is to monitor Iran. That’s a lot of money for motives of payback for something done to the U.S. in 1979.

The bottom line is this… only with time will the truth come out and we’ll see who was right and who was wrong and who the eventually winner will be in this ridiculous nuclear pissing contest. Ohhhh… and Turkey doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance of becoming a superpower! Ciao!

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 25, 2010 at 2:05 pm Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 23 at 10:11 pm

”The literature is not clear whther this waread was the same 1550 kg device they tested ealier.  it was only anotehr year before China develoepd a hydrogen bomb, so unless I’m missing something, the 1966 test probably involved an implosion device.”


A uranium implosion device which is exactly NOT what you claimed the Iranians were able to construct using uranium. You sure back-peddle a lot Shingo. Their “DF-2A became operational with a nuclear warhead in 1966”, that’s the year prior to their developing a plutonium bomb. What’s important here Shingo and which you continue to try and downplay is that the technology that Iran needs to construct a uranium implosion bomb has been in existence since the mid sixties and proven functional by both the Chinese and the Pakistanis, whose improved technology miniaturized the Chinese model, increasing the possibility of it being used in Iranian missiles. 

“The first Chinese ballistic missile to become operational, designated the CSS-1 by the United States and Dong Feng (DF) or East Wind 2 by the Chinese, was probably a modified R-5 [SS-3] powered by a YF-1 storable-propellant motor. Although the first DF-2 test on 21 March 1962 failed, a successful test flight was conducted on 29 June 1964 following a major redesign of the system which included a reduction of the liftoff thrust from 45.5 tons to 40.5 tons and a reduction in range to 1,050 km. The original DF-2 design was modified in 1964, with the new DF-2A having a design range of 1,250 km with a 1,500 kg payload [the 12-KT nuclear warhead weighs 1,290 kg and the reentry-vehicle weighs an additional 200 kg]. Test launches continued throughout the period with this system furnishing the delivery vehicle for the first, and to date only, missile delivered test shot, on 27 October 1966 (CHIC 4). The DF-2A became operational with a nuclear warhead in 1966.”

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/theater/df-2.htm

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 25, 2010 at 2:02 pm Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 23 at 10:13 pm

”Khan stole nuclear blueprints from the Dutch in 1975 and the US intelligence community began tracking his activities the year after. Former Dutch Prime Minister Ruud Lubbers not only confirmed the CIA was monitoring Khan from the beginning but had turned down offers to detain Khan in 1975 and 1986 because they wanted to “gain more information” about the scientist’s activities.  In fact, the US allowed Kahn to obtain the technology, though they somehow missed the fact that he also opened up a nuclear weapons Wallmart on the side.”


This is where you screw up most, due to your myopic, America-hating, left wing view. Earlier you come here telling us that our intelligence agencies got it all wrong in Iraq and that that proves how inadequate and unreliable they are. Now you come here and say that they knew all about Pakistan and turned a blind eye to Kahn in order to sell F-16s. I can believe that. But your problem is that you want your cake and to eat too. When it comes to Pakistan you say that our intelligence agencies were not deceived then when it comes to claims about Iran you want to say that they don’t know what they’re talking about. When asked what motive would the U.S. and Israel have to want to attack Iran you would have us believe that it is something as puerile as payback for 1979!

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 25, 2010 at 2:00 pm Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 23 at 10:13 pm

” Anyway, getting back to my earlier point about your shallow analysis, controlling the world’s oil is not about stealing it, but about controlling who has access to it as well and manipulating price.”


That’s precisely the point I was making. We don’t have to invade Iran in order to maintain access to the world’s oil supplies. Hell Shingo, if Iran has reserves next to the Iraq border they can directional drill and harvest much of it before Iran would even be aware of what the hell was going on. I also made it clear that most of the world’s oil ends up in the U.S. because of our refining technology.

The U.S., unlike previous empires, does not colonize a nation and ship all the resources home. It assures that the market has access to those resources that the whole world benefits from. And if we are truly transitioning from a Type 0 to a Type 1 civilization this is what we are going to see more of because a Type 1 civilization will have a planetary government.

What the world needs is power and we get our power from energy and not only do we have enough proven oil reserves for about another 50 years the majority of power is produced from coal, not oil, followed by natural gas. The U.S. has the largest coal reserves in the world followed by Russia, China, Australia, and India. Coal is followed by natural gas as the next largest source of energy for power production and it burns much cleaner than either coal or crude and is much easier to transport. (See “Power Hungry,” chap 4, “Coal Hard Facts” by Robert Bryce) Care to guess where the world’s largest natural gas reserves are? North America! And which of those two countries sits atop the largest portion of that? The U.S. of A.! And with the new technology that can efficiently get natural gas from shale we’re in good shape.

The future is going to be nuclear power. There is a direct correlation between per capita electrical use and standard of living. It is of utmost importance that the third world has access to cheap power. When I was in college we were taught that the deepest they ever expected to find crude was at a depth of 17,000 ft. Today they are drilling wells and finding crude at 8 miles! In addition to that the percentage of successful explorations has increased from 10% to 50% in just a few decades. There are more than 5,000 independent oil firms spending billions annually in R&D and that rate of success is going to increase. Not only are we much more successful in predicting where to locate crude, but new technology is providing us with much better conversion ratios. We’re doing more with a lot less! That’s enlightenment, that’s knowledge. What it is not, is belief in non-existent fairies.

All this doomsday bullshit is just that… BULLSHIT!

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 25, 2010 at 1:57 pm Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 23 at 10:13 pm

”Given that even Hillary Clinton has stated Iran is no threat to the US, and the fact that Iran has not attacked or invaded anyone in 270 years, then obvious that the willingness to to risk a third world war is not based on security matters.
What is ludicrous is somehow denying that that oil and gas are of any consequence, given Western obsession and subversion in Iran dating back more than half a century.”


Hillary Clinton? Now you’re using the same government that you say is out to get Iran for vengeance sake as proof that Iran does not pose a threat. And I haven’t denied that oil and gas are of consequence. What I’ve demonstrated is that the West has open access to 8 of the top 11 “proven” reserves in the world. And Mexico is 3rd in “PROVEN” reserves followed by Iran. With that kind of access one does not risk a WWIII –not yet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oil_reserves

By Shingo, June 23 at 10:13 pm

”And don’t hold your breath re Venezuela collapsing.  That wingut fantasy is based on 99% wishful thinking and 1% reality.  Your hostility towards a state that has all but eliminated illiteracy within a decade pretty much betrays your reverence for the enlightenment.”

Very briefly because I’m not going to enter into yet another discussion about Venezuela: In every discussion that I have had on Venezuela I’ve mentioned the two areas the Chávez government has achieved much needed improvement. Those two areas are in literacy and providing medial clinics and services to the poorest of Venezuela’s barrios where people had little or no access before. You can travel through the poorest neighborhoods and find clinics staffed with Cuban doctors throughout the country. The problem is lack of medicines and supplies. All the medical attention in the world won’t help you if there aren’t any medicines available to treat the illness. Shortages are common traits of collectivism.

With regards to literacy: improvement in literacy numbers are common traits with communist/socialist societies because education is provided for all and usually mandatory to a certain level. It not only removes the monetary barriers that prevented many from being able to get an education, but also removes cultural and religious barriers that prevented women from getting an education. This is why you find higher literacy rates in Islamic cultures of the former U.S.S.R. than you do in those that weren’t.

Your puerile attempts to paint me as a right-winger is one of the major reasons you’ve been bitch-slapped all over this thread for more than a week. You have been proven wrong on most of your assessments; especially that of an Iranian bomb having to be a gun type and thus too heavy a payload for its missile capacity.

I’m going to reiterate for you something that I’ve made clear on many different occasions. I’m neither a right-winger nor a left winger. I, unlike you and many other of the so-called left and right, do not believe in fantasy. There is no such thing as left and right in politics. Everything in life is up/down, meaning the end result of any political or ideological “ism” is nothing more complicated than different levels of “haves” and “have nots.”  You’d do well to let that fact sink in.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 25, 2010 at 1:37 pm Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 23 at 10:13 pm

”How about we begin by putting your straw man back in it’s box and   you providing a quote where I made such a statement?  As with Iraq, most Americans wouldn’t know who or what Iran was were it not for it’s oil and gas.”


There’s no straw man. It is inferred from the following statement because the idea that the U.S. wants to invade Iran, risking a war with Russia and/or China or both, is so off the wall that I can only attribute it to your having forgotten to take your meds.

And that does not explain Israel. You don’t risk WWIII because you want some payback. There’s another motive. And if it isn’t oil and gas then what is it?

By Shingo, June 23 at 12:51 am

”The obsession with Iran’s nuclear program is a cynical ploy to attack and punish that country for the events of 1979, for which the US has never forgiven them. Tghey have no nukes, no way to produce nukes and a dilapidated military.  Frankly speaking, I believe they are not pursuing nuclear weapons because the opportunity costs do not justify the risks.  As Barak said, they may be extremists, but they are not crazy.
If they didn’t have a shit load of oil and gas under their feet, we wouldn’t be interested in them one way or another.”

Report this

By Shingo, June 23, 2010 at 6:13 pm Link to this comment

Part 1 of 2

By nemesis2010, June 23 at 3:30 pm
“Let’s move on to your claim that the U.S. wants to invade Iran for its oil and gas:”

How about we begin by putting your straw man back in it’s box and   you providing a quote where I made such a statement?  As with Iraq, most Americans wouldn’t know who or what Iran was were it not for it’s oil and gas.

By nemesis2010, June 23 at 3:30 pm
“The popularized claim that the U.S. wants Iran’s oil and gas reserves and that it is willing to risk a third world war for it is ludicrous.”

Given that even Hillary Clinton has stated Iran is no threat to the US, and the fact that Iran has not attacked or invaded anyone in 270 years, then obvious that the willingness to to risk a third world war is not based on security matters.

What is ludicrous is somehow denying that that oil and gas are of any consequence, given Western obsession and subversion in Iran dating back more than half a century.  I had to laugh at the irony of your citation of Venezuela as being under US control, given that like Iran in 1953, the US backed a coup to overthrow the leader once he decided to nationalize the state’s resources.  Of course, on the 2002 effort failed miserably.

And don’t hold your breath re Venezuela collapsing.  That wingut fantasy is based on 99% wishful thinking and 1% reality.  Your hostility towards a state that has all but eliminated illiteracy within a decade pretty much betrays your reverence for the enlightenment.

I’m actually surprised that you would resort to such a shallow argument that control of oil and gas requires an invasion.  The Iraq FUBAR (where the majority of contracts did not go to the US) provided us with a first hand example of how such plans are destined to fail.  As with the case of the states you listed, the most effective means of controlling oil in other states has always been by propping up puppet government, preferably tyrants and Islamic theocracies. And to correct your claims, the US controls 6 of the top 11 reserves, not 8.

Mexico is 14th not 3rd.

Iraq is 4th, and more in the control of Tehran than Washington’s thanks to our FUBAR invasion.  Heck of a job Team America!!

It’s no secret that Saudi Arabian fields are on the decline and there is strong evidence that their recovery estimates are exaggerated.  Iran is the 3rd largest and those numbers are probably low balled due to the limited exploration that has taken place.

Anyway, getting back to my earlier point about your shallow analysis, controlling the world’s oil is not about stealing it, but about controlling who has access to it as well and manipulating price.

By nemesis2010, June 23 at 3:30 pm
“The world knows that Pakistan, a pseudo-democratic, theocratic state, was able to evade all the nuclear regulatory agencies and intelligence agencies of several nations, even, and especially, that of the U.S. and Germany for 2 decades.”

And if you believe that, I have a bridge is Alaska to sell you.  Khan stole nuclear blueprints from the Dutch in 1975 and the US intelligence community began tracking his activities the year after. Former Dutch Prime Minister Ruud Lubbers not only confirmed the CIA was monitoring Khan from the beginning but had turned down offers to detain Khan in 1975 and 1986 because they wanted to “gain more information” about the scientist’s activities.  In fact, the US allowed Kahn to obtain the technology, though they somehow missed the fact that he also opened up a nuclear weapons Wallmart on the side.

Report this

By Shingo, June 23, 2010 at 6:11 pm Link to this comment

Part 2 of 2

Dick Cheney, Defence Secretary during the Reagan and Bush terms (no doubt a hero of yours), and who’s wife was on the board of General Dynamics, withheld such evidence from Congress when they were debating whether to sell F-16’s to Pakistan.

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/They_sold_out_world_for_F16_0426.html

To lump Iran and Pakistan together and suggesting that they present the same case epitomizes your ignorance.  As I pointed out above, Pakistan were not only given protection and cover for their nuclear program every step of the way, but the US and Israel were working overtime to keep the world’s attention on states that were not developing nukes while Pakistan were busy.

Needless to say, not only did Pakistan never sign the NPT or allow inspectors into the country, but to John Bolton (another one of your role models no doubt) argued that this abrogation meant that their nuclear weapons program was legitimate.

You gotta love the cohesion and consistency of US foreign policy.

By nemesis2010, June 23 at 3:30 pm
“Given that, you would have us believe that Pakistan and Iran’s word should be accepted as evidence that they have no malicious pretense and that it wouldn’t be possible for Iran to evade those same agencies that you have said on this very thread are incompetent.”

You really have lost your marbles haven’t you nemesis2010?  Please explain how the IAEA can be accused of incompetence when Pakistan never signed the NPT, but much less allowed their program to be scrutinized?  And seeing as the CIA not only knew what was going all along, but facilitated it,  the term you are probably looking for is not malfeasance, not incompetence.

By nemesis2010, June 23 at 3:30 pm
“Anyone accepting the word of Islamic theocracies and pseudo-democratic, theocratic states does so at his own risk. Only a fool would do so!”

Spoken like a true Imperialist.  Unfortunately for Islamophobes like yourself, not only do such entities exist, but our government happens to be in bed with them, though I happened to agree that our country has long been run by fools.

By nemesis2010, June 23 at 3:30 pm
“A nuclear theocracy is a viable threat to world peace and because of this discussion my position on Iran has changed. I thank you.”

There’s no need to thank me Nemesis.  Your epiphany is as surprising as hearing David Duke claiming he’s discovered a new reason to distrust black people.

Given your paranoia and irrational hatred of Islam, I’m pretty sure you would have arrived at that position on your own, if indeed you didn’t already harbor it to begin with.  It’s not like any evidence or augment has been presented throughout our debate to suggest Iran is any kind of threat, so your about face is clearly emotional.

Report this

By Shingo, June 23, 2010 at 3:25 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 23 at 3:33 pm
“China tested its first missile delivered warhead with it’s fourth nuclear test, in October 1966.” –Dr. Jeffrey Lewis”

The literature is not clear whther this waread was the same 1550 kg device they tested ealier.  it was only anotehr year before China develoepd a hydrogen bomb, so unless I’m missing something, the 1966 test probably involved an implosion device.

China’s successful testing of an implosion type uranium bomb was followed up within a few months, and only their 4th nuclear test, with its 1st missile delivered warhead. And this was in 1966!

By nemesis2010, June 23 at 3:33 pm
“Given that, it is possible—albeit improbable—that Iran can build a uranium bomb using Pakistan’s miniaturized version”

Improbable and indeed impossible without the world being alerted to Iran’s efforts were they do pursue such options.  You’d surely be aware of how complexed implosion devices are and the amount of testing required to perfect them.  Pakistan’s efforts were enabled by sourcing nuclear detonators from South Africa.

Israel and the US have been predicting that Iran was 6 months away from making a nuke since the mid 90’s, so if they wanted to produce a nuke, they would have done so by now.

By nemesis2010, June 23 at 3:33 pm
“There’s the threat and it is a viable threat given that Iran is an Islamic theocracy!”

Given that no Islamic theocracy has ever used a nuke, this statement is absurd to say the least.  Islamic theocracies may be extreme, but as Ehud Barak stated, that does not make them insane.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 23, 2010 at 11:33 am Link to this comment

I.

By Shingo, June 23 at 12:51 am

”Now onto the matter of uranium implosion bombs, I concede that it does appear the Chinese tested 7 uranium implosion devices in the 60’s though it’s not clear that these were made into deliverable weapons”

Thank you. What we have established here is that you are wrong about an Iranian uranium bomb not being possible because it would have to be a “gun type” and thus too heavy for any of its missile capabilities.

By Shingo, June 23 at 12:51 am

”They certainly didn’t have missiles at the time capable of delivering 1,500 kg payloads. ”

Apparently you missed this part of the quotes from sources that you have just admitted are correct.

“China tested its first missile delivered warhead with it’s fourth nuclear test, in October 1966.” –Dr. Jeffrey Lewis

China’s successful testing of an implosion type uranium bomb was followed up within a few months, and only their 4th nuclear test, with its 1st missile delivered warhead. And this was in 1966!

Given that, it is possible—albeit improbable—that Iran can build a uranium bomb using Pakistan’s miniaturized version (and possibly advanced technology since 1998) of the 1960’s Chinese design which Pakistan successfully tested in 1998.

Such a bomb falls into a weight that anyone of Iran’s missiles—including the notoriously inaccurate SCUDS—can manage. This type of uranium implosion bomb mated to a Sahab 3 presents a nuclear threat and especially so when mated to a Sahab 4 with a new guidance system and extended range of 1250 miles because it can target the entire Middle East!

There’s the threat and it is a viable threat given that Iran is an Islamic theocracy!

Let’s move on to your claim that the U.S. wants to invade Iran for its oil and gas:

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 23, 2010 at 11:30 am Link to this comment

II.

The popularized claim that the U.S. wants Iran’s oil and gas reserves and that it is willing to risk a third world war for it is ludicrous.

Of the top ten proven largest oil reserves in the world, Western oil firms are harvesting 6 of them and partially in a 7th, Venezuela (Chevron). The 11th largest is in Nigeria and Western firms are and have been harvesting those resources also (ExxonMobil). That’s 8 of the top 11.

The largest proven reserves as of a 2008 study are in Saudi Arabia and Canada. Mexico is 3rd and Iran 4th, followed by our puppet state Iraq whose estimated oil reserve life is 55 years longer than that of Iran. Venezuela will soon collapse under the misguidance of their communist dictator and those reserves will once again be harvested by Western firms meaning that 7 of the world’s top ten largest oil reserves are being harvested by the West and easily available to the world market.

