Monday, February 20, 2006

Nukes, Iran, and LANL...

The Nuclear Abyss

The United States is preparing to enter a new era: an era in which it will enforce nuclear nonproliferation by the threat and use of nuclear weapons. The use of tactical nuclear weapons against Iran will usher in a new world order. The ultimate goal is that no nation other than the U.S. should have a nuclear weapons arsenal.

A telltale sign that this is the plan is the recent change in the stated mission of Los Alamos National Laboratory, where nuclear weapons are developed. The mission of LANL used to be described officially as "Los Alamos National Laboratory's central mission is to reduce the global nuclear danger" [1] [.pdf], [2] [.pdf], [3] [.pdf]. That will sound ridiculous once the U.S. starts throwing mini-nukes around. In anticipation of it, the Los Alamos mission statement has been recently changed to "prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction and to protect our homeland from terrorist attack." That is the present and future role of the U.S. nuclear arsenal, to be achieved through threat (deterrence) and use of nuclear weapons. References to the old mission are nowhere to be found in the current Los Alamos documents, indicating that the change was deliberate and thorough.

[...]

Full Story

Comments:
Well this is certainly a stellar piece of Neo Islamo-Liberal propaganda. It truly amazes me that there are people in this country who are either so completely detached from reality or, are so completely hostile to the country that has given them so much. When an author makes the statement that: “The public mindset has been thoroughly prepared for war by a barrage of untrue propaganda against Iran,” it is obvious that the facts have eluded him. He seems to be challenging us saying ‘ Are you going to believe me or your lying eyes and ears.’ Anyone who is paying the slightest bit of attention should have seen and heard the Iranian Presidents inflammatory and dangerous statements against America and Israel. Denying the holocaust and calling for Israel to be wiped off the map can hardly be categorized as “untrue propaganda against Iran.” Since Amadinijad is a head of state it would be criminally negligent not to take such insane rhetoric seriously. It is no secret that it is the policy of this nation to defend Israel and to respond to attacks on our soil and on our citizens. Therefore it should be no surprise that we would prepare for attacks from Iran.

Iran and Syria, are terrorist states. While the NILs in the press are fabricating stories like this one they completely ignored the fact that this week Amadinijad held a state sponsored seminar on how to become a suicide bomber. They ignore the fact that Natanz is an underground facility because it is a military facility not a peaceful civilian power plant. They completely ignored the fact that last weekend Abdul Hamid Al-Gore was committing treason by denouncing the United States on foreign soil in the heart of our enemies’ territory in Saudi Arabia. You can’t tell me that Gore is so stupid that he would not realize the harm his words would do when they will undoubtedly be regurgitated on Al-Jazeera. These people are stirred to commit murder over a damn cartoon so they would certainly use the words of a former Vice-President to justify action against our fighting men and women over seas. Their blood is on his head. Maybe Abdul Hamid Al-Gore should attend one of Amadinijads seminars, strap on a Semtex belt, and take one for his team because he’s certainly not playing for our side. Truman never faced the hostility that Bush has been subjected to. Certainly not from a self absorbed sore loser like Gore. Indulging hatred is harming the country and airing our dirty laundry in public plays into the hands of those who want to destroy us. The loyal opposition of WWII has become a disloyal and selfish domestic insurgency that is every bit as dangerous as Al-Qaeda itself. A house divided cannot stand. The decisions have been made and the troops are committed there is no choice at this point but to follow through. Whether you agree or not is no longer the issue. If, at some point, the National Command Authority decides to employ our most destructive weapons then so be it. I have spent 23 years of my life ensuring that these weapons will work if they are ever needed. I don’t want them used but I always knew that it was a possibility. Anyone who has a problem with that should have never signed on to work here.

This country is involved in WWIII. I don’t think most of the nation truly realizes the scope of the enemy we face or that we could actually lose this fight if we are not united.
Our grandfathers understood that loyalty to country should come before loyalty to party. That is something the Neo Libs have either forgotten or never knew. It’s time to pitch in and help. We can argue later.
 
I hear you, John. But you should be just a little more cautious, in my opinion. If "Abdul Hamid Al-Gore" says something that makes you this mad, what if you heard almost the same thing from the mouths of conservative (NON-Democrat) libertarians like Scott Ritter (former UN weapons inspector in Iraq) or Ron Paul (Republican Congressman from Texas)? Are their anti-Neocon sentiments traitorous, in your view? The modern eagerness to be the first to cross the nuclear line would have been abhorrent to the Manhattan Project people, even when we were faced with a REAL ENEMY, the Soviet Union, who REALLY HAD weapons of mass destruction, without question.