The U.S., the world’s largest importer of oil, is also one of the world’s largest exporters of oil because crude is not only highly toxic and smells like shit, but is almost useless until it is refined. It is the U.S. that has the high tech refineries that refines the world’s crude for all the different needs. The U.S. doesn’t need Iran!

The world knows that Pakistan, a pseudo-democratic, theocratic state, was able to evade all the nuclear regulatory agencies and intelligence agencies of several nations, even, and especially, that of the U.S. and Germany for 2 decades. Given that, you would have us believe that Pakistan and Iran’s word should be accepted as evidence that they have no malicious pretense and that it wouldn’t be possible for Iran to evade those same agencies that you have said on this very thread are incompetent. Anyone accepting the word of Islamic theocracies and pseudo-democratic, theocratic states does so at his own risk. Only a fool would do so!

A nuclear theocracy is a viable threat to world peace and because of this discussion my position on Iran has changed. I thank you.

Report this

By Shingo, June 22, 2010 at 8:51 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 22 at 8:41 pm

I take no pleasure in winning arguments about Iran.  Frankly, I am sickened by the misinformation and the willingness of the public to allow themselves to be duped into a re-run of the lead up to the Iraq war.  Listening to Marshall, you’d be forgiven for thinking that Iran was breaking some law by not satisfying every wish of the US and it’s allies, when in fact, Iran is under no obligation to even consider these proposals.  The US claimed it was pursuing negotiations with Iran, when in fact all it has done is make inflexible demands and insisting that the only offer was a final one.

With regards to enlightenment, we’ve already agreed that there were empires many millennia before the enlightenment took place, at least one of which, happened to be Islamic.  I don’t believe Turkey will be a superpower either, though it wouldn’t bother me in the slightest if they did.  I don’t think there will be any superpowers emerging in the near future.  The US experiment has surely convinced the rest of the world that it is a guaranteed path to ruination.

Now onto the matter of uranium implosion bombs, I concede that it does appear the Chinese tested 7 uranium implosion devices in the 60’s though it’s not clear that these were made into deliverable weapons.  They certainly didn’t have missiles at the time capable of delivering 1,500 kg payloads.  Pakistan modernized their weapons to plutonium in the 90’s with the help of Chinese.

The important points to mention are the following:

1. Iran are signatories to the NPT and no state has ever developed nukes while open to inspections.
2. The IAEA has repeatedly reported (with 100% certainty) that Iran is not diverting any nuclear material to any weapons program
3. The US Intelligence community (all 16 agencies) reported in 2007, that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program
4. Dennis Blair upheld this conclusion last April, in a presentation to the Senate.
5. In the February 2010 threat assessment Report, the same intelligence agencies concluded that the 2007 conclusion was still applicable

The banning of 2 IAEA inspectors is hardly surprising.  Iran are being denied their rights under the NPT and based on reports, they suspect that these IAEA inspectors were spies.  Be that as it may, one can hardly blame them for being paranoid seeing as Israel and Washington both declared that there would be efforts to undermine the Iranian nuclear program.  The assassination of an Iranian nuclear scientist and the apparent abduction of another would have done little to quell their suspicions.

The obsession with Iran’s nuclear program is a cynical ploy to attack and punish that country for the events of 1979, for which the US has never forgiven them. Tghey have no nukes, no way to produce nukes and a dilapidated military.  Frankly speaking, I believe they are not pursuing nuclear weapons because the opportunity costs do not justify the risks.  As Barak said, they may be extremists, but they are not crazy.

If they didn’t have a shit load of oil and gas under their feet, we wouldn’t be interested in them one way or another.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 22, 2010 at 4:45 pm Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 21 at 10:06 pm

” The IAEA concluded that Iran’s explanation was satisfactrory and the Pakistanis confirmed the story.”

Well that’s comforting. Who would doubt Pakistan, right? I’m going to sleep much better knowing this.

I find the following very disturbing. Is this true that for two decades this Khan guy was able to evade all of our intelligence agencies? All the money that is given to those agencies; doesn’t reflect well on our superpowers, does it?

“Khan, with the help of associates on four continents, managed to buy and sell key nuclear weapons capabilities for more than two decades while eluding the world’s best intelligence agencies and nonproliferation institutions and organizations. Despite a wide range of hints and leads, the United States and its allies failed to thwart this network throughout the 1980s and 1990s as it sold the equipment and expertise needed to produce nuclear weapons…”

By Shingo, June 21 at 10:06 pm

”How can it be true if these guidance systems and extended ranges haven’t yet been developed?  You’re confusiin spectulation with fact.”

You’ve missed a word. It happens. The question was if it was or wasn’t true that officials “believe” that the Sahab 4 will eventually have new guidance components and an extended range of 1250 miles carrying a 2200 lbs payload.

What I’m trying to understand is why the U.S. would want to invade Iran. Why would Israel want to attack Iran, or have as many here claim, the U.S. attack Iran for them? What’s in it for them? If officials do “believe” that then it could explain why Israel and others are so nervous. But even that seems not to hold much water because as you’ve said they don’t have plutonium therefore they can’t use a missile, right?

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 22, 2010 at 4:41 pm Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 21 at 10:05 pm

”Stick to whjat you know Nemesism, which is clearly very little.  Leave the talk about nukes to the adults OK?”

Naw… I may not know much Shingo but at least I do know the difference between “enlightenment” and “The Enlightenment” and the definition of Western civilization. Oh, and that Big Pharma killing the competition from generic AIDS drug production hasn’t got a damn thing to do with Turkey not standing a snowball’s chance of becoming a superpower.

Let’s just say that I like it rough and pretending I’m an adult, okay?

Smile Shingo, you’ve been taking it on the chin for more than a week now and dodging questions and unable to present evidence to back your position on Islamic cesspools. Now, fortunately for you, we’re entering into an area where you excel and I’m living in a dictionary because I’m in way over my head. It’s going to be a grand opportunity for you to get some payback. Relax and enjoy it.

I will be slowing it down a bit because of time constraints and all those big words. I’m spending half my day looking up all those big words in my new “Nuklear Stuff for Losers in Trailers” book.

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:14 pm

”Didn’t China have an implosion uranium device in the 1960s?”

By Shingo, June 21 at 10:06 pm

”No”…
…The documents referrred to the designs of plutonium spheres not uranium.

So the following is incorrect?

”Iran’s nuclear program is based around uranium, which can be made critical either by slamming a uranium pellet into a nearly critical mass of uranium (a gun-type device like we dropped on Hiroshima) or imploding sphere of uranium (like the Chinese did in the 1960s). The latter is the more likely route for a number of reasons, largely related to the size of the weapon. Since we are talking about a ballistic missile delivered weapon, let’s assume Iran goes the implosion route.” –Dr. Jeffrey Lewis

”That’s pretty consistent with what we see from new nuclear states. China’s first bomb—a uranium implosion device—weighed 1550 kg and had to be wheeled to the tower.

China tested its first missile delivered warhead with it’s fourth nuclear test, in October 1966.” –Dr. Jeffrey Lewis
———————————————————————-
Both the new and the old designs exploit the principle of implosion, in which a blast wave from a sphere of conventional explosives squeezes inward with tremendous force to compress a ball of bomb fuel, starting the chain reaction and the atomic explosion. A nuclear official in Europe familiar with the Khan investigation said the new design was powerful but miniaturized – using about half the uranium fuel of the older design to produce a greater explosive force.

‘Pakistan cannot put the big China design on any of its rockets,’ said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the information is classified. ‘It’s too big.’ A smaller warhead created from the new design, he added, is ‘more efficient and easier to hide,’ meaning that one day it might become a ‘terrorist issue.’

China first exploded the old design in 1966, nuclear experts say, and Pakistan fired the miniaturized version in 1998. -David E. Sanger and William J. Broad, “Axis of Evil”, New York Times, Mon, 16 Jun 2008 05:57 EDT

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, June 22, 2010 at 3:37 am Link to this comment

Israel suffers from excessive paranoia and ingraditude. 

Iran was the first “Islamic” state to recognize Israel.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2010/0618/Does-Israel-suffer-from-Iranophobia

Report this

By Shingo, June 22, 2010 at 2:04 am Link to this comment

Marshall 1 of 2

By Marshall, June 22 at 5:12 am

“Shingo - pull your head out from between your legs long enough to read the entire Barak quote you keep regurgitating, okay?”

You can obsess about that quote all you like.  Barak admits he is speculating and more importantly, it does NOT contradict the only important argument we are having - whether Iran poses a threat to Israel were it to have a nuke.

Batrak says NO.  80% of Israelis say no.  End of story.  That’s the only argument that matters. Scrape the barrel all you like for minutia about arms races that have already began in spite of Iran, but it doesn’t change a thing.

By Marshall, June 22 at 5:12 am
“The other quotes I cited are very clear but not surprisingly you’re filtering reality to suit your beliefs.”

Clearer, but no more relevant. At no point does Barak suggest that Iran would attack Israel.  In fact, even Clinton recently stated that Iran presents to existential threat to anyone.

By Marshall, June 22 at 5:12 am
“Policy makers rarely speak directly of attack; it’s always about “leaving all options on the table” which we all know is code for military action.”

All that means is that Israel wants to attack Iran, or more to the point, wants the US to do it for them. Sop what’s new?  Israel wants wars with Syria and Lebanon too.  It likes to maintain a state of war and siege because fear and panic is he only thing holding that society together.

By Marshall, June 22 at 5:12 am
“If you can’t win on content then try to attack on technicality right?  I see.  Well I said “an” arms race.”

I see, so you admit an arms race has already begin in the Middle East/East but now you’re arguing that Iran might start another parallel race.  That’s laughable given that that hostilities with Turkey are bound to fuel one anyway.

You must seriously hate Islam to be so obsessed about Iran, a country that hasn’t attacked or invaded anyone in 270 years.

By Marshall, June 22 at 5:12 am
“Your man Barak said it, Clinton agreed, and you’ve still cited no source that disagrees.”

Actually I did, but you didn’t bother to read it.

Israeli general Brigadier-General Uzi Eilam denies Iran is nuclear threat
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6982447.ece

By Marshall, June 22 at 5:12 am
“It’s pointless talking with someone who uses a source when it suits them then calls that source a liar when refuted so I see i’m wasting my time here.”

Your argument is entirely pointless, because you and I know that there is no evidence that Iran is making nukes.  Your whole argument rests on the assumption that they are, in spite of the fact that the 2007 NIE says they are not, the IAEA says they are not, and the February 2010 Intelligence Threat Assessment Report confirms those conclusions.

Report this

By Shingo, June 22, 2010 at 2:02 am Link to this comment

Marshall 2 of 2
By Marshall, June 22 at 5:12 am
“Wrong.  Adds language that specifically assigns ownership of the LEU to Iran (in addition to fuel rods) which means they could repossess it.”

Your link is a joke and full of lies.  Hardly surprising given it comes from the same think tank that lied us into the Iraq war. I’m amazed you would be so clueless to cite a source from the AEI.

The proposal states that Iran could demand that Turkey ship back the LEU in the event that Iran does not receive the fuel rods.  Your link is deliberately misleading on that point.  The last time Iran entered into such a deal, France ended up refusing to provide the fuel and refused to return the uranium to Iran (all 50 tonnes of it).
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=113611&sectionid=351020104

Of course the LEU belongs to Iran.  Who else should it belong to?  They are producing the stuff, but the fuel rods do not, and your AEI propaganda infested link doesn’t even sugest that.

By Marshall, June 22 at 5:12 am
“October proposal had France converting LEU to medical grade.  Brazil deal omits that requirement.”

Again you haven’t got a clue what you’re talking about. You might want to read your own links you idiot. 

“Iran would ship 1,200 kilograms of its declared low-enriched uranium (LEU) stockpile to Turkey within one month of the proposal’s acceptance under the deal.[3]  The “Vienna Group” (identified in the declaration as the United States, Russia, France and the IAEA) would then provide Iran with 120 kilograms of 20% enriched uranium for the Tehran Research Reactor within one year.”

This is entirely consistent with the 2009 October proposal.

Face it Marshall.  You are completely clueless neocon who simply has it in for Iran.  You have no evidence that Iran has or is pursuing nukes.  We already had a long running debate on that topic and all you could do is obsess about whether Iran would agree to the additional protocols and now all you have are a few scraps as to whether Iran would be responsible for starting an arms race that has already existed for a decade.

Give it up.  You’re way out of our depth.

Report this

By Marshall, June 22, 2010 at 1:12 am Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 21 at 11:36 pm #

Shingo - pull your head out from between your legs long enough to read the entire Barak quote you keep regurgitating, okay?  Here it is:

“I prefer to refrain from speculation about the future,” Barak added. “Right now, Iran does not pose an existential threat to Israel. If Iran becomes nuclear, it will spark an arms race in the Middle East. This region is very sensitive because of the oil flow ? the region is important to the entire world. The fact that Iran is not an immediate threat, but could evolve into one, means that we can’t let ourselves fall asleep.”

And the “I prefer to refrain from speculation about the future” is about as specific as my sunday horoscope but you’ve again cherry-picked for your purposes.  The other quotes I cited are very clear but not surprisingly you’re filtering reality to suit your beliefs.

Policy makers rarely speak directly of attack; it’s always about “leaving all options on the table” which we all know is code for military action.  Barak said exactly that numerous times:

http://www.haaretz.com/news/barak-tells-gates-all-iran-options-still-on-table-1.7526

<<you’ve just debunked your claim that Iran’s obtaining nukes would start an arms race.  You can’t start something that has already begun.>>

If you can’t win on content then try to attack on technicality right?  I see.  Well I said “an” arms race. Your man Barak said it, Clinton agreed, and you’ve still cited no source that disagrees.  It’s pointless talking with someone who uses a source when it suits them then calls that source a liar when refuted so I see i’m wasting my time here.  And your second rambling cut and paste post actually makes my point leading me to think you’re drunk.

<<The proposal does not allow Iran to repossess the LEU after receiving the fuel-rods.>>

Wrong.  Adds language that specifically assigns ownership of the LEU to Iran (in addition to fuel rods) which means they could repossess it.

http://www.irantracker.org/news-highlight/irans-nuclear-proposal-context

<<You don’t re-purpose uranium as medical grade.>>

October proposal had France converting LEU to medical grade.  Brazil deal omits that requirement. 

Give it up Shingo - you’re wrong on every count here but your state of denial remains impenetrable.  I’m signing out off this one.

Report this

By Shingo, June 21, 2010 at 7:41 pm Link to this comment

BTW Marshall,

Barak is not alone in his assessment.

Israeli general Brigadier-General Uzi Eilam denies Iran is nuclear threat

A general who was once in charge of Israel’s nuclear weapons has claimed that Iran is a “very, very, very long way from building a nuclear capability”.

Brigadier-General Uzi Eilam, 75, a war hero and pillar of the defence establishment, believes it will probably take Iran seven years to make nuclear weapons.

The views expressed by the former director-general of Israel’s Atomic Energy Commission contradict the assessment of Israel’s defence establishment and put him at odds with political leaders.

Major-General Amos Yadlin, head of military intelligence, recently told the defence committee of the Knesset that Iran will probably be able to build a single nuclear device this year.
Related Links

  * Iran awaits Ayatollah’s nod before building N-bomb

  * Iran in scramble for fresh uranium supplies

Binyamin Netanyahu, the prime minister, has repeatedly said that Israel will not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran. Israeli forces have been in training to attack Iranian nuclear installations and some analysts believe airstrikes could be launched this year if international sanctions fail to deter Tehran from pursuing its programme.

Eilam, who is thought to be updated by former colleagues on developments in Iran, calls his country’s official view hysterical. “The intelligence community are spreading frightening voices about Iran,” he said.

He suggested that the “defence establishment is sending out false alarms in order to grab a bigger budget” while some politicians have used Iran to divert attention away from problems at home.

“Those who say that Iran will obtain a bomb within a year’s time, on what basis did they say so?” he asked. “Where is the evidence?”

He has just published Eilam’s Arc, a memoir in which he reveals that he opposed the Israeli attack on Iraq’s nuclear reactor at Osirak in 1981.

According to well-placed defence sources, Israel is speeding up preparations for a possible attack on Iran’s nuclear sites. Last week its defence forces released footage that showed training to refuel F-15 jet fighters in mid-air. “This was a warning not to Iran but to the Americans that we’re serious,” said an Israeli defence source.

But Eilam argues “such an attack [against Iran] would be counter-productive”.

“One strike is not practical. In order to delay the Iranian programme for three to four years, one needs an armada of aircraft, which only a super-power can provide. Only America can do it.”


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6982447.ece

Report this

By Shingo, June 21, 2010 at 7:36 pm Link to this comment

By Marshall, June 21 at 11:05 pm

“Shingo - your source omits the other statements Barak makes during the briefing.  His followup is that it’s “unacceptable” for Iran to go nuclear because of the arms race likelyhood I posed earlier ...”

On the contrary.  Barak admits in his 4/19 speech, “I prefer to refrain from speculation about the future,” and at no stage dopes he contradict my central argument that Barak agree Iran would not attack Israel if they had a nuke.

Tzipi Livni made the same statement a few years ago too BTW.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/livni-behind-closed-doors-iran-nukes-pose-little-threat-to-israel-1.231858

By Marshall, June 21 at 11:05 pm
“I can hardly think of a stable world order with a nuclear Iran.”

Again, Barak does not suggest that Iran would attack Israel.

By Marshall, June 21 at 11:05 pm
“They are trying to jump directly into the second or second-and-a-half generation of nuclear warheads that could be installed on top of ground-to-ground missiles with ranges that will cover not just Israel, but Moscow or Paris.”
Again, Barak does not eveb try to suggest that Iran would attack Israel.

Of course, on this point we know that Barak is lying becasue there is no evidence of this. The US intelligence community has never accepted such a hysterical analysis.

By Marshall, June 21 at 11:05 pm
“He also said Israel would not need to coordinate any military response to Iran with the US.”

Which is true, because Israel has no means to attacking Iran without US support. It still does not suggest that Iran would attack Israel.

By Marshall, June 21 at 11:05 pm
“The point is that your source disagrees with you entirely on this issue.”

On the contrary.  The argument is whether a nuclear armed Iran is a threat to Israel and Barak says no. That’s the only point that matters. You can’t argue thsi so rather than admit you’re argument has failed, you are trying to conflate the debate with trivia.

I chose Barak, because every so often, an Israeli politician breaks rank and tells it like it is.  Livni said the same thing in 2007.

Of course, polls already show that 4 in 5 Israelis see life continuing as normal should Iran get the bomb.

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=103021#axzz0rXrV7Vy5


By Marshall, June 21 at 11:05 pm
“They’re nuclear states because of an arms race.”

So in other words, you’ve just debunked your claim that Iran’s obtaining nukes would start an arms race.  You can’t start something that has already begun.

By Marshall, June 21 at 11:05 pm
“Nope.  The Brazilian deal allowed a greater percentage of Iran’s LEU to remain in Iran because they increased their stocks since Oct. ‘09 and it failed to address Iran’s domestic 20% enrichment program.  It allowed Iran to repossess the LEU after receiving the fuel-rods and omitted its commitment to re-purpose the uranium as medical grade.  All clearly a step backwards.”

Rubbish.
1. If the West were ever interested is reaching a deal, they could have easily proposed that a greater percentage of Iran’s LEU should be shipped to a third party.  Instead they rejected the proposal outright without making any counter proposal.

2. The West made no counter recommendation re the 20% enrichment program.

3. The proposal does not allow Iran to repossess the LEU after receiving the fuel-rods.  The Fuel rods go back to Russia once they are spent.  That has always been the arrangement.

4. You don’t re-purpose uranium as medical grade.  Obviously you have no idea what you are talking about. You either enrich to levels to produce fuel for medical applications or you don’t.

Report this

By Marshall, June 21, 2010 at 7:05 pm Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 21 at 7:56 pm #

Shingo - your source omits the other statements Barak makes during the briefing.  His followup is that it’s “unacceptable” for Iran to go nuclear because of the arms race likelyhood I posed earlier ...which makes him my first legitimate source in response to your failure to provide any that support your denial that such an arms race would occur.  It’ll be hard to discredit my source since he was your guy.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/mar/21/opinion/la-oe-mcmanus21-2010mar21

So as long as we’re cherry picking, here are some of his other comments from that interview:

“I can hardly think of a stable world order with a nuclear Iran.”

“They are trying to jump directly into the second or second-and-a-half generation of nuclear warheads that could be installed on top of ground-to-ground missiles with ranges that will cover not just Israel, but Moscow or Paris.”

He also said Israel would not need to coordinate any military response to Iran with the US.

<<The speech I was referring to was not from the 4/19.>>

And this matters how?  The point is that your source disagrees with you entirely on this issue.  I’m sure you wouldn’t be using him if you had a better one but I understand that beggars can’t be choosers.

<<If 2 states in the region have nukes, then why hasn’t a nuclear arms race already begun?>>

They’re nuclear states because of an arms race.  Iran joining the club will be further evidence as will the next regional power and at some point your state of denial might begin to seem ludicrous even to you.  Or perhaps not.

<<it reflected precisely what was on the table>>

Nope.  The Brazilian deal allowed a greater percentage of Iran’s LEU to remain in Iran because they increased their stocks since Oct. ‘09 and it failed to address Iran’s domestic 20% enrichment program.  It allowed Iran to repossess the LEU after receiving the fuel-rods and omitted its commitment to re-purpose the uranium as medical grade.  All clearly a step backwards.

Report this

By Shingo, June 21, 2010 at 6:17 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:11 pm

“That’s right Shingo! And it is what all of those Islamic shitholes seek! It is Western technology, expertise and enlightenment (knowledge) that’s provides the means to harvest their natural resources, that provides advanced medical equipment and techniques and drugs to heal their people, that train their workforce, that provide higher education for many of their students, etc.”

Blah blah blah.  Like I said, this Western technology was being discovered long before the enlightenement and was being discoevered by peopel of faith.

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:11 pm
“Do you have any idea what the hell the U.S. military might have that we haven’t a clue about? I’m not privy to any top-secret weapons development and weaponry and I doubt that you are either…”

Whatever top-secret weapons development and weaponry we might have might help us kill peopel faster and more efficiently, but it isn’t helping us on the batlefield.


By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:11 pm
“The facts are that we the people know very little about what is really taking place behind the scenes. And you’re just as ignorant as the rest of us when it comes to knowing the true motives behind what is going on politically in the world.”

True, but every now and then, we get a hint of what is taking place behind the scenes, such as the collkateral murder video from Wikileaks.  And one doesn’t have to knwo explicitly what is taking place behind the scenes.  All it requires is observation as to what is being achieved or what the end results are.

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:11 pm
“You denigrate this nation, and admittedly, there’s a lot of wrong that needs to be righted, while living in the comfort and advantages that it offers, presenting Islamic cesspools as if they were anything but and yet when asked are unable to present us with a single attribute that those theocratic, oppressive, and autocratic cesspools can offer mankind for a better future.”

For over a century, the enlightened West has been working overtime in maitaining the Middle Eastern states in a state of perpeptual poverty and stagnation by suporting manevolent dictators who are prepared to put the interests of the West before their own populations. These policies are what have created the conditions for ignorance and religios extremism to thrive.

I suspect that once a state like Turkey begins to enjoy the benefits of economic success, it will inevitably move towards modernization.

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:11 pm
“Tell us what Middle Eastern—especially Islamic—nation offers us a better chance for a better future than that which we have in the West.”

Why is this question so important to you, unless you beleive that we are destined to become an Islamic society?

Report this

By Shingo, June 21, 2010 at 6:06 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:14 pm
“What you are saying is that a ballistic missile is incapable of delivering a fission bomb, yet a W33 artillery shell was 37” long, 8” in diameter and only weighed 243 lbs and designed to be fired from a large gun barrel. They were gun type, weren’t they?”

Fission applies to both plutonium devices as well as HEU.  For a ballistic missile to carry a uranium fission bomb, it would have to carry both the projectile, the target and the gun itself.

The W33 artillery shell was experimental and clearly had a very limited range.

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:14 pm
“Didn’t China have an implosion uranium device in the 1960s? And isn’t this the design that is believed to have made its way to Pakistan then Libya and possibly on to… uhhhhh… let’s see… hold on a second… let me check this out… yep… it says here Iran.”

No and no. 

The so called designs that the IAEA came across in Iran were documents that AQ Kahn threw in with paperwork of otherwise innoucuous and ageing centrifuge equipment.  The documents referrred to the designs of plutonium spheres not uranium.  The IAEA concluded that Iran’s explanation was satisfactrory and the Pakistanis confirmed the story.

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:14 pm
“Isn’t Pakistan’s program based on HEU? What’s their delivery system? Aren’t all of their Haft 1 thru 5 and/or the M 11 nuclear capable?”

No, Pakistan’s program based on plutonium like everyone else’s, which is what AQ Kahn was trying to market to the Iranians.

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:14 pm
“Is it, or is it not, true that Iran’s CSS-8, Scud B and Scud C short range missiles can handle a payload of 500 + kg?”

Perhaps, but as you point out, they are “short range” missiles, not delivery systems for reentry vehicles.

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:14 pm
“Is it, or is it not, true that their Sahab 3 & 4 are really extended range North Korean No Dongs with an estimated 800-930 mile range and capable of carrying a 500-1000 lbs and 1600 lbs warhead, respectively?”

Perhaps but so what?

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:14 pm
“Is it, or is it not, true that officials believe that the Sahab 4 will eventually have new guidance components and an extended range of 1250 miles carrying a 2200 lbs payload?”

How can it be true if these guidance systems and extended ranges haven’t yet been developed?  You’re confusiin spectulation with fact.

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:14 pm
“I’m only a loser living in a double wide trailer with my sister and our son but it appears to me that based on the above data, if confirmed by you, a rather small—in comparison to first world fusion devices—fission device can be built and delivered by one of their missiles. Based on the above data with a Sahab 4 they could target any objective in the entire Middle East, couldn’t they?”

No first world fusion devices was ever delivered by missile or did you miss that?

Report this

By Shingo, June 21, 2010 at 6:05 pm Link to this comment

Part 2 of 2

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:14 pm
“Why is it that we are supposed to accept that your sources and positions are infallible while all of those contrary are false? Isn’t Iran in a pissing contest with I.A.E.A. as I type? Haven’t they just banned two I.A.E.A. members from entering?”

The contrary claims are not based on any evidence.  You’re own link uses careful working like “suspect”, “believe” and “may one day have the ability”.  You’ll note that no one.  NO ONE, claims to have evidence that Iran is developing nukes.

Secondly, Iran is sticking to the letter of the law as far as the NPT is concerned.  Given that they being denied their rights under the NPT, it’s hardly surprising that they are not going the extra mile and agreeing to inspections beyind NPT obligations.  The IAEA inspection of Jabr Inb Jayan Multipurpose Research Laborator does not come under the Safeguards Agreement.

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:14 pm
“Would you have me believe that those fat ayatollahs are above lying and deceiving?”

Of course, not, which is why I haven’t cited them as a source for any of my arguments.  That’s not even a decent straw man Nemsis.

By nemesis2010, June 21 at 9:14 pm
“We know they’re lying through their damn teeth because they claimed in January to have conducted pyroprocessing experiments only to retract the claim two months later. They either lied about the experiments or they are lying about not having conducted the experiments.”

False on all counts.  You should know better that to believe BS from unnamed diplomats/sources.

1. The accusation is that Iran intends to use spent fuel rods for these experiements. The Bushr reactor hasn’t even been comissionned yet.
2. The AP claims that Iran confirmed that it had carried out experiements, but does not cite a source or produce any evidence of that statement.
3. The IAEA has made no comment about the matter nor has it issued any report citing any violation of the safeguards agreement or the NPT itself.

Stick to whjat you know Nemesism, which is clearly very little.  Leave the talk about nukes to the adults OK?

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 21, 2010 at 5:14 pm Link to this comment

I.

By Shingo, June 20 at 9:19 pm

”Gun refers to the detonation system used in uranium based bombs, like the Little Boy. One chuck of uranium (below critical mass) is fired into a another chunk of uranium (also below critical mass), thereby producing one chunk (above critical mass).”

My bad Shingo. We were talking about delivery systems and when you said gun type rather than think of fission vs. fusion devices I thought of our earlier nuclear artillery. I don’t see what any of this has to do with Turkey being a turkey that’s never gonna be a superpower but what the hey. As related to the article and my comments there’s no way you can deny that the technology they seek is Western because it sure as hell is!

Are you going to stick by the following quote or would you prefer to modify it or retract it completely?

By Shingo, June 19 at 9:27 pm

” let’s assume they are trying to make a uranium based nuke, which is what the war party keeps insisting.  Such a nuke could not even be delivered by a missile,
because it would be a gun type design, which is far to large for any missile delivery
system.”

What you are saying is that a ballistic missile is incapable of delivering a fission bomb, yet a W33 artillery shell was 37” long, 8” in diameter and only weighed 243 lbs and designed to be fired from a large gun barrel. They were gun type, weren’t they?


Didn’t China have an implosion uranium device in the 1960s? And isn’t this the design that is believed to have made its way to Pakistan then Libya and possibly on to… uhhhhh… let’s see… hold on a second… let me check this out… yep… it says here Iran.

Isn’t Pakistan’s program based on HEU? What’s their delivery system? Aren’t all of their Haft 1 thru 5 and/or the M 11 nuclear capable?

Is it, or is it not, true that Iran’s CSS-8, Scud B and Scud C short range missiles can handle a payload of 500 + kg?

Is it, or is it not, true that their Sahab 3 & 4 are really extended range North Korean No Dongs with an estimated 800-930 mile range and capable of carrying a 500-1000 lbs and 1600 lbs warhead, respectively?

Is it, or is it not, true that officials believe that the Sahab 4 will eventually have new guidance components and an extended range of 1250 miles carrying a 2200 lbs payload?

I’m only a loser living in a double wide trailer with my sister and our son but it appears to me that based on the above data, if confirmed by you, a rather small—in comparison to first world fusion devices—fission device can be built and delivered by one of their missiles. Based on the above data with a Sahab 4 they could target any objective in the entire Middle East, couldn’t they?

Why is it that we are supposed to accept that your sources and positions are infallible while all of those contrary are false? Isn’t Iran in a pissing contest with I.A.E.A. as I type? Haven’t they just banned two I.A.E.A. members from entering?

Would you have me believe that those fat ayatollahs are above lying and deceiving? We know they’re lying through their damn teeth because they claimed in January to have conducted pyroprocessing experiments only to retract the claim two months later. They either lied about the experiments or they are lying about not having conducted the experiments.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 21, 2010 at 5:11 pm Link to this comment

II.

By Shingo, June 20 at 9:37 pm

”Western technology and expertise is a commodity, like any other.”

That’s right Shingo! And it is what all of those Islamic shitholes seek! It is Western technology, expertise and enlightenment (knowledge) that’s provides the means to harvest their natural resources, that provides advanced medical equipment and techniques and drugs to heal their people, that train their workforce, that provide higher education for many of their students, etc.

Enlightenment is not empty rhetoric; enlightenment is climbing out of the religious pit of ignorance. Enlightenment is mankind throwing off its first attempt to explain the world in which he lives and gaining knowledge through reason rather than believing fairy tales by faith.

By Shingo, June 20 at 9:37 pm

”The reality, then: the United States has been engaged in two wars for over seven and half years. In that time, the executive has never been curtailed by the Congress; every request for further funding has been rubber stamped.”

I have the exact same complaints that you do Shingo. It’s not my fault and that hasn’t a goddamned thing to do with Turkey becoming a superpower.

By Shingo, June 20 at 9:37 pm

”But you are immune to this thinking because you assume, without foundation, that there is lurking within the U.S. military some sleeping giant that merely needs to be awakened.”

Are you completely daft? This is what hatred does to a person. It eats away at all reason.

How much clearer can I be than:

”As a taxpayer I sure as hell would have preferred diplomacy to war. There were many other options rather than invade and occupy. You cannot “win”, in the traditional sense, these types of conflicts. I learned that the hard way as a teenager.”

Do you have any idea what the hell the U.S. military might have that we haven’t a clue about? I’m not privy to any top-secret weapons development and weaponry and I doubt that you are either because if you are the guys in black monitoring the Internet need to go pay you a call. An obdurate, America-hating, Islamic minion such as you is bête noire with respect to national security. I’ve no doubt in my mind that you’d sell this nation and its people out faster than a flea can find refuge in an ayatollah’s beard.

The facts are that we the people know very little about what is really taking place behind the scenes. And you’re just as ignorant as the rest of us when it comes to knowing the true motives behind what is going on politically in the world.

You denigrate this nation, and admittedly, there’s a lot of wrong that needs to be righted, while living in the comfort and advantages that it offers, presenting Islamic cesspools as if they were anything but and yet when asked are unable to present us with a single attribute that those theocratic, oppressive, and autocratic cesspools can offer mankind for a better future.

All the rest of your commentary is simply a continuation of your circular straw man arguments. Tell us what Middle Eastern—especially Islamic—nation offers us a better chance for a better future than that which we have in the West. What Asian nation or society offers us a better chance for a better future than that which we have here in the West? South American? African? What? Where?

Report this

By Shingo, June 21, 2010 at 3:56 pm Link to this comment

Marshall, June 21 at 7:27 pm
We are well aware of your propensity to lie and obfuscate.
“Shingo - well aware of your sympathies with Iran and your cherry picking
quotations out of context.  Ehud Barak’s reference to Iran as “no threat” refers to
the current non-nuclear Iran.”

Barak’s quote is as follows:
“I don’t think the Iranians, even if they got the bomb, (will) drop it in the neighborhood,” he told a forum sponsored by Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-02/27/c_13190202.htm

Marshall, June 21 at 7:27 pm
“ In the same 4/19 speech and others he contradicts you on the question of a nuclear Iran stepping up the regional arms race and supports Israeli military action to prevent a nuclear Iran.  Not highly effective debate technique to cite as support those who disagree with you.”

The speech I was referring to was not from the 4/19.

Marshall, June 21 at 7:27 pm
“You can’t cite legitimate sources that agree with you that the arms race in that
region can’t expand.”

Nor can you.  The only sources you can site are speculation as to what may or may not happen.  As Barak said in his 4/19 speech, “I prefer to refrain from speculation about the future,”

Marshall, June 21 at 7:27 pm
“You claim no such arms race exists, then name three countries that have already participated in it; again using supporting evidence that turns against you.”

You’re just blowing smoke Marshall and you know it.  The logic is clear.  If 2 states in the region have nukes, then why hasn’t a nuclear arms race already begun?

Marshall, June 21 at 7:27 pm
“ But of course, unlike the other now nuclear regimes, Iran is exempt because somehow its agenda doesn’t concern itself with such inconsequential issues as regional power.”

Another statement that has no basis in reality.  How can anyone with any contact with reality suggest that Iran is exempt, when it is the only state in the Middle East facing sanctions for pursuing a civilian nuclear program, which it entitled to as a signatory to the NPT?

Marshall, June 21 at 7:27 pm
“ Your faith in the regime is unshakable even in the face of the obvious.”

What’s obvious Marshall?  That Iran is making nukes?  Even the US government isn’t making that argument, having stepped back from that ridiculous assertion to now suggesting that the threat is that Iran may one day develop the capability to make nukes.
In other words, the only thing that is obvious is that Iran is NOT making nukes.

Marshall, June 21 at 7:27 pm
“ The brazil deal was a bad joke told by a small country desperate for diplomatic points and short on foresight and undermined what was already on the table.”

How did it undermined what was already on the table, when it reflected precisely what was on the table? The only joke is the suggestion that the West eve had any intention of negotiating with Iran.

In fact, last year, when Iran did accept the West’s offer, it caught the West by surprise, so much so that Iran’s acceptance was met with some truly Orwellian responses from Germany and France.  The French said the acceptance of th offer by Iran was “troubling” and the Germans said that Iran’s acceptance would mean the deal would have to be re negotiated.

Report this

By Marshall, June 21, 2010 at 3:27 pm Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 21 at 7:13 am #

Shingo - well aware of your sympathies with Iran and your cherry picking
quotations out of context.  Ehud Barak’s reference to Iran as “no threat” refers to
the current non-nuclear Iran.  In the same 4/19 speech and others he
contradicts you on the question of a nuclear Iran stepping up the regional arms
race and supports Israeli military action to prevent a nuclear Iran.  Not highly
effective debate technique to cite as support those who disagree with you.