I posted this article, not so much for its absolute factual content, as for its view (from the Left) about LANL. We need to know our opponents from Within (namely, the Neo/theo/cons who run the U.S. Government at the highest levels), as well as those on the outside looking in. On that score, I do not agree at all with you that the Left embraces the "freedoms" of either Islamic or Jewish fundamentalism, any more than they do those of our own home-grown Christian Right.

We need to maintain a rational eye on all of this, and do what we can to keep our balance. While your comments are articulate, John, I cannot agree that we are already engaged in WWIII. But if we strike first with nuclear weapons, then we really will have precipitated the end game, and all bets on our future will be off.
 
The story below is all too typical. Bush visits the DOE NREL
Energy Lab to tout his "born again" belief in renewable energy.
Problem is, his people just cut NREL funding, and they are now
getting ready to lay off staff. Why am I not surprised by this
story?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1644671&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312
----------------------------------------------------------
Bush Blames Cuts at Energy Lab on Mix-Up - AP News Feb 21, '06

GOLDEN, Colo. Feb 21, 2006 (AP)— President Bush on Tuesday
acknowledged that Washington has sent "mixed signals" to
one of the nation's premiere labs studying renewable energies
by first laying off, then reinstating, 32 workers just before
his visit.
----------------------------------------------------------


Now that Dubya has finished his little visit, I'm guessing that
DOE can take back the "emergency funds" and commence with the
layoffs. How pathetic. It's almost as bad as the President's
recent decision to let the the UAE buy up all our biggest US
ports. The 911 families in NYC are furious over this one...


http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060221/D8FTL7000.html
---------------------------------------------------------
Frist Calls for Halt to U.S. Ports Deal - AP News Feb 21, '06

WASHINGTON (AP) - Senate Republican Leader Bill Frist called
Tuesday for the Bush administration to stop a deal permitting
a United Arab Emirates company to take over six major U.S.
seaports, upping the ante on a fight that several congressmen,
governors and mayors are waging with the White House.
---------------------------------------------------------

Hey, folks, you can't even make stuff like this up. Looks
like LANL needs to start working over-time on efficient cargo
radiation detectors. With bone-headed decision like this
coming from the Whitehouse, we'll probably need them sooner,
rather than later.
 
Kudos to John Horne for his thoughtful and fact-filled commentary! But I have to wonder if John is watching a bit too much Fox TV. Does anyone seriously think Iran is going to attack Israel? I don't think so. If they did, then the world would rightly condemn it. But it is not going to happen. On the other hand there is a very real danger that Israel and/or the US is going to attack Iran.

John - are you aware that the US organized a military coup in Iran in 1953 which overthrew a very popular government there? And that the military coup became a brutal dictatorship which lasted for decades? If that happened to us, how would you feel?

John - are you aware that both Netanyahu and Sharon urged the US to invade Iran quickly after the invasion of Iraq? That was not an idle threat or instigation. It is not just bluster; it is real. I am 98% sure that you did not know that ... why should you since Ahmadinejad's stupid comments are publicized over and over while the much more threatening and dangerous statements by the likes of Sharon are barely reported at all.

Iran is hostile to the US and Israel for a reason. It's about our policies.

The dangers and threats reported in the article are very real.

BTW it is ironic to hear your racially tainted demonization of Al Gore. Sorry but he did win the election in 2000. It is also curious to hear your call for unity after the rabid right wing assault and humiliation of Clinton and the country for ..... consensual sex. Meanwhile the chicken hawks in power (virtually every one of them) sqaunder the precious lives of our youth, avoid any responsibility, trash the reputation of the country and pile up a mountain of debt. Amazing.
 
"Does anyone seriously think Iran is going to attack Israel? I don't think so. If they did, then the world would rightly condemn it. But it is not going to happen."

Well now, I'm reassured.
 
The reason that Iran won't attack Israel is really very, very simple "Neville." Israel has 200 nukes, and they are prepared to use them, whether the US says "Yes!" or "No!"

Of THAT you may be reassured.
 
Nowar-- I sense some anti-semitism in your comments. My "demonization" of Al Gore was not racial at all. I chose the name Abdul Hamid for a very specific reason. Abdul Hamid is the muslim name taken by a fellow traitor of Al Gores. None other than Johnny "Taliban" Walker.

Your statement that "Iran is hostile to the US and Israel for a reason. It's about our policies." does not surprise me but it is inaccurate. The Arab world hates Israel for theological reasons not political ones. If it were not for the US Israel wouldn't stand a chance in that neighborhood.


And by the way, there were 5 recounts in Florida and Al lost all of them. That is a documented fact. This gave GW a victory by 1 vote in the electoral college. Were you aware that it is the electoral college that determines the outcome of the election. This has been the way it has been done since 1776. You might want to brush up on your civics.