You can’t cite legitimate sources that agree with you that the arms race in that
region can’t expand.  You claim no such arms race exists, then name three
countries that have already participated in it; again using supporting evidence
that turns against you.  But of course, unlike the other now nuclear regimes,
Iran is exempt because somehow its agenda doesn’t concern itself with such
inconsequential issues as regional power.  Your faith in the regime is
unshakable even in the face of the obvious.  The brazil deal was a bad joke told
by a small country desperate for diplomatic points and short on foresight and
undermined what was already on the table.

Report this

By Marshall, June 21, 2010 at 2:33 pm Link to this comment

By ofersince72, June 21 at 6:47 am #

“So Marshell, are saying that Iran is another boogyman??”

So ofers, are you saying that bookymans don’t exist?

Report this

By Shingo, June 21, 2010 at 3:13 am Link to this comment

Marshall, June 21 at 6:35 am
“Of course their technology, based on help from NK, is improving rapidly and they’ll
have longer range capability in time so their current limitations are irrelevant.”

On the contrary, it’s entirely relevant, because without a WMD payload, those missiles have limited effect,

Marshall, June 21 at 6:35 am
“A nuclear Iran will ignite an already simmering arms race in the region,
compelling other regional powers to seek the same.”

Absolute garbage.  As Nemeis has explained, we already have a nuclear armed Israel, Pakistan and India.  If there was ever going to be a nuclear weapons race, it would have started decades ago.

Marshall, June 21 at 6:35 am
“ Iran’s own internal divisions, growing military ego and open hatred of other countries makes it prime candidate for most likely to throw reason out the window light the regional powder keg.”

Blah blah blah, chicken little on steroids.

Hey Mashall, when was the last time Iran attacked or invaded another country? Can you name such a event within the last 270 years? 

Even Ehud Barak said that a nuclear armed Iran would be no threat to Israel.

Powder keg my ass.

Marshall, June 21 at 6:35 am

“So while you’re thinking short term and failing to register its ambitions, Iran is thinking longer term because it’s playing a chess game.”

Again, pure hysteria and paranoia purely driven by Islamophobia.

Iran is like any other state.  It has bigger things on it’s plate that sitting around scheming on how to take over the world, like for example, how to maintain a functioning society while facing crippling sanctions.

Marshall, June 21 at 6:35 am
“If you “don’t like the idea of Iran having a nuclear bomb” then you should support all non-
proliferation efforts.”

You really are beyond clueless Marshall.  Iran are signatories to the NPT and have not violated the NPT in any way.  Yet, we are punishing Iran for not foreoing up it’s rights under the NPT.

What better way to destroy the NPT you fool that sending a message to other states that those who do sign it might not be allowed their rights under the agreement if Israel or the US decide they want to isolate that state?

Yes there is a window of opportunity with Iran,  We can start by negotiating the deal they struck with Turkey and Brazil, rather than simply dismissing it.  We can start by dropping the nauseating hypocrisy and playing fair.

Marshall, June 21 at 6:35 am
“Would it have been worth going to war with WWII Germany to
prevent it from getting the bomb?  Well it was.”

Germany was attacking other countries and invading them.  Iran has attacked no one in 270 years.  You’re beginning to sound like Netenyahoo.

Marshall, June 21 at 6:35 am
“In short: your belief is based on the idea that the MAD policy that worked so well with the Soviets would also work with Iran, but most analysts disagree.”

Rubbish.  Most analysts you are referring to are ignorant pundits with an agenda to start another war.

Marshall, June 21 at 6:35 am
“And no we don’t have the ability to destroy missiles before they reach their
objectives - Obama gutted missile defense when he inexplicably gifted the
Russians and got nothing in return.”

Get real. Missile defence has never worked, even on tests rigged to succeed.

You’re nothing more that a hack scaremonger.

Report this

By ofersince72, June 21, 2010 at 2:47 am Link to this comment

So Marshell, are saying that Iran is another boogyman??

Report this

By Marshall, June 21, 2010 at 2:35 am Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 19 at 3:35 pm #

Iran going nuclear raises a whole host of problems.  You’ve pointed out one
obvious one which is their ability to attack Israel with current missile tech.  Of
course their technology, based on help from NK, is improving rapidly and they’ll
have longer range capability in time so their current limitations are irrelevant.

A nuclear Iran will ignite an already simmering arms race in the region,
compelling other regional powers to seek the same.  This means rampant
proliferation in a region historically rife with instability and religious
extremism.  NNPT becomes a fond memory.  Iran’s own internal divisions,
growing military ego and open hatred of other countries makes it prime
candidate for most likely to throw reason out the window light the regional
powder keg.

So while you’re thinking short term and failing to register its ambitions, Iran is
thinking longer term because it’s playing a chess game.  If you “don’t like the
idea of Iran having a nuclear bomb” then you should support all non-
proliferation efforts.  NK and Pakistan already have the bomb so that’s a
completely different situation, but Iran does not which means there’s a window
of opportunity.  Would it have been worth going to war with WWII Germany to
prevent it from getting the bomb?  Well it was.  If we relied on China and Russia
to stop it, we’d be taking a huge gamble on an assumption.  Bad idea.

In short: your belief is based on the idea that the MAD policy that worked so
well with the Soviets would also work with Iran, but most analysts disagree.

And no we don’t have the ability to destroy missiles before they reach their
objectives - Obama gutted missile defense when he inexplicably gifted the
Russians and got nothing in return.

And while I gather you’re an atheist, i’m really not sure what your reference to
Christians is for since there not the ones we’re worried about.

Report this

By ofersince72, June 20, 2010 at 6:36 pm Link to this comment

But Shingo , you don’t understand.

The rest of the world needs their own version do
Dale Jr., American Idol and a massive prison system
that discriminates. They need some Burger Kings,
a government that spends over half of It’s annual budget
on the military, a debt that matches no other, and no
vision for the future,

then they too will be enlightened.

Report this

By Shingo, June 20, 2010 at 6:16 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 8:00 pm
“That’s right our technology provides us with the ability to not only kill humans in much larger numbers with a lot less effort, but also to kill with better precision which is why the death toll in these latest conflicts are much less than what they would be were they using more conventional weaponry and methods.”

Death tolls for whom Nemesis2010? 
“Technology is a double edged sword that cuts both ways. The problem isn’t technology but how Homo Sapiens use that technology they develop.”

Yeah, guns don’t kill people either right?

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 8:00 pm
“Do you understand the concept of “threat”? I don’t think that you do. A threat has to be dealt with sooner or later.”

Really?  I seem to recall there being a threat lasting 40 years from the evil empire that was never dealt with.  Rather than deal with it, we negotiated our way out of it.
The only concept of threat is that it is more of often than not, a manufactured marketing gimmick to keep the sheep in a perpetual state of fear whereby they forgo their ability to think for themselves.

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 8:00 pm
“We’re big brained apes and it simply is a matter of choice; which society offers a better future for the whole of humanity? It is without question Western society. You cannot dispute that Shingo, the evidence is overwhelming. You haven’t answered what it is that Islamic shitholes offer the world. Is there something worthwhile that they offer mankind? “

I haven’t answered it because it’s a false choice.  Apart from the paranoid right wing xenophobes at the American Enterprise Institute, who believes that we are going to be forced to accept Islam as a way of life?

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 8:00 pm
“Part of the reason AmeriCorp finds itself in these stupid and unwinnable conflicts is because of its reluctance to used unbridled force against its enemies. War is not pretty but if you’re going to engage in it, it is utterly stupid not to use the full weight of your might.”

That’s just social Darwinism. 

We started those wars, not because we were defending ourselves, but because going to war is what empires do, but wars still have to have some strategic rationale.  Those agendas come down to geopolitics or natural resources, which is why so many our wars happens to be in oil rich regions. 

No strategic goals can therefore be serves by using nukes.  And given that there are not enough bullets to kill every man, woman and child and that aerial bombardment won’t do the job, we are faced with an unavoidable choice of having to deal with containing and controlling resident populations.

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 8:00 pm
“No nation should go to war unless it means business and is willing to risk all”

That’s never going to happen.  Apart from the very few legitimate wars we’ve had, nations go to war becasue they think they can win.

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 8:00 pm
“Middle Eastern societies stagnated in a religious and autocratic cesspool that surpass us in ignorance, poverty, oppression, brutality, and lack of human rights. You can have it!”

That might have been true in the 50’s, but we are fast approaching that level of degeneration.

Report this

By Shingo, June 20, 2010 at 5:49 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 7:55 pm
“You do realize that you have unequivocally stated that you refuse to see the overwhelming amount of good that has come from Western enlightenment, do you not? There’s nothing more to be said here.”

No I haven’t said that at all, what I have said is that I don’t attribute all the progress that has been made since the enlightenment to the enlightenment. 

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 7:55 pm
“Except for Pythagoras all of the people you mentioned were part of enlightenments roots. Knowledge was on the rise.”
Of course knowledge.  Knowledge is cumulative, and by it’s very nature, can only rise.

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 7:55 pm
“It appears to me that you also haven’t a clue that enlightenment and “the Enlightenment” or not exactly the same.”

I know enough about it to know that you are employing some very broad definitions of when the enlightenment began and who was involved in that period.

Davinci and Michaelangelo passed away more than 300 years before the enlightenment period.  How elastic do you want to be with the period of your enlightenment?

Report this

By Shingo, June 20, 2010 at 5:37 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 8:03 pm
“The facts are that the U.S. goes through great pains to prevent what today is called “collateral damage.” That’s one of the reasons an idiot like you can come here and say that the U.S. was defeated using WWII technology.”

What a load of horse shit. Recycling the arguments from the Vietnam era, are we?

Sorry, but as we saw with the Wikileaks collateral murder video, that’s just a myth. 

I love the way the war-mongers fight to keep reality out of your analysis, such as it is. The reality, then: the United States has been engaged in two wars for over seven and half years. In that time, the executive has never been curtailed by the Congress; every request for further funding has been rubber stamped.

To claim restraint, of course, is to miss the following, crucial point: its not altogether clear whether America CAN defeat a determined opponent. Iraq does not qualify, since in both instances overwhelming airpower and a decade of sanctions obviated the need for a drawn-out campaign (the occupation, of course, is another matter). Given its history and geography, Afghanistan seems to fit the mold of the ‘unwinnable’ war better. But you are immune to this thinking because you assume, without foundation, that there is lurking within the U.S. military some sleeping giant that merely needs to be awakened. Alas! Were it not for the treasonous liberal fifth column, victory over the Islamist scourge would have been achieved long ago.

So what are the great pains the US goes to? Because it hasn’t yet resorted to tactical nukes, mustard gas, Agent Orange? Short of nuking or carpet bombing the entire place, how has the US held back?

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 8:03 pm
“I have also stated, and still do, that the technology they seek is Western technology and expertise. You’ve yet to prove any of that wrong. The evidence is on my side.”

Western technology and expertise is a commodity, like any other.  If Turkey have the resources and the geographic, demographic and strategic resources that attract investment, it will make it’s way to that state as it has in China.  Your theory about enlightenment is just empty rhetoric.  Empires rose and fell long before the enlightenment and one of those powers happened to be Islamic.

Report this

By Shingo, June 20, 2010 at 5:19 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 8:06 pm

“And I believe they were delivered by prop planes, no special gun needed. Have you been watching that movie about Saddam’s attempt to build a really big gun? “

Gun refers to the detonation system used in uranium based bombs, like the Little Boy. One chuck of uranium (below critical mass) is fired into a another chunk of uranium (also below critical mass), thereby producing one chunk (above critical mass).

Gun type nukes are large and heavy, which is why modern nukes are plutonium based implosion detonated designs.

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 8:06 pm
“You, as well as others like the I.A.E.A., say there’s no evidence—actually I believe it says no “specific” or “hard” evidence—that they are seeking a nuclear bomb while other agencies, like American and German intelligence, etc. say they are and the U.N. has them under sanction because of their “controversial nuclear program.” Life sure isn’t fair, is it?”

No, as a former nuclear engineer who has prepared reports for the IAEA, I can tell you that the IAEA says they have no evidence.  In fact, until the US lobbied for Al Baradei to be replaced by their new poodle Amano, the IAEA was consistently reporting that they were 100% certain that Iran was not diverting any nuclear material towards weapons proliferation.

Secondly, not only did the US intelligence community report in 2007 that Iran was not producing nukes, but in February of this year, the threat intelligence estimate confirmed those findings.  German intelligence has produced ZERO evidence to support their allegations, and if they had, the US would have been marketing it to the public by now.

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 8:06 pm
“Do you even remember that I ridiculed the fear that others have of Iran’s supposed desire and attempt to obtain a nuclear device? Forgot to take you little pill, didn’t you?”

Yes I do remember, but what alarms me is that even those who think they are impartial on this matter have swallowed the BS they’ve been fed, and assume that Iran is making nukes.

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 8:06 pm
”Iran might be seeking to develop nuclear weapons capability, inspectors say”

A typical vague and ludicrous piece that says virtually nothing. Notice how it doesn’t say Iran “might” be developing nukes but they they “might”be developing nuclear weapons capability, which is a bit like saying that I might develop the capability of winning a gold medal in the 100m sprint at the London Olympics because I jog every day.

The allegation of “high-precision detonators and modified designs of missile cones to accommodate larger payloads” has already been debunked.

By nemesis2010, June 20 at 8:06 pm
“First I say that analyst claim their current technology can deliver a WMD perhaps as far as Israel then you counter saying that their conventional Sahab missiles can but the phony re-entry vehicle—a Sahab-3 ballistic “missile”—can not. And this after stating that a missile cannot carry a uranium based bomb anywhere. Okay.”

The allegations of a re-entry vehicle were based on designs allegedly contained in a stolen laptop, which was obtained by the political wing of the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (listed by the State Department as a terrorist organisation).

The Sahab-3 missiles can deliver conventional payloads to Israel, but as we’ve seen in Iraq, WMD is a vague term to say the least.

Report this

By Shingo, June 20, 2010 at 4:37 pm Link to this comment

By Peter Knopfler, June 20 at 5:31 pm

“...Yes Munich Olympics Iran killed Israeli athletes, did you forget, I did not…”

Oh dear, the 60’s certainly weren’t kind to you were they Peter?  Iran killing Israeli athletes? 

“The USA intelligence for the region is Israel, Israel is still the brains for washington.”

Yes, we have Ken Pollard as a perfect example of Israel being USA’‘s intelligence in the region.

“It`s all one since George Washington…”

Ummm, George died a long time before Hetzl even conceived of Israel.

“Even the Evangelists are Christ for Jews”

The far right wing Evangelists are not for Jews, they are for Israel and only becasue they think that Israel’s creation will lead to the rapture where they get to all but 7000 Jews burned to death.

You obviously did a lot fo LSD in your time Peter.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 20, 2010 at 4:06 pm Link to this comment

I.

By Shingo, June 19 at 9:27 pm

”WTF are you talking about? What nuke does not require a delivery system?”

Technically speaking Shingo any type of bomb needs a delivery system. Even an IED has to have someone place it at a strategic point. If your desire is to blow up families and lovers enjoying a pizza on a Friday night, you look for some poor mental retard, or a druggie, or a delusional believer in flying horses carrying an Iron Aged, knuckle-dragging, mouth breathing, pedophile to speak to a non-existent angel Gabriel, strap explosives to him and… PRESTO!... an unsophisticated bomb delivery system.

What I was obviously referring to is Iran’s archenemy Israel. Personally, I believe that any desire on Iran’s part for a nuclear device is more a defensive measure rather than offensive; at least presently.

By Shingo, June 19 at 9:27 pm

”What type of bomb is Iean supposed to be seeking? Leaving aside for a minute the fact that there is no evidence Iran is seeking any kind of nuke, let’s assume they are trying to make a uranium based nuke, which is what the war party keeps insisting.  Such a nuke could not even be delivered by a missile, because it would be a gun type design, which is far to large for any missile delivery system.”

Apart from a nuclear device (bomb) I wouldn’t know Shingo as I’m not privy to Iran’s nuclear program.

Let’s see if I understand you correctly. A uranium based nuclear bomb is too big for a missile? So many of our “uranium based” nuclear bombs aren’t on missiles and rockets? Even the atomic bombs of WWII were uranium based, weren’t they? And I believe they were delivered by prop planes, no special gun needed. Have you been watching that movie about Saddam’s attempt to build a really big gun?

You, as well as others like the I.A.E.A., say there’s no evidence—actually I believe it says no “specific” or “hard” evidence—that they are seeking a nuclear bomb while other agencies, like American and German intelligence, etc. say they are and the U.N. has them under sanction because of their “controversial nuclear program.” Life sure isn’t fair, is it?

Israel neither confirms nor denies nuclear capability. What’s your opinion? What should I believe?

Do you even remember that I ridiculed the fear that others have of Iran’s supposed desire and attempt to obtain a nuclear device? Forgot to take you little pill, didn’t you?

”Iran might be seeking to develop nuclear weapons capability, inspectors say”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2010/02/18/AR2010021803378.html

By Shingo, June 19 at 9:27 pm

” Actually that might be an analysis of their conventional Sahab missiles, but the best analysis has concluded that the the phony designs for a rentey vehicle would not be
able to carry a nuke of any kind.”

Uhhhh… okay. First I say that analyst claim their current technology can deliver a WMD perhaps as far as Israel then you counter saying that their conventional Sahab missiles can but the phony reentry vehicle—a Sahab-3 ballistic “missile”—can not. And this after stating that a missile cannot carry a uranium based bomb anywhere. Okay.

What exactly is it that you’re trying to say here? Do you even know?

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 20, 2010 at 4:03 pm Link to this comment

II.

Shingo, June 20 at 1:32 am

” You’re against the wars when it suits you, but your ex marine background rears it’s ugly head from time to time when you take satisfaction in the dead and destruction our enlightened society has wrought in those very wars.  You have defended the war by suggesting it has brought benefits to Iraq (oil exploration) that interestingly enough, we were denying them for over a decade through our sanctions.
You even adopted the lame right wing position that we could have killed many more than we actually have in Iraq, as though that were some justification for murdering hundreds of thousands in that country.
You’re so insistent on propping up your faux intellectualism that you have lost the complete thread of your argument and your basically arguing in circles.”

You’re the type of “liberal” that gives progressives a bad name. Besides being a Douchebagger, you’re dumber than a high school drop out Teabagger. I haven’t taken satisfaction in the death and destruction brought on by any war. You need to construct that straw man so that you can have something to knock down because… well… because you’re an idiot that has attempted to prove that Western technology wasn’t Western by using Western technology to prove that Western technology wasn’t Western technology.

I didn’t defend the war because it brought benefits to Iraq. I challenge you to find such a quote. What I have “repeatedly” stated is that contact with Western technology, technicians, enlightenment, etc. has benefitted the Muslim world. It has! The benefits from war are simply the silver lining of a dark cloud. As a taxpayer I sure as hell would have preferred diplomacy to war. There were many other options rather than invade and occupy. You cannot “win”, in the traditional sense, these types of conflicts. I learned that the hard way as a teenager.

Unfortunately, draft dodgers from that same era never learned the lesson that most other Americans had. That’s not my fault. Had your democratic party run someone other than a stuffed-suit, then four years later, a horse-faced jackass this all might not even be an issue. 

Stating that the death toll could be much worse is not support for the war any more than stating that fear of Iran as a nuclear threat was puerile supports Iran obtaining a WMD. The facts are that the U.S. goes through great pains to prevent what today is called “collateral damage.” That’s one of the reasons an idiot like you can come here and say that the U.S. was defeated using WWII technology. You need to invent these straw man arguments because you’re trying to defend the indefensible.

I haven’t lost anything on my argument. I have stated and still state that neither Turkey, nor any other Islamic shithole, stands a snowballs chance in hell to become a superpower while it remains Islamic. I have also stated, and still do, that the technology they seek is Western technology and expertise. You’ve yet to prove any of that wrong. The evidence is on my side.

Are you the idiot that wrote this rubbish of an article?

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 20, 2010 at 4:00 pm Link to this comment

III.

Shingo, June 20 at 1:32 am

” Along with our ability to save lives has come our ability to destroy life on an infinitely larger scale.  This brings us to a question you failed to answer.  If 9/11 was the Islamists best shot, then how can you similarly insist that Islam represents the greatest threat to humanity?  Meanwhile, our political elite speak unreservedly about using nukes against non nuclear powers.”

That’s right our technology provides us with the ability to not only kill humans in much larger numbers with a lot less effort, but also to kill with better precision which is why the death toll in these latest conflicts are much less than what they would be were they using more conventional weaponry and methods.

Technology is a double edged sword that cuts both ways. The problem isn’t technology but how Homo Sapiens use that technology they develop. Would you prefer to live in a world with small pox and polio and without the many antibiotics and medicines that we have to deal with disease? Would you prefer to complain that there weren’t any medicines to fight AIDS or about the lack of competition in manufacturing and marketing of drugs that fight and perhaps cure it?

Do you understand the concept of “threat”? I don’t think that you do. A threat has to be dealt with sooner or later. We’re big brained apes and it simply is a matter of choice; which society offers a better future for the whole of humanity? It is without question Western society. You cannot dispute that Shingo, the evidence is overwhelming. You haven’t answered what it is that Islamic shitholes offer the world. Is there something worthwhile that they offer mankind?

The only use of atomic weapons in human history was against a non-nuclear power. What’s new? Why does it matter? If you are threatened you respond with what you have. Part of the reason AmeriCorp finds itself in these stupid and unwinnable conflicts is because of its reluctance to used unbridled force against its enemies. War is not pretty but if you’re going to engage in it, it is utterly stupid not to use the full weight of your might. These half-hearted attempts at playing war cost more in life and resources in the long run. This is due in no small part Shitgo to enlightenment and respect for life.

Had we a mind to risk possible escalation in Viet Nam we could have razed the North. It was the not knowing of how the U.S.S.R. and Red China might have responded that held us back and which made the conflict even more senseless. No nation should go to war unless it means business and is willing to risk all.

Shingo, June 20 at 1:32 am

”White supremacists like yourself like to argue that the relative progress we’ve made compared to the Islamic states proves our superiority.  The reality is that their resilience and longevity surpasses ours by an order of magnitude.  Our enlightenment is only a few hundred years old, while most Middle Eastern societies are thousands of years old.”

Now I’m a white supremacist? Bwaaaaaaaaa!; more evidence that you’re a deluded fool who cannot argue any issue without a straw man to knock down; are you a creationist?

Middle Eastern societies stagnated in a religious and autocratic cesspool that surpass us in ignorance, poverty, oppression, brutality, and lack of human rights. You can have it! In the West we have obese poor! They should have such problems!

The age of a society is not important Shitgo. It is what one accomplishes while it exists.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 20, 2010 at 3:55 pm Link to this comment

IV.

Shingo, June 20 at 1:32 am

”That’s because I don’t attribute every advancement mankind to the enlightenment.  Given the incredible achievements of mankind preceding or in spite of the enlightenment, it seems the contribution of the enlightenment has been vastly exaggerated.  In fact, given the works and achievements of Davinci, Michael Angelo, Pythagoras, Newton and many others, it would be reasonable to assume that those advances in science were inevitable.

You do realize that you have unequivocally stated that you refuse to see the overwhelming amount of good that has come from Western enlightenment, do you not? There’s nothing more to be said here.

Except for Pythagoras all of the people you mentioned were part of enlightenments roots. Knowledge was on the rise. One can only imagine how much further along we’d be if centuries of battles against Christian ignorance and brutality weren’t required.

Pythagoras was from one of antiquity’s two greatest empires, Greece and Rome, where technology and knowledge flourished. Notably both were pagan! In order words, they weren’t monotheistic shitholes.  (<- you want to think tolerance or the lack thereof here)

It appears to me that you also haven’t a clue that enlightenment and “the Enlightenment” or not exactly the same.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 20, 2010 at 3:50 pm Link to this comment

V.

Shingo, June 20 at 1:32 am

”Civilization and enlightenment are all a veneer in any case. Underneath it all, the nature of man has not been changed by any enlightenment. We are still fundamentally driven by fear and tribalism. The fact that 80% of the public supported a war based on lies and were fooled into believing that Saddam was behind 9/11, shows that Western societies are every bit as primitive and superstitious as any Islamic society.”

Civilization and enlightenment are facts Shingo, not veneers. And you, as well as all of us, benefit from both.

Yes, Homo sapiens still do fear the other. That’s why I’m always of the opinion that any so-called fix for all that ails us is worthless unless it addresses the fact that we are still basically big brained apes. We progress by understanding who and what we are and it is scientific research—not religion—and the knowledge gained from that research that will enable us to progress even further.

The fact that so large a percentage of the population was fooled by lies can also be attributed to improved methodology in propaganda and a much greater knowledge of how the human brain works.

Have you even considered that much of the willingness to believe all those lies can be attributed to the eschatological beliefs of the big 3 monotheistic religions? If you want more than anything else in life for your Jewish zombie savior to snatch you out of this life and destroy all your enemies you’re one of the biggest suckas in the world and easily taken advantage of by neo-conservative criminals. The same goes for those looking for the 12th Imam and a long awaited Messiah.

Religion is the bane of society!

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 20, 2010 at 3:49 pm Link to this comment

VI.

Shingo, June 20 at 1:32 am

”That argument clearly doesn’t hold water.  The Roman, Greek and Ottoman Empire (Islamic), superpowers at the time if you will, all predated the Western enlightenment.”

Sure it does. The Roman and Grecian empires were not monotheistic, they were pagan. When we look back to the roots of democratic rule, human rights, enlightened forms of governments, mathematics, philosophy, engineering, etc. which of the 3 aforementioned do we look back to? The Roman and Greek empires! Did the Ottoman Empire give humanity anything worthwhile other than, perhaps, mosque art work?

While the Ottoman Empire technically fits into the term “superpower” the definition in the 21st century means a nuclear power. Things are very different today Shingo, all warfare isn’t conducted with swords, spears, and shields and the disparity in military ability is for more than technique. Turkey isn’t going to be a world power in the near future, if ever.

Shingo, June 20 at 1:32 am

”You’re insistence that super power status is incumbent upon an enlightenment also debunked by the rise of China.  China’s ascendance hasn’t been the consequence of it’s natural recourses, it’s population.  What this writer is arguing is that through a merging of demographic, geographic, political and strategic reasons, Turkey could potentially become a super power.”

In order to be a superpower Shitgo you have to be a world economic and nuclear power. Turkey is neither nor will it ever be in the near future. The very thought is not only laughable but ludicrous.

China’s ascendance is due to enlightened economic thought and taking advantage of the economic opportunities offered it by the West because of its slave labor wage market and the West’s desire for a global market. If China had not acted upon Nixon’s offer to join the rest of the human race it would still be a Maoist shithole. It still is in many ways.

Turkey being a client state of a Chinese superpower does not make Turkey a superpower. It makes Turkey a little bitch to use when the big dog feels like it needs a hump.

Is the basis of all this anti-West vitriol due to the price of AIDS drugs?

Report this
Peter Knopfler's avatar

By Peter Knopfler, June 20, 2010 at 1:31 pm Link to this comment

Progressive resistance builds strength, Attacked at Birth, and every 6-7 years until today. Success through failure. Makes one very strong, Yes Munich Olympics Iran killed Israeli athletes, did you forget, I did not, 60 years of threats, keeps one on their toes.The Jewish accumulated pool of knowledge, since 5770, coughes up , printing presses, cell phone, The USA intelligence for the region is Israel, Israel is still the brains for washington.  You can`t separate the two. It`s all one since George Washington, like the Star of David on the one dollar bill. America`s left hemisphere is a jewish mind, Even the Evangelists are Christ for Jews, supporting Israel, they hate the Muslim, they will never leave the Rabbi on Cross!

Report this

By Shingo, June 19, 2010 at 9:32 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 19 at 3:40 pm

“I made the statement that Turkey, as long as it remained Islamic, would never become a super-power. I have since broadened that statement to include any—especially Arab—Islamic shithole. “

That argument clearly doesn’t hold water.  The Roman, Greek and Ottoman Empire (Islamic), superpowers at the time if you will, all predated the Western enlightenment.

Civilization and enlightenment are all a veneer in any case. Underneath it all, the nature of man has not been changed by any enlightenment. We are still fundamentally driven by fear and tribalism. The fact that 80% of the public supported a war based on lies and were fooled into believing that Saddam was behind 9/11, shows that Western societies are every bit as primitive and superstitious as any Islamic society.
You’re insistence that super power status is incumbent upon an enlightenment also debunked by the rise of China.  China’s ascendance hasn’t been the consequence of it’s natural recourses, it’s population.  What this writer is arguing is that through a merging of demographic, geographic, political and strategic reasons, Turkey could potentially become a super power.
 
By nemesis2010, June 19 at 3:40 pm

“You refuse to see the overwhelming amount of good that has come from Western enlightenment”

That’s because I don’t attribute every advancement mankind to the enlightenment.  Given the incredible achievements of mankind preceding or in spite of the enlightenment, it seems the contribution of the enlightenment has been vastly exaggerated.  In fact, given the works and achievements of Davinci, Michael Angelo, Pythagoras, Newton and many others, it would be reasonable to assume that those advances in science were inevitable.

By nemesis2010, June 19 at 3:40 pm

“We in the West aren’t the only one’s to experience relief from those diseases, the whole of humanity has benefited.”
Along with our ability to save lives has come our ability to destroy life on an infinitely larger scale.  This brings us to a question you failed to answer.  If 9/11 was the Islamists best shot, then how can you similarly insist that Islam represents the greatest threat to humanity?  Meanwhile, our political elite speak unreservedly about using nukes against non nuclear powers.

By nemesis2010, June 19 at 3:40 pm
“Which society offers humankind the hope for a better future?”

White supremacists like yourself like to argue that the relative progress we’ve made compared to the Islamic states proves our superiority.  The reality is that their resilience and longevity surpasses ours by an order of magnitude.  Our enlightenment is only a few hundred years old, while most Middle Eastern societies are thousands of years old.

By nemesis2010, June 19 at 3:40 pm
‘I’ve stated many times, and unequivocally, that I was, and always have been, against the Bush Wars and none of that sinks in to that empty skull of yours.”

You’re against the wars when it suits you, but your ex marine background rears it’s ugly head from time to time when you take satisfaction in the dead and destruction our enlightened society has wrought in those very wars.  You have defended the war by suggesting it has brought benefits to Iraq (oil exploration) that interestingly enough, we were denying them for over a decade through our sanctions.

You even adopted the lame right wing position that we could have killed many more than we actually have in Iraq, as though that were some justification for murdering hundreds of thousands in that country.

You’re so insistent on propping up your faux intellectualism that you have lost the complete thread of your argument and your basically arguing in circles.

Report this

By Shingo, June 19, 2010 at 5:27 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 19 at 3:35 pm

“Marshall having a bomb is one thing, but a nuclear bomb of the type that Iran is
seeking needs a delivery system.”

WTF are you talking about? What nuke does not require a delivery system?

What type of bomb is Iean supposed to be seeking? Even the hawks in Washington
have only gone so far as to suggest Iran has yet to make a descision as to whether
they want to produce a nuke.  

Leaving aside for a minute the fact that there is no evidence Iran is seeking any kind of
nuke, let’s assume they are trying to make a uranium based nuke, which is what the
war party keeps insisting.  Such a nuke could not even be delivered by a missile,
because it would be a gun type design, which is far to large for any missile delivery
system.

“The best analysis of Iran’s missile technology—technology of Western origin—says
that it might make it to Israel. “

Actually that might be an analysis of their conventional Sahab missiles, but the best
analysis has concluded that the the phony designs for a rentey vehicle would not be
able to carry a nuke of any kind.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 19, 2010 at 11:40 am Link to this comment

I.

By Shingo, June 17 at 7:44 pm

” What you’ve failed to argue, while tryign to desperately to be clever and Witty, is that Western inventions are not the key to success.  Lioek I said earlier, Japan’s rise to economic power was based entirely on copying Western inventions, adn eventually paved the way for innovation.”

I’m not even going to attempt to address all that misinformation and convoluted bile that you posted 17/06/10. My goodness just the first section alone required over 15,000 characters. It requires a lot more time and energy to debunk all that bullshit than it does for you to propagandize it. Jeebus on a grilled cheese sandwich, “Mohammad’s Revisionist World History for Dumbasses” is not a reliable source.

That is not what we are arguing. I made the statement that Turkey, as long as it remained Islamic, would never become a super-power. I have since broadened that statement to include any—especially Arab—Islamic shithole. 

You responded by insulting American inventors and scientists claiming that American scientists and inventors hadn’t invented anything but had only advanced the ideas of others -and by others you meant NON-WESTERN ideas and innovations. You then set about demonstrating that you didn’t understand the definition of Western civilization because all of your examples to counter were from Western societies. It was one of the first of many “Dubya in the headlights” moments for you.

I’ve heard of America hating Americans but you’re the epitome of an America hating American. If indeed you really are an American. You refuse to see the overwhelming amount of good that has come from Western enlightenment. Just the advances in medical science alone have been a boon to all of mankind. Advances that have eradicated terrible diseases like small pox and polio didn’t come from the Quran or the Bible or the Torah or any of your precious Islamic shitholes. It came from enlightenment and science and economy and human cooperation. We in the West aren’t the only one’s to experience relief from those diseases, the whole of humanity has benefited.

What Ayatollah or Rabbi or Catholic priest or Televangelist pulpit pimp has provided you with a single liberty or right or cure for a disease? Not one!

Which society offers humankind the hope for a better future? You and every one else know damn well which one, Western society. Which society has a better chance to effect positive change in its government through peaceful democratic processes; the West or any one of those Islamic shitholes? You know damn well which one.

You’re a sick MFer Shingo and you deserve to live in an Islamic shithole but something tells me that you can’t because sexual preference in Islamic shitholes can be a real bitch and fatal.

I’ve stated many times, and unequivocally, that I was, and always have been, against the Bush Wars and none of that sinks in to that empty skull of yours. Your straw man defenses simply continue to prove the indefensibility of your asinine position and your biased and deluded world view. Nothing more!

You continue to bring up Hitchens when I’ve made absolutely no reference to him at all. I’ve only referenced an article here on Truthdig titled “Hitch 22” as a source for links that I posted in the comments section. Please, don’t stop taking your meds because if you’re as delusional as this with meds, I pity anyone who would have to be near you without them.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 19, 2010 at 11:38 am Link to this comment

II.

Here are the facts:

The advances in Islamic nations in their standard of living, harvesting of natural resources, and what little progress has been made with regards to human rights, is due mostly to Western technology, technical expertise, and enlightenment.

Japan’s economy, like that of South Korea and Germany, has been helped tremendously by America providing and paying for a large portion of their defense. (There’s a reason the U.S. is referred to as the world’s policemen.) They have been helped—just as the Islamic world—by Western technology, technical expertise, and enlightenment. Because of that those nations have a far better chance of becoming a super-power than Turkey ever will. Your claims about what enabled Japan’s economic rise counters your original stance. You’ve yet again provided evidence for my claims about Western technology, technicians, expertise, and enlightenment guaranteeing success.

Where would China be today had the economic opportunities provided it by the West not been taken advantage of? What China once was isn’t what it is today!

You denigrated American accomplishments for the same reasons that you are now praising China and Japan! Any attempt by you to counter my claims about Western technology, innovation and enlightenment has been met with vitriolic stupidity presenting Western scientists, ideas, accomplishments, technology, etc. as proof that it wasn’t Western. You’re nuts!

And to make it perfectly clear, the Germans weren’t the only one’s working on nuclear power in 1939. We were also! And it was Oppenheimer—an American—who was the key figure behind development of the first functional atomic bomb! Functional is the key word dumbass, it the goddamned thing doesn’t work what the f—k good is it? The Nazi scientists helped us with our space program after hostilities ended. Take your copy of “Mohammad’s Revisionist World History for Dumbasses” and throw it in the trash.

To state those facts does not mean that one is claiming that the West and AmeriCorp are perfect and without very bloody hands. AmeriCorp and other western nations do perpetrate evil and many of their actions are very questionable. If it wasn’t the U.S. and the West it would be someone else.

The key issue here is what do your precious Islamic shitholes offer as an alternative; death for watching soccer, acid disfiguration, caning and stoning of defenseless men and women, clitoral circumcision and vaginal infibulation, Sharia Law, illiteracy, extreme poverty, autocracy, and oppression of innovation and enlightenment; a new Dark Age exponentially worse than that of Europe’s.

The moment civilization can no longer provide the power needed and demanded by us—the citizens of the world—the entire world economy is going to collapse and deprivation on a scale none of you idiots can even imagine is going to begin. When that happens all of you “liberated and progressive religious anuses” are going to be the first ones demanding that the government do something about it. And you hypocritical SOBees won’t give a rat’s ass about how many little brown people have to die to get your air conditioning working again.

Your convoluted history and level of ignorance vies with that of the Teabaggers and causes me to wonder if the left started a Douchebagger Party and you’re its poster geriatric.

America is going to be here long after the worms have finished with you and I delight in that thought!

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 19, 2010 at 11:35 am Link to this comment

By Marshall, June 18 at 5:37 am

”Sounds like we don’t need to worry about Iran getting the bomb because we
have it too.  This is an argument for letting them get the bomb.  If i’m
misinterpreting your meaning then feel free to clarify.”

Marshall having a bomb is one thing, but a nuclear bomb of the type that Iran is seeking needs a delivery system. You need a missile to launch a bomb at an enemy. The best analysis of Iran’s missile technology—technology of Western origin—says that it might make it to Israel. I don’t like the idea of them having a nuclear bomb any more than I like the idea of Israel and North Korea having a nuclear bomb but what can I do prevent it? Nothing and neither can you!

Do you really think it worth going to war with Iran in order to prevent them from obtaining a bomb? Do you really believe that China and Russia, both of whom are much closer to Iran than the U.S., are going to provide them with technology that could be used against their nations? They’ll get what Russia and China can already defend.

Let’s consider reality. The U.S. has many thousands of multiple warheads mounted on rockets in ground launch facilities, aircraft, and naval vessels. That means with a single launch we can target multiple objectives. In addition to that we have spy satellites monitoring everything taking place on the face of the earth and many more thousands of reserve multiple warheads in bunkers all over the U.S. We also have these devices mounted on nuclear powered submarines that I have little doubt are prowling very close to Iran—probably the Persian Gulf—and who can deliver a nuclear strike within minutes of a launch by Iran or any other hostile nation. And we probably have the technology to destroy the missile before it hits its objective. After they’ve spent their single bomb what are they left with besides their prick in one hand and the Quran in the other?

I know that when it comes to stupid you have to be pretty goddamned stupid to out stupid adherents of Islam but if there is one thing the leaders of all religions know and live by, it is that their imaginary gods are just that, imaginary, and they don’t want their obese criminal asses blown to their respective kingdom comes. That’s why you don’t see an Ayatollah suicide bomber, or a Televangelist Pulpit Pimp grunt on the front line, or the Pope without his bullet-proof vehicle. They know its all bullshit! They all want to go to heaven but they don’t want to die.

If a nuclear bomb in the hands of Islamists worries you why aren’t you concerned about Pakistan? They’re every bit as nuts as the Muslims in other countries or possibly more so.

Do you, are anyone else, have any doubt of the outcome of a nuclear exchange between any of these nations and the U.S.?

I’m concerned about those crazy Jews and their reported nuclear power capabilities. Jews are just as crazy as Muslims. How do feel about them having nuclear capabilities?

Did you sleep well knowing that a village idiot who thought that god was talking to him had his finger on the button for eight years?

Do you think that if it weren’t for our enlightened laws and morals that Christian evangelicals would pose any less a threat than any of the kooks in the Islamic and Judaic worlds?

Report this

By Shingo, June 18, 2010 at 2:44 am Link to this comment

Marshall, June 18 at 5:37 am

“This is an argument for letting them get the bomb.  If i’m
misinterpreting your meaning then feel free to clarify.”

Not only is it absurd to suggest that this is an argument for Iran getting the bomb, but even Ehud Barak and 80% of Israel’s population don’t consider an Iranian nuke to be a threat.

Report this

By Marshall, June 18, 2010 at 1:37 am Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 15 at 3:54 pm #

“Where did I argue for Iran to get a bomb? “

You said: “...how terrified so many become thinking of an Islamic nation with
one or two nuclear weapons while forgetting that the U.S. has enough nuclear
weapons to render the planet uninhabitable for much of life. Talk about crying
wolf!”

Sounds like we don’t need to worry about Iran getting the bomb because we
have it too.  This is an argument for letting them get the bomb.  If i’m
misinterpreting your meaning then feel free to clarify.

Report this

By ofersince72, June 17, 2010 at 5:54 pm Link to this comment

The Middle East had to teach Europeans that the
world was round and how to count past their fingers
and toes.
Their culture dosn’t value the same gidget and widgetry
that we do…..like running through the woods on a
  four wheeler. shit like that.

Report this

By Shingo, June 17, 2010 at 5:45 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:01 pm #

“I thought that I had made it perfectly clear that the Germans were the first to discover nuclear fission. German technology is WESTERN technology. You keep proving my position for me.”


You really should try pulling your head out of your ass and breathe a little fresh air.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:01 pm #

“Actually what happened was that some European scientists fled Europe and came to America and they, along with many other scientists (many of whom were Americans), developed a working atomic bomb.”

Actually what happened was that many Nazi scientists were given safe passage to the US (and immunity from prosecution) in return for sharing their knowledge about rocket design and nuclear fission.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:01 pm #
“Having the science doesn’t necessarily guarantee that you can do anything with it. If developing a working nuclear bomb was that easy the Nazis would have beat everyone to it.”

They no doubt would have with more time.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:01 pm #
“What’s really interesting here is that you’ve come full circle and are unwittingly proving my point that all the technology that those Islamic shitholes seek and need are Western inventions.”

What you’ve failed to argue, while tryign to desperately to be clever and Witty, is that Western inventions are not the key to success.  Lioek I said earlier, Japan’s rise to economic power was based entirely on copying Western inventions, adn eventually paved the way for innovation.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:01 pm #

“That’s just it. AmeriCorp isn’t like any other super-power. AmeriCorp doesn’t colonize, not in the sense that previous empires colonized.”

AmeriCorp’s brand of colonization is much dumber and less viable because unlike European colonization, it’s based on more money and resources leaving our shores than we get in return.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:01 pm #
“As long as we remain a Type 0 civilization there will be super-powers because there will always be an Alpha male in charge.”

And as long as we remain a Type 0 civilization, those super powers will always create the conditions for their own ruin and be surpassed.

Report this

By Shingo, June 17, 2010 at 5:37 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:04 pm

“Now compare that to the data I posted on the “Hitch 22” article about literacy in the Muslim world—especially the Arab Muslim world—and you will see why I say that neither Turkey nor any other Islamic country will become a super-power as long as it is Islamic.”

Hitchens is again being highly selective in his factoids.

Iraq for example, had among the highest levels of literacy in the Arab world, and not surprisingly, achieved this in spite of being alienated by the US.  As is so often the case, US influence in the Middle East has propped up dicattoprs who are willing to serve the interts of the West at the expense of their own populations. Education is understandably among the areas most affected by this.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:04 pm
“It will require generations of intense education and enlightenment just to catch up to the rest of the world.”

Hardly.  Illiteracy in Venezeula was almost erradicated within a number of years.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:04 pm

“Bullshit! The Brits went bankrupt fighting a very avoidable war with Germany for imperial supremacy of Europe.”

A few definitions of bankruptcy.

1. A debtor that, upon voluntary petition or one invoked by the debtor’s creditors, is judged legally insolvent.
2. A person adjudged insolvent by a court, his property being transferred to a trustee and administered for the benefit of his creditors

Now when you’ve finished soiling yourself in public, you might care to explain how the US would not quilify as bankrupt under these definitions.

In early 2008, Joseph Stiglitz calcultated that the Iraq war had already cost us 3 trillion we don’t have.  The US debt and unserviced liabilities is not only greater than the GDP, but higher than the amount of money in circulation.  The only reason we haven’t been declared bankrupt is because we would take down the rest of the world with us.

By WWI standards of accounting, we woudl have been bankrupted by the Vietnam war.  Unlike the British version of Empire howvere, which actually stole from the world and brought wealth back to Britain, the US model is based on finacing our 700 or more miltary bases and permanent state of war, and holding the world to ransom against calling in their debt.

Yes, “AmeriCorp” is very different from former Empires insofar as it’s even less sustainable.

Report this

By Shingo, June 17, 2010 at 3:44 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:08 pm

“First, you can’t prove that there’s been a million dead in Iraq. Second, acceptable warfare, especially warfare as practiced by the U.S., has changed tremendously. Even if you could prove 1 million Iraqi dead that number would be much higher if the same tactics and technology of WWII were being used today. While it isn’t good, it could be much worse.”

Again, you’re being argumentative for the sake of it and simultaneously denying a death toll while justifying it on the basis that it could have been worse.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:08 pm

“Anyone—as some fools here on Truthdig suggested—who thinks close combat is what we should be doing hasn’t ever been in close combat and experienced that madness”
No one would dispute it is madness, but it’s madness that we went looking for. It’s what empires do remember?

Enlightenment be damned.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:08 pm

“Lost the war? In order to have lost it, we would have to have failed to meet our objectives. Have you any idea what AmeriCorp’s objectives were? I haven’t.”

Thank you for making the case for me.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:08 pm

“You say we haven’t learned the lessons of empire. I ask, haven’t you learned the dangers of a power vacuum from what we’ve seen take place in Iraq?”

That’s a bit like bashing a hornet’s nest with a tennis racket and arguing that the chaos that ensures was inevitable.  Hitchens is fond of that argument, but it doesn’t hold water, because what we witnessed predominantly the consequence of occupation,  our policy of divide and conquer and our dismantling of the entire society.

You’re hardly in a position to be demanding that critics of the war stop criticizing the FUBAR unless they have a water tight solution to the problem that the war created.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:08 pm

“’Also your Chinese super-power has quite a way to go yet. You do realize that most anything they’ve got that is worth anything is either provided by Western sources or copied?”

China was building dry docks when the so called West was still climbing trees.  Their history of innovation and resourcefulness, while going back a long way, has already been proven.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:08 pm

“A recent example is their new fighter jet which came on the scene after purchasing 100 Russian made Migs—which they have not paid for—and which, remarkably, look just like a Russian made Mig!”

So what?  When Israel does it, we refer to that as sharing technology. Stealing trade secrets and copying is what took Japan from an impoverished country to status as the word’s second largest economy.

Report this

By Shingo, June 17, 2010 at 3:09 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:11 pm #

“ On the “Hitch 22” comments I described my first trip to Saudi Arabia; you’re not going to blow smoke up my ass because I’ve been to the Islamic world.”

Good for you.  So you’ve been to the most racist, sexist and backward country ion the Middle East used that experience as the basis of your view of Islam.
I’ve been to towns in Middle America that were Justas bad.  So it’s your word against mine.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:11 pm #

“ That’s one of the major problems with our nation today, there is very little, if any, representation of the people because those so-called representatives of the people are completely out of touch and sold out to Big Corp, Big Oil, and Big Pharma.”

Don’t forget Lockheed Martin and Boeing.

Report this

By Shingo, June 17, 2010 at 3:04 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:15 pm

“Only an idiot cannot see and admit that, presently, the adherents of Islam are the ones that pose the greatest threat to civilization.”

Nemesis, you’re clearly more invested in trying to sound clever and condescending than in making a cogent argument, and clearly oblivious to the glaring and inevitable contradictions that ensue.  It’s revealing that you should refer to the Hitch 22 article, seeing as his level of bile and vitriol is usually inversely proportional to the strength of his arguments, much like yourself.

Frankly, you could have saved us all a gerat deal of time by simply declaring that you hate Islam and have equal disdain for the concept fo teh world beuing ruld by brown people. 

A few posts back, you were mocking the “Muslim world” for the lame 9/11 effort where it gave it’s “best shot and managed to destroy a few buildings and murder less than 3,000 innocent human beings”, yet you’re simultaneously trying to aver that adherents of Islam pose the greatest threat to civilization.

It doesn’t really add up does it?

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:15 pm

“The AK47 is not a WWII weapon. “

Again you’re being pedantic and not bothering to read what I referred to WWII era weapons, and eve someone as pedantic and argumentative as yourself would have to accept that semi automatic weapons were indeed in existence as the time.  While the RPG may not have been around at the time, it is hardly a high tech weapon, and needless to say mortars and IED’s are anything but state of the art.

Iraq was under sanction and its oil harvesting was severely crippled because of that.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:15 pm

“ Many of our allies were making back door deals and that was probably one of the motivating factors to get in there and take control. I reiterate, that’s what empires do.”

Another example of your cleverness conflicting with your efforts to make an argument.

FYI. Your argument was that the invasion “opened up” Iraq’s oil resources to exploration, when it could just as easily have been done by lifting what were fraudulent sanctions and allowing that exploration to take place in broad daylight.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:15 pm

“The Taliban’s cruelest actions are against their fellow Muslim believers and especially women.”

Frankly, what business is it of yours what goes on in Afghanistan?

What never ceases to amaze me is how cynically war proponents cite their new found appreciation of women’s and human rights in general when trying to justify massacring entire populations, as though bombs and drone attacks are supposed to be a cure for those ills.  I won’t rehash the origins of the Taliban, needless to say, the movement grew in response to human rights violations by the far more sinister war lords in that country.
And FYI.  The Taliban as Pashtuns and there are none in Somalia, though coincidentally this week, Wikileaks revealed they have video footage of the US massacring 140 Afghan civilians who were no more deserving of their fete than the 2 Somali men watching a soccer match.

By nemesis2010, June 17 at 2:15 pm

“As for whether or not the U.S. will fail it’s difficult to say until you know what the hell the objectives were.”

That’s a little lame isn’t it?  If after 8 years, a former marine can’t articulate what the objectives were of going into Iraq, then surely it’s obvious they weren’t achieved, especially seeing as it appears we’re going to be leaving empty handed.
 
Iraq was already as close to any “new republic” as anything we have seen in the Middle East, and nor was it a an “Islamic shithole”, though our efforts drew it closer to that outcome.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 17, 2010 at 10:17 am Link to this comment

By radson, June 16 at 8:09 pm

” Nemeses 2010 the word DUH is oftentimes used in your rebuttals ,but perhaps the readers are not appreciating the full meaning of it’s use .”

Thanks for the link radson. Yours—IMO—is the most meaningful post on this entire thread. She’s a real cutie and has some lovely Ta Ta. (as she says, yes in Irish) LOL!

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 17, 2010 at 10:15 am Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:56 pm

”On the contrary, it is precisely because of this fundament shift that the US isn’t going to make it.”

Actually the whole of humanity might not make it. Type 0 to Type 1 transition—according to Michio Kaku—can be fatal for the entire civilization. If so, it’s all irrelevant anyway, right? Death is an inescapable inevitability of life.

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:57 pm

”You’re obviously being overtly pedantic for the sake of argument.  You clearly regard Islam as one monolithic entity that poses a threat to humanity, or at least, a threat to your beloved enlightenment.”

I regard all religion as a threat to the future well-being of humanity. Only an idiot cannot see and admit that, presently, the adherents of Islam are the ones that pose the greatest threat to civilization. That doesn’t mean that the other two evils, Judaism and Christianity, aren’t capable of raising their ugly heads to the same degree or worse and therein lies the real danger.

I’m going to try and quickly respond to the rest of your tripe which is starting to repeat from previous comments.

The AK47 is not a WWII weapon. The 47 in AK47 tells you something if you bother to research it. The RPG-7 wasn’t placed into service until 1961 and saw action along with the AK47 against us in Viet Nam. As a former Marine—1965-1969—I can personally attest to that.

Iraq was under sanction and its oil harvesting was severely crippled because of that. Many of our allies were making back door deals and that was probably one of the motivating factors to get in there and take control. I reiterate, that’s what empires do. Why it surprises you is a wonder to me.

The Taliban is a group of Islamic murderers and oppressors. It never ceases to amaze me how supposedly enlightened and progressive individuals side with groups of murderers and thugs against their own. The Taliban’s cruelest actions are against their fellow Muslim believers and especially women. A perfect example of Taliban rule took place this weekend in Somalia where two men were murdered by Taliban leaders for watching the world cup games. Reportedly, 14 more were taken and are awaiting trial in one of those paragons of justice, a Taliban run Sharia court. The Taliban have not ruled in Afghanistan for years now. We replaced them with our own puppet government. Will things change? Anything can change. That’s the nature of war and especially when you haven’t the will to do what has to be done in order to accomplish your objectives. Democracies do not tolerate long, drawn out wars with no clearly defined objectives. That was another major reason I was—and I am still— against Bush War II.

As for whether or not the U.S. will fail it’s difficult to say until you know what the hell the objectives were. We don’t know, and probably will never know, what the true motivations behind Bush War II were. What can’t go on forever doesn’t. It’s that simple. And it could be that out of the rubble a new republic will rise. One thing I’m sure of, it won’t be an Islamic shithole taking over the super-power status if that does happen.

With respect to my being a loser; I don’t think I’m a loser because my trailer is a double-wide and I live in it with my sister and our son, who is also our nephew.

There’s nothing sadder in life than an old bugger whose chilito no longer functions and is totally ignored by younger men because he’s an old, wriggled, and bitter shadow of his former self.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 17, 2010 at 10:11 am Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:03 pm

”Is it beyond your comprehension to consider that an Islamic state and a shithole are not a tautology?”

No, but if it’s Islamic, it’s a shithole, especially for the masses of humanity that populate those shitholes. On the “Hitch 22” comments I described my first trip to Saudi Arabia; you’re not going to blow smoke up my ass because I’ve been to the Islamic world.

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:03 pm

” So how would you describe the process we are seeing in the US, when the country is abandoning education and reason and embracing the yoke of religious oppression?”

Exactly as I described it a couple of days ago on this very same thread. It’s a couple of steps back. It’s our traversing through a valley of darkness. It’s a setback for the nation at large. But that doesn’t mean the U.S. will collapse because of it. Personally I’d like to see the U.S. break up into about 5 or 6 different nations. I firmly believe that freedom, liberty, and representative republicanism are best experienced and thrive when localized. That’s one of the major problems with our nation today, there is very little, if any, representation of the people because those so-called representatives of the people are completely out of touch and sold out to Big Corp, Big Oil, and Big Pharma.

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:56 pm

” The US used to so much good, but these days, it pretty much sticks exclusively to the evil option.”

There’s still much good, you simply don’t want to admit it. It doesn’t help your America bashing cause.

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:56 pm

” I’d be interested in what that evidence might be.”

Go to the “Hitch 22” article.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 17, 2010 at 10:08 am Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:17 pm

”What pretences are there about US rule?  Our leaders and pundits speak openly about US interests (another word for rule) on the other side of the globe and the fact that we’ve wasted 1 million people in Iraq (while somehow managing to lose the war), should serve as evidence of our regard for brown people.”

There are lots of pretenses: Making the world safe for democracy, blah, blah, blah.

First, you can’t prove that there’s been a million dead in Iraq. Second, acceptable warfare, especially warfare as practiced by the U.S., has changed tremendously. Even if you could prove 1 million Iraqi dead that number would be much higher if the same tactics and technology of WWII were being used today. While it isn’t good, it could be much worse. Anyone—as some fools here on Truthdig suggested—who thinks close combat is what we should be doing hasn’t ever been in close combat and experienced that madness. 

Lost the war? In order to have lost it, we would have to have failed to meet our objectives. Have you any idea what AmeriCorp’s objectives were? I haven’t. That was one of my major complaints and reasons for being against the invasion and occupation; there were no clearly defined objectives. It was Viet Nam, minus the pretty girls, great pot and hashish, jungles and rice paddies, all over again.

You say we haven’t learned the lessons of empire. I ask, haven’t you learned the dangers of a power vacuum from what we’ve seen take place in Iraq? Just what the hell answer do you clowns have to replace the system that is now in place without producing a scale of death that would make the Black Plague look like a celebration for life in comparison?

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:03 pm

”Interesting observation, coming from someone who’s already decided that the future of Turkey is going to look like.”

It might or might not, kinda washes out, doesn’t it? I personally don’t believe it will because they’ve too many internal problems and lack creative juices. They also have a problem with literacy. If you want a tell-tale indicator for states that have the potential to become super-powers check out their per capita use of electrical power.

Also your Chinese super-power has quite a way to go yet. You do realize that most anything they’ve got that is worth anything is either provided by Western sources or copied? A recent example is their new fighter jet which came on the scene after purchasing 100 Russian made Migs—which they have not paid for—and which, remarkably, look just like a Russian made Mig! Then there’s the remarkably Boeing looking airliner, the Chevrolet looking cars and trucks, and on it goes. It’ll be hard to become a superpower if all you can do is steal trade and state secrets.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 17, 2010 at 10:04 am Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:17 pm

”Illiteracy in the US is an embarrassment.”

Yes it is. But let’s clarify a couple of points shall we? In the U.S. we’re speaking of adult illiteracy. According to a CBS report the U.S. is 15th in adult literacy in the world. And except for South Korea and Japan all of the others that scored higher than the U.S. are Western societies. (Check the demographics and learn who it is that is illiterate in the U.S. and you’ll understand.)

Now compare that to the data I posted on the “Hitch 22” article about literacy in the Muslim world—especially the Arab Muslim world—and you will see why I say that neither Turkey nor any other Islamic country will become a super-power as long as it is Islamic. It will require generations of intense education and enlightenment just to catch up to the rest of the world. Arab leaders are aware and very concerned about this. The data is easily obtainable.

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:17 pm

” The Brits also learned before it was too late that Empire is a guaranteed road to ruin.  It turns out that all that shiny sparkling enlightenment has been forgotten and we are not only not learning the lessons of the British and roman Empire, but repeating them.”

Bullshit! The Brits went bankrupt fighting a very avoidable war with Germany for imperial supremacy of Europe. That war bankrupted the three major players and brought us WWII, which—in my opinion—was nothing more than a continuation of the same war once the major powers recuperated financially.

AmeriCorp is very different from former Empires. That doesn’t mean that it will not meet with its demise one day, but all empires do.

” The lesson of history is that we don’t learn the lessons of history.” - Thomas G. Donlan, Barron’s, 2005

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 17, 2010 at 10:01 am Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:17 pm

”And where did the US gain most of it’s technology?  Was it not from that other bastion of human civilization, but the Third Reich?”

I thought that I had made it perfectly clear that the Germans were the first to discover nuclear fission. German technology is WESTERN technology. You keep proving my position for me. You really should try pulling your head out of your ass and breathe a little fresh air.

Actually what happened was that some European scientists fled Europe and came to America and they, along with many other scientists (many of whom were Americans), developed a working atomic bomb. Having the science doesn’t necessarily guarantee that you can do anything with it. If developing a working nuclear bomb was that easy the Nazis would have beat everyone to it. Today the knowledge is widespread and look at how hard it still is to develop. 

What’s really interesting here is that you’ve come full circle and are unwittingly proving my point that all the technology that those Islamic shitholes seek and need are Western inventions.

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:17 pm

” I tend to agree with you, though not for the reasons you give.  I think the days of superpowers are over, largely because superpowers as we know them have been based on the model of empire, colonialism and expansionism, which has been proven time and again to be unsustainable.”

That’s just it. AmeriCorp isn’t like any other super-power. AmeriCorp doesn’t colonize, not in the sense that previous empires colonized. As long as we remain a Type 0 civilization there will be super-powers because there will always be an Alpha male in charge. We’re big brained apes and that’s simply how we have evolved.

Is anything ever sustainable for any real length of time? If our sun turns into a red giant before the universe expands enough to put us into the deep freeze we become cinder. Death is an inescapable inevitability of life.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 17, 2010 at 9:59 am Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:28 pm

”Really?  Do you measure you memory in gigabytes?  That would be quite an achievement.  How exactly do you do that?”

You mentioned AIDS earlier. Is your mind rotting from that disease as well as senility and Alzheimer’s?

I was speaking of computer memory such as that of Truthdig’s had I been of a mind and initiative to do so.

Memory: a device where information can be stored and retrieved. In the most general sense, memory can refer to external storage such as disk drives or tape drives; in common usage, it refers only to the fast semiconductor storage (RAM) directly connected to the processor.  (Microsoft Press Computer Dictionary)

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:17 pm

”Why would I need to?  We’ve already agreed that China could well become a superpower and yet, the number of inventors and inventors and innovators in the past 500 years would barely rate a mention.”

You have conveniently forgotten that you were challenged to write a list of notable Muslim inventors and innovators after your asinine and ludicrous remark about American—or lack thereof—inventors, scientists, etc.

What you’re really saying here is that you’re unable to produce such a list unless it would be one for innovative Islamic suicide bombers or Islamic techniques of flying planes into buildings and perhaps innovative Islamic techniques to hide your cowardly Islamic ass behind women and children.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 17, 2010 at 9:55 am Link to this comment

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:28 pm

”You’re delusions are stuck in the 50’s.  We’ve moves way past the good old days of gentlemanly exchange of ideas and now entered one where such knowledge is patented.  Our delightful pharmaceutical giants are suing 3rd world countries for daring to manufacture generic drugs to cure aids.”

Science shares information and any new theories or hypotheses have to be peer reviewed in order to be considered viable. Big Pharma hires scientists but Big Pharma is not science.

I wasn’t even aware that a drug to “cure” aids had been developed. If so, and others are violating patent rights, that isn’t quite the same issue is it?

The real question—in order to stay on topic—is whether or not the drug is a product of Western technology or Islamic technology and science? So, tell us Shingo, did some Mohammed al Shithead come up with a cure for aids or is it the product of Western civilization? Islamists have long had a cure for both AIDS and homosexuality –death by stoning.

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:28 pm

” That would make you a newcomer to the scene.  I was working with them when hard drives were considered a luxury and 4 meg of ram was considered high end.”

That explains a lot. Are you taking a brand name or “generic” drug to treat your senility?

By Shingo, June 16 at 7:28 pm

”Actually it was probably Tesla, but never mind.”

Nikola Tesla—a Serbian born AMERICAN—discovered the principles of alternating current and invented numerous devices and procedures that were influential to the development of radio and the harnessing of electricity.

Edison—yet another AMERICAN—is credited with having developed the electrical lighting system. The difference is probably too subtle for your senile mind to grasp.

I get the impression that you know more than a little about A.C. and D.C.

Report this

By radson, June 16, 2010 at 4:09 pm Link to this comment

Nemeses 2010 the word DUH is oftentimes used in your rebuttals ,but perhaps the readers are not appreciating the full meaning of it’s use .The following link can possibly alleviate some of the misunderstandings
amongst you argumentative folks.DUH one more thing the loveliness may enlighten you with regards to Turkey and if perchance you’re not sure ,feel free to ask ,hell she might even know how to cook one.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYxpiff4gpY

Report this

By Shingo, June 16, 2010 at 3:57 pm Link to this comment

nemesis2010 part 1 of 2

By nemesis2010, June 16 at 3:12 pm #

“ Why would I have a phobia about knuckle dragging, mouth breathing ignoramuses? ALL religion is shit, especially Judaism, Christianity, and Islam!”

You’re obviously being overtly pedantic for the sake of argument.  You clearly regard Islam as one monolithic entity that poses a threat to humanity, or at least, a threat to your beloved enlightenment.

“On 9/11 the Muslim world took its best shot and managed to destroy a few buildings and murder less than 3,000 innocent human beings. AmeriCorp responded and has killed hundred of thousands, displaced millions, leveled Iraq, opened up the world’s second largest reserve of oil to exploitation, deposed the Hussein and the Taliban, and has control of Afghanistan—which means access for the pipeline and access to very valuable minerals, including lithium.”

To quote someone, this idiotic comment has to be about the stupidest thing I’ve heard in one hell of a long time. 
So Islam pulled off 9/11 did it?  That’s like suggesting that Western civilisation pulled off the Holocaust and brought us 2 world wars.

Secondly, Iraq’s oil was already open to exploitation.  Our enlightened leaders just wanted to get in on the action before competing interests got a foot in the door.  As it turns out, we’re leaving Iraq (desolate and destroyed) empty handed.  What a truly enlightened project that was!  We even got our asses handed to us by a rag tag militia brandishing WWII era weaponry.

Third.  Have we really deposed the Taliban?  O might want to tell that to McChrystal, who said only a few weeks ago that the war was at a stalemate (or a draw as he put it).  When the DOD is saying the war is being drawn, you know we’re losing.

“Keep f—king with the empire and we’ll own the entire Middle East just like the Romans!”

Yeah just like the Romans.  Yeehhaaaa.  Oh wait….
“Terrorism isn’t new, it’s been going on since the earliest days of human history, and that same history proves that civilization always defeats terrorism.”
What a simpleton you are.  All that posturing about your erudition of history and yet you go out and spew a talking t point from a Bush speech. Terrorism is nothing new because we use it every day you imbecile.  Terrorism is nothing more than a term to describe those we don’t like, but when it comes to the definition of terrorism, we’ve it’s biggest proponents.

“ Do you have a clue why?”

Actually I do, and you clearly haven’t.

You might want to look up the book, “Drying to Win” by Robert Pape.  He carried out a DOD funded study of all the recorded suicide terrorist attacks and deduced that in 90-95% of cases, religion has nothing to do with the attack.  What he did find was that in 90-95% of cases, the motivation behind the attack was military occupation and territorial disputes.

“Because sane human beings want to live and get on with life not sit around all day wishing they could be with an imaginary sky daddy and convince poor retarded, drugged, and deluded humans to blow themselves up while murdering other innocent human beings.”

Again you might want to rethink that rather than soiling yourself on this forum.  Given the military’s new recruitment policies, this statement could just as easily apply to our own DOD.

“You mentioned China as a super-power or possible super-power. The Chinese have recently purchased $20 billion of U.S. Treasury notes and the rest of the world has recently purchased $160 billion of Treasury notes. Does that sound like the rest of the world thinks the empire is failing and going to go into default?”

Yes it does, because as the old saying goes, if you owe me $1000, you’re in trouble, but it you owe me a ten million then I am. You must be the only wingnut this side of the plant, ho thinks that the purchase of treasury notes is a vote of confidence in the US monetary and financial system.

Report this

By Shingo, June 16, 2010 at 3:56 pm Link to this comment

nemesis2010 part 2 of 2

The US used to so much good, but these days, it pretty much sticks exclusively to the evil option.

“ As a matter of fact I presented evidence on another thread that demonstrates that contact with the West has a very positive effect for many millions of religious and autocratically oppressed Muslims around the world.”

I’d be interested in what that evidence might be.

“All empires die but it is, more often than not, a prolonged and anguished death. You also seem to be ignorant of the fact that we—the world—are transitioning
from a Type 0 civilization to a Type 1 civilization.”

On the contrary, it is precisely because of this fundament shift that the US isn’t going to make it.

“ The struggle is only just beginning and you think you know the outcome. You don’t!”

Actually we do, and it’s not that big a mystery. The US is founded on an unsustainable model.  We consume more than the world can provide.  We owe more money than we have in circulation, let alone what we can ever hope to repay.  States like the US and much of the West are the ones is greatest danger, because we are the populations that are going to have to make the most radical and dramatic changes to our lifestyle in order to survive. 

“I notice that you write using British style English, are you a natural born Britain or are you one of the many from Islamic shitholes who had to go to the West in order to get a decent education?”

No I just happen to travel a great deal and having spent a great deal of time in the Britain and Australia, I happen to have learned some good habbits.

Given your lack of perspective and ignorance of the world at large, my money is on you living in trailer and have done nest to nothing with your life.

Report this

By Shingo, June 16, 2010 at 3:28 pm Link to this comment

nemesis2010, June 16 at 3:16 pm #

“In science knowledge is not only shared, it is put out for peer review.”

You’re delusions are stuck in the 50’s.  We’ve moves way past the good old days of gentlemanly exchange of ideas and now entered one where such knowledge is patented.  Our delightful pharmaceutical giants are suing 3rd world countries for daring to manufacture generic drugs to cure aids.

“I was working with computers when we had hard drives of just 150 megs or less, and can remember when 16 meg of ram was mind blowing because it was double that of the norm and there was no Windows operating system. Floppy disks were really floppy and about 12” in diameter.”

That would make you a newcomer to the scene.  I was working with them when hard drives were considered a luxury and 4 meg of ram was considered high end.
It was Ransom Olds who “innovated” the assembly line (1901) and Henry Ford who further developed it.

“ It was Edison that came up with a viable electrical lighting system.”

Actually it was probably Tesla, but never mind.
The very system that you are using to demonstrate what an ignorant ass you are!

“I can list gigabytes of memory of inventors and scientists—more than just a few Americans—to whom we owe our modern day living standards.”

Really?  Do you measure you memory in gigabytes?  That would be quite an achievement.  How exactly do you do that?
“Why don’t you make us a list of Muslim inventors and innovators in the past 500 years?”

Why would I need to?  We’ve already agreed that China could well become a superpower and yet, the number of inventors and inventors and innovators in the past 500 years would barely rate a mention.

Report this

By Shingo, June 16, 2010 at 3:17 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 16 at 3:22 pm #

“ The vaunted U.S.S.R. didn’t develop theirs until 1953. That’s hardly in lock step and much of their advances were made from stolen American technology!”

And where did the US gain most of it’s technology?  Was it not from that other bastion of human civilization, but the Third Reich?

The early technology was GERMAN, and the Germans had an nuclear program going soon after discovering nuclear fission in 1939.

“If you wanted to gain prestige and peer-envy in early 20th century you went to Germany to study.”

No argument about that.

“Turkey will not become a super-power any time soon, if ever, it doesn’t have the right stuff. This article is pure unadulterated bullshit!”’

I tend to agree with you, though not for the reasons you give.  I think the days of superpowers are over, largely because superpowers as we know them have been based on the model of empire, colonialism and expansionism, which has been proven time and again to be unsustainable.

“Illiteracy in Islamic countries—especially Middle Eastern Arab Islamic nations—is appalling.”

Illiteracy in the US is an embarrassment. 

“The world should rejoice that it’s AmeriCorp and not the British Empire that rules today because the Brits knew how to empire.”

The Brits also learned before it was too late that Empire is a guaranteed road to ruin.  It turns out that all that shiny sparkling enlightenment has been forgotten and we are not only not learning the lessons of the British and roman Empire, but repeating them.

“ There would be no pretenses about their rule, they would just go in and rape and pillage the entire land and ship everything home without giving a hoot about what all those little brown people had to say about it.”

What pretences are there about US rule?  Our leaders and pundits speak openly about US interests (another word for rule) on the other side of the globe and the fact that we’ve wasted 1 million people in Iraq (while somehow managing to lose the war), should serve as evidence of our regard for brown people.

Report this

By Shingo, June 16, 2010 at 3:03 pm Link to this comment

By nemesis2010, June 16 at 3:25 pm #

“Yes, China might become a super-power. Then again it might not. You don’t know the future anymore than any of the many Evangelicals spewing that apocalyptic bile all over the Internet.”

Interesting observation, coming from someone who’s already decided that the future of Turkey is going to look like.

“ And don’t forget, the U.S.S.R., Russia of today, and China are not, nor ever were, Islamic shitholes.”

Is it beyond your comprehension to consider that an Islamic state and a shithole are not a tautology?

“Enlightenment is throwing off the yoke of religious oppression and embracing education and reason.”

So how would you describe the process we are seeing in the US, when the country is abandoning education and reason and embracing the yoke of religious oppression?

Report this

By ofersince72, June 16, 2010 at 1:48 pm Link to this comment

America has made Isreal the fifty first state, the one
that gets the most aid per capita.
Isreal’s total existance depends on this.

Unless there is a one state solution, everyone is
delusional to believe Isreal will survive a two
state solution without the aid and AIPAC lobbying
that we have right now running the show. Basicly what
is going on, Congress appropiates and hands to AIPAC,
who in return, hand back as campaign contributions.
We are in this forever as it is.
(until the oil runs out)(then we don’t care what happens)

Report this

By ofersince72, June 16, 2010 at 1:34 pm Link to this comment

I agree John

  If America was to find a way to divest from AIPAC
  and Isreal, America would still survive.

  however, Isreal would collapse almost overnight,
  so what citizens are really being held hostage?

  That is just why a one state solution is the only
  solution that will ever work. Jewish citizens are
  forever going to be hostage to American policy and
  living imprisoned inside the walls that they built.

Report this

By ofersince72, June 16, 2010 at 12:56 pm Link to this comment

Ed , you never refuted anything I said, only in your
illusional tunnel visioned mind.

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, June 16, 2010 at 12:27 pm Link to this comment

re:By truedigger3, June 16 at 3:51 pm:

Oh well, I still disagree, but I’m all written out on this subject. Another time, y’all.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 16, 2010 at 11:57 am Link to this comment

Sorry about that mispost which obviously belongs in the article about the boring as hell world cup.

Report this

By truedigger3, June 16, 2010 at 11:51 am Link to this comment

Re: By Ed Harges, June 16 at 12:21 pm #


Ed Harges wrote:

“But no, China instead kisses up to Iran. Because that’s how you get stuff that you want: you make nice to, and make deals with, the countries that have what you want.

For example, in Latin America, China is lavishing lots of investment and financial aid on countries that are economically important to China, and— gee whiz, what do you know!—those countries are becoming more and more independent of the US, and ever friendlier toward China.

Why don’t the Chinese try, by similar means, to win Israel, this supposed prize, away from the United States—this prize that opens the magic door of access to oil?”
____________________________________________________

Ed,

You forget a basic fact which is that the Chinese and US ecomomies are hooked at the groin!.
Ignoring the posturing and usual bullshitting, China is nothing but a huge sweat shop mostly for US corporations which have thousands of manufacturing plants in China, many of them under Chinese names and in partnership with Chinese individuals who are mostly sons and daughters of government officials and the communist party appartchiks!.
These manufacturing plants need energy and raw materials to function. So, the US does not mind at all, but even encourages the Chinese to go out and get the oil and raw materials needed.
And don’t forget, some of the Chinese profits are recycled back to the US by buying US Treausury Bonds to balance the US budget!.
Kissing up to anybody does not mean a damn thing.
What is important is the real intentions and what is the long range plan in the scheme of things.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 16, 2010 at 11:27 am Link to this comment

By omygodnotagain, June 15 at 8:16 pm

” I agree, what most American Football fans will not admit, is that their sport is homoerotic, muscular guys in tight Spandex excentuating their behinds who are playacting rough sex, they have field positions with homosexual overtones like Receiver, Tight End even the team names suggests hardcore homosexual fantasies the Cowboys, the Rams, the Browns, the Steelers, the Giants, the Redskins,the Packers. Doesn’t take much imagination to see what thats all about.
So why is gay marriage such a big deal, because its American as Apple Pie and Football

For someone accusing others of homoeroticism and play acting rough sex you sure appear to have it down pat. I’d bet that you’ve seen many a happy hour playing “tight end”; which is a receiver position.

You should speak to someone—outside of the showers—about how the game has evolved. “End” was a designation for the two pass receiver positions where the guys were lined up on each extreme—the end—of the offensive line. As the game evolved so did the designators for those positions. In your case though I take it that you began as a tight end and after being rammed by the Rams enough times you just became a loosey-goosey end, right?

I personally do not care for the new rules of pro football because they were changed to favor the offenses and the corporate domination has ruined it by too many time outs. Of course we all know that the time outs are for T.V. commercials (profit) so that the income for the very large salaries for all those prima Dona players can be met.

The key is that corporate ruination of pro-football does not make soccer any less boring. It’s boring, it’s stupid, and it really does suck big time!

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 16, 2010 at 11:25 am Link to this comment

I.

By Shingo, June 15 at 7:37 pm

”Ironically, the US became a superpower by abandoning pretty much all of it’s founding principals.”

No shit Sherlock! How long did it take you to figure that one out? It became a super-power helping other European nations bitch-slap the Nazis and taking advantage of the situation post WWII. 

By Shingo, June 15 at 7:37 pm

” The Soviet Union was a superpower and so will China be, of not already.  Neither became one through any enlightenment.”

Naw… the U.S.S.R. was a super-power? Dayum ain’t ewe smert tahdey! What has that got to do with the price of bread?

Yes, China might become a super-power. Then again it might not. You don’t know the future anymore than any of the many Evangelicals spewing that apocalyptic bile all over the Internet.

And Russia did have enlightenment influence, all that new thinking—like Marx—came out of enlightenment. And don’t forget, the U.S.S.R., Russia of today, and China are not, nor ever were, Islamic shitholes.

Enlightenment is throwing off the yoke of religious oppression and embracing education and reason.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, June 16, 2010 at 11:23 am Link to this comment

Ed Harges, June 16 at 12:54 pm #

Ofer: I have perfectly refuted your position, and you refuse to
comprehend. Whatever. Enjoy your illusions.

**********************************

For once ofer is more right than you are. Look at a map: China has land routes, therefore pipeline routes through countries like Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran to oil fields….and Israel is WAY, WAY on the other side.

Geography is ALWAYS a critical factor in determining national interests.  You should pay more attention to it.  Many things get far clearer just by looking at a map.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 16, 2010 at 11:22 am Link to this comment

II.

By Shingo, June 15 at 7:37 pm

”Most of America’s power came thought colonialism, and through the threat posed by it’s military.  Most of America’s financial muscle was a consequence of it’s military capacity.”

Wow! You just keep batting them out of the ball park today! That’s how an empire comes about! This is truly a DUH! moment in your life.

By Shingo, June 15 at 9:02 pm

”The Soviets developed nuclear technology in lock step with the US, proving yet again the technology is not a Western concept.”

Another DUH! moment for you Shingo!

The British Empire is a Western Empire! You need to buy a dictionary and finish school before coming here and playing with the big boys.

The Soviets began their project during WWII after learning about the U.S. pursuing development of an atomic bomb. The Japanese also were pursuing an atomic bomb. The U.S. developed its bomb and used two to help bring the war in the Pacific to a close. The vaunted U.S.S.R. didn’t develop theirs until 1953. That’s hardly in lock step and much of their advances were made from stolen American technology!

The early technology was GERMAN, and the Germans had an nuclear program going soon after discovering nuclear fission in 1939.

You seem to be as ignorant of what constitutes the “West” and “western civilization” as you are about everything else. The “West” or “western civilization” is defined as societies of European origin. Ignorance is the price one pays for maintaining such vehement jealously and hate and reading only revised history books written by West hating anuses! It is definitely “Western” technology!

Just so you’ll know; early 20th century Germany was the cultural and technological center of the world. If you wanted to gain prestige and peer-envy in early 20th century you went to Germany to study. 

Turkey will not become a super-power any time soon, if ever, it doesn’t have the right stuff. This article is pure unadulterated bullshit! Illiteracy in Islamic countries—especially Middle Eastern Arab Islamic nations—is appalling. And the main reason they are what they are is due to Islam! Religion needs stupid people in order to thrive. And where religion thrives enlightenment dies because enlightenment is the enemy of delusion. That’s a fact jack and it don’t mean no never mind what the hell you think about it!

The world should rejoice that it’s AmeriCorp and not the British Empire that rules today because the Brits knew how to empire. There would be no pretenses about their rule, they would just go in and rape and pillage the entire land and ship everything home without giving a hoot about what all those little brown people had to say about it.

Report this

By truedigger3, June 16, 2010 at 11:20 am Link to this comment

offersince72 wrote:
“Economics has always been the motive; religion the transportation to get there.”
_____________________________________________________

offersince72,

I agree with you 100%, but add, in addition to rligion, ethnicity and political ideology are also uded, and more so.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 16, 2010 at 11:16 am Link to this comment

III.

By Shingo, June 15 at 7:37

”Americans did innovate, but largely used existing processes that have been also perfected, and indeed exceeded by the Russians.”

This idiotic comment has to be about the stupidest thing I’ve heard in one hell of a long time. This competes with comments by dumbass Creationists —it’s that stupid!

In science knowledge is not only shared, it is put out for peer review. Take the very piece of equipment that you are using to demonstrate to us just how utterly stupid you are. Many men in many different countries, especially in Germany, Britain, and the U.S., were developing working models that eventually led to the modern day computer. Whose ideas and technology ended up besting all the others on the world market? Who developed the software that made the personal computer possible?

I was working with computers when we had hard drives of just 150 megs or less, and can remember when 16 meg of ram was mind blowing because it was double that of the norm and there was no Windows operating system. Floppy disks were really floppy and about 12” in diameter.

It was Ransom Olds who “innovated” the assembly line (1901) and Henry Ford who further developed it.

There were about 22 different inventors working on the incandescent lamp (light bulb). Whose design outstripped the others and became a marketable innovation? Swan and Edison’s! It was Edison that came up with a viable electrical lighting system. The very system that you are using to demonstrate what an ignorant ass you are!

And please don’t confuse an electrical lighting system with Faraday’s discovery of the principles of electromagnetic generation (Faraday’s law). I can list gigabytes of memory of inventors and scientists—more than just a few Americans—to whom we owe our modern day living standards. Why don’t you make us a list of Muslim inventors and innovators in the past 500 years?

It’s a shame because the very lands that gave us our Arabic number system, algebra, and the poetry of Omar Khayyam has been held in a Islamic Dark Ages for more than a 1,000 years.

Report this

By nemesis2010, June 16, 2010 at 11:12 am Link to this comment

IV.

By Shingo, June 15 at 7:37

”And what must surely eat away at your Islamophobic bones is the realisation that the US’s days as a superpower are fast coming to an end.”

Islamophobic bones? Moi? Bwaaaaaaaa! Bwaaaaaaaa! Why would I have a phobia about knuckle dragging, mouth breathing ignoramuses? ALL religion is shit, especially Judaism, Christianity, and Islam!

On 9/11 the Muslim world took its best shot and managed to destroy a few buildings and murder less than 3,000 innocent human beings. AmeriCorp responded and has killed hundred of thousands, displaced millions, leveled Iraq, opened up the world’s second largest reserve of oil to exploitation, deposed the Hussein and the Taliban, and has control of Afghanistan—which means access for the pipeline and access to very valuable minerals, including lithium. 

Keep f—king with the empire and we’ll own the entire Middle East just like the Romans! Terrorism isn’t new, it’s been going on since the earliest days of human history, and that same history proves that civilization always defeats terrorism. Do you have a clue why? Because sane human beings want to live and get on with life not sit around all day wishing they could be with an imaginary sky daddy and convince poor retarded, drugged, and deluded humans to blow themselves up while murdering other innocent human beings.

You can believe that silly deluded shit when you see those fat f—k Immans, Ayatollahs, Evangelical Pulpit Pimps, and Rabbis offering their family members and especially themselves as future minced meat for the cause. And even then it’ll still be a lie!

By Shingo, June 15 at 7:37

”the realisation that the US’s days as a superpower are fast coming to an end.”

Fast coming to an end? Bwaaaaaa! Bwaaaaa!

You mentioned China as a super-power or possible super-power. The Chinese have recently purchased $20 billion of U.S. Treasury notes and the rest of the world has recently purchased $160 billion of Treasury notes. Does that sound like the rest of the world thinks the empire is failing and going to go into default? Have you a clue as to what nation has a bigger piece of the ownership pie in the U.S.? Britain! It’s like Sly said back in the day… it’s a family affair!

The U.S. of A., not being perfect, does perpetrate a lot of evil in this world but it also does much good. As a matter of fact I presented evidence on another thread that demonstrates that contact with the West has a very positive effect for many millions of religious and autocratically oppressed Muslims around the world.

All empires die but it is, more often than not, a prolonged and anguished death. You also seem to be ignorant of the fact that we—the world—are transitioning from a Type 0 civilization to a Type 1 civilization. This is totally unknown territory as it may very well be the first time in the entire history of this universe that this is taking place. It is a very dangerous time for any civilization since it, in essence, means that we are transitioning from many nation states and their respective governments into a world governmental system. The struggle is only just beginning and you think you know the outcome. You don’t!

I notice that you write using British style English, are you a natural born Britain or are you one of the many from Islamic shitholes who had to go to the West in order to get a decent education? Given your lack of historical knowledge my money is on you living in an Islamic shithole and having learned English as an extracurricular study… probably from a Westerner.

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, June 16, 2010 at 8:54 am Link to this comment

Ofer: I have perfectly refuted your position, and you refuse to
comprehend. Whatever. Enjoy your illusions.

Report this

By ofersince72, June 16, 2010 at 8:43 am Link to this comment

Not for the Chinese. China was a broken nation in the
midst of revolution when Isreal was designed.
And of course, America, especially since WWII , does not
use diplomacy to extract their ends. If you remember
the U.S. installed their own government in Iran from
1953 until it was thrown out in 1979. Where it is
convienient, China uses the same policy, such as in Tibet.

I do not agree with US ties to Isreal any more than you
do. What we disagree is whether this policy is because
of economics, or ethniticity and religion. Economics
has always been the motive; religion the transportation
to get there.

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, June 16, 2010 at 8:21 am Link to this comment

re:By ofersince72, June 16 at 11:08 am:

Ofersince72, the idea that our policy of inflexibly
supporting Israel while threatening Iran is
motivated by oil interests is ludicrous.

Consider China. Do we not agree that China’s main material interest in the Middle
East is access to oil?

If so, then if the way to get access to oil is to kiss up to Israel, why is China not
trying to outdo us in kissing up to Israel? Why does China not, for example, offer
to give Israel $4 billion, $5 billion, or $10 billion dollars a year, topping our yearly
$3 billion? China could easily do this in a second—they have a lot more money
than we do at this point, when you take into account our debts.

But no, China instead kisses up to Iran. Because that’s how you get stuff that you
want: you make nice to, and make deals with, the countries that have what you
want.

For example, in Latin America, China is lavishing lots of investment and financial
aid on countries that are economically important to China, and— gee whiz, what
do you know!—those countries are becoming more and more independent of the
US, and ever friendlier toward China.

Why don’t the Chinese try, by similar means, to win Israel, this supposed prize,
away from the United States—this prize that opens the magic door of access to
oil?

The reason they don’t is obvious: Israel is no such prize.

Report this

By ofersince72, June 16, 2010 at 7:08 am Link to this comment

Once again, I have to disagree with your analysis of
American policy in the Middle East, even though I agree
with you about our policy with Isreal needs to be changed.
If you don’t believe the invasion and conquering of
Iraq was about oil, and setting up permanent military
bases there was to secure this oil, I doubt we will
agree about US motivations towards Iran.
Isreal is always used as the exuse for the aggression
to secure Middle East natural resources.
I repeat, if it weren’t for oil, no one would care about
and Arab or a Jew, not even our Jewish lawmakers.

Report this

By ofersince72, June 16, 2010 at 4:35 am Link to this comment

It is amusing , with the history of Turkey this article
goes into, nothing about post WWII.  Both Greece and
Turkey had a majority communist party,
Another job well done of assassinations and destabilizations by our secret services, kidnapping,
murdering journalists, you know how they do.
Both Turkey and Greece didn’t want to be pulled into
the cold war.  They wanted their independence of any
sphere of influence.
  Of course, just as today, we wouldn’t allow that.

Report this

By truedigger3, June 16, 2010 at 3:48 am Link to this comment

By Inherit The Wind, June 15 at 10:55 pm #


ITW,

You are partially right.
Yes, the Russians are Western, althought many in the West used to complain about the so called “Russian way of thinking”, and what they so called, “their devious oriental mind”, in quote!. I guess that vilificatation was due to the cold war.
The Turks are definitely not Western. They have stricly enforced secular constitution,  but that does not mean that they are Western. Do you call the Japanese Western??!!
The Turks used to have Arabic Alphabet until Attaturk switched to Latin Alphabet.
A cursory scan of the Turkish history will prove beyond any doubt that they are not Western.
Hardly anything was heard about Turkey in the Media,  until tension started between Turkey and Israel, and all of a sudden, they are in the news almost constantly, and this article is an example of that.!

Report this

By Shingo, June 15, 2010 at 11:50 pm Link to this comment

By Ed Harges, June 16 at 3:28 am #

While I appreciate your sentiment, and there is no question that the hostility toward Turkey is almost entirely about Israel, there are a few points I would like to address.

1) Relations with Israel and Turkey were already on the slide after the Gaza massacre.

2) While Israel’s amen corner have been the most vocal about condemning Turkey over the flotilla massacre, I’m pretty sure there is a large contingent that is remaining silent, who appreciate the importance of Turkey to US interests.

3) Thus, while good relation with Israel were an important part of Turkey’s appeal, they are not the only factor.

I have a strong suspicion that we are reaching a point when Us foreign policy and Israel are coming to loggerheads, and that this disparity will be made obvious to the publicly.

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, June 15, 2010 at 11:28 pm Link to this comment

re:By Inherit The Wind, June 15 at 10:55 pm:

Sorry, but it is inevitable that once again the subject of Israel dominates this
thread as so many others, for several reasons:

(1) It is the flotilla massacre, committed by Israel, that precipitated the
Turkish rebellion against the US/Israeli status quo.

(2) This rebellion was immediately interpreted by the American foreign policy
establishment almost exclusively in terms of what it means for Israel’s security.
Even the alarmism about Turkey’s relations with Iran is about Israel, because
the entire campaign to demonize Iran and drum up a big bombing war against
Iran is something contemplated for Israel’s benefit (as perceived by the crazies
who run both Israel and our State Department). As the article states in the first
paragraph, the Turkish reaction is “essentially a breach with Israel”.

(3) To the extent that Turkey was ever loved by the US foreign policy
establishment, it was only because it was acting as an ally to Israel. And
now Turkey is instantly reviled by that same establishment, solely because of
its defiance of Israel
.

Of course this article ends up being almost all about Israel!

That’s because US foreign policy, especially in the Middle East, is almost
exclusively about Israel, no matter what other country we’re supposedly talking
about.
.

Report this

By Richard_Ralph_Roehl, June 15, 2010 at 10:20 pm Link to this comment

Perhaps the time has come for Turkey to develop a working nuclear arsenal to match their ambitions? If the ethno-racist Zionist wackos in the apartheid theo-crazy of Israel can have 200+ nukes, then why not Turkey?

Everything has changed. The world now realizes that Zionist Israel is a rabid dog, a mad dog that threatens the very existence of humanity (the neighborhood). One does not pet a rabid dog! You damn well shoot it!

We can’t count on Amerika to be $ensible or $ane. The Amerikans have become Israel’s bitch.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, June 15, 2010 at 6:55 pm Link to this comment

I thought Russians were Western…I thought Turks were Western.
Hell, I thought this was a thread about Turkey, not another thread about how Jews control the US government.

I’ve never seen so much bullshit from every direction. Hell, Ed Harges is making more sense than anyone else (don’t take that as a complement, Ed—it’s not meant that way).

Does anyone know ANYTHING about Turkey, either historically or in the current context?????

Report this

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.