As for the consentual sex, the technical term is sexual harrasment. When a supervisor uses his position of authority in such a manner it is not only unethical but, illegal on government property ( we own the oval office, it is not the same as the presidential residence) The hypocracy of the left on this one is stunning. When Senator Bob Packwood gave his intern a peck on the cheek you all drove him out of the Senate. But when your boy was caught checking Monica's tonsils and using her for a humidor in the Oval Office there was no mention of sexual harrasment at all.


Lastly, I am aware of far more that you might think. I'm 100% certain that I'm better informed on this topic than you are. And I have the guts to use my own name.
 
Nevill C. must be one of the most frequently alluded to figures from the 20th century! It's amusing and very predictable. The allusion consistently corresponds with a clear propaganda campaign and build toward military aggression. Anyone who questions the coming aggression is compared to Chamberlain.

The general pattern is that the aggressor poses as victim; the soon to be real victim is presented as aggressor and the leader portrayed as Hitlerian. Questioning the aggression is deemed akin to Chamberlain. The Hitler of the moment changes every 5 years or so - which is about the time it takes to wage the propaganda campaign, execute the attack, and digest the spoils. After that a lull, then on to the next target. Looking back over the past 25 years there was Libya then Grenada then Nicaragua then Panama then Iraq then Yugoslavia then Iraq again.

The lesson of appeasement to Hitler indeed is important. But looking at the history of the past 40 years .... which country fills the shoes of the aggressive war-mongering 3rd Reich? There are some courageous Americans who formerly believed the myths but now say we need to look in the mirror. Try the recently published "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" for example.
Cheers,
Rick Sterling
 
JH -
There is an important difference between anti-semitism and opposition to the brutal, illegal and racist practices of the Israeli government. Norman Finkelstein shines a light on this issue in his excellent book "Beyond Chutzpah". Right wingers and bullies try to similarly intimidate people who criticise US government practices which can be similarly brutal, racist and illegal. For example would-be bullies can accuse one of being "anti-american" for not supporting the current occupation of Iraq ..... as if torture and foreign invasion was somehow 'american'.

JH - I think you are too quick to denounce fellow Americans whom you don't like politically as 'traitors'. Was Thoreau a traitor? How about Mark Twain? Sinclair Lewis? How about Eisenhower? Or Hemingway? Oppenheimer and a large cast of physicists .... traitors all?

IMHO your prejudices are a product of this particular and powerful regime, its educations and propaganda system. I don't mean this as a put-down. I know numerous right wing individuals who are personally very nice and generous. It's not personal. I think if you were in the shoes of a Palestinian, Iranian, Chilean or Angolan for just a few days your perspective would be very very different. And you would see why almost nobody else in the world views America or our government and corporate policies as we are taught to believe.

Regarding the election, yes I am aware of the electoral college. Most people learn about that in junior high, right? I believe that the major recount of the votes in Florida concluded that a recount of the votes in the entire state resulted in a Gore victory. Pathetically this did not come out until nearly a year after the election and that vital conclusion was buried. Conveniently for GW, people were afraid to raise the issue after 9-11.

- Rick Sterling
 
"Does anyone seriously think Iran is going to attack Israel?"
Yes.

"I don't think so."
Speculative.

"If they did, then the world would rightly condemn it."
Comforting.

"But it is not going to happen."
Clairvoyant.
 
North Korea has nukes and are within missile striking distance of Seoul, South Korea, and Tokyo, Japan.
If North Korea uses a nuke on either one of these, the US will obliterate North Korea with as many nukes as it takes to pulverize the place.
Is Kim Jong Il so pathologically stupid?
Maybe.
But just because he is a flamboyant showboater doesn't *necessarily* mean that he would want to personally try out nuclear suicide.

Israel has nukes and is willing to use them.
Iran does not.
Are Iranians pathologically stupid enough to attack Israel and thereby provoke a nuclear response from them?
Maybe.
But just because their leaders are demagogic grandstanders doesn't *necessarily* mean that they would want to personally try out nuclear suicide.

So far, in the history of the world, the only two countries who have been poised on the brink of nuclear madness were the US and the Soviet Union over missiles in Cuba. Call them whatever awful names you wish--evil "liberal" Democrats vs. evil commie tyrants--neither set of leaders was ultimately persuaded to try out nuclear suicide.

Harold Agnew once said that the Nevada Test Site should be reserved once every ten years or so for an above-ground test, to be viewed by the leaders of all the nations in the world (attendance mandatory). They would be given sunglasses and told to strip to their skivvies, and then seated in bleachers about 10 miles from ground zero, to hear the roar and feel the heat and the shock wave. Harold was sure that not one of those pompous, flamboyant grandstanders would ever want to use a nuke on anyone, ever. (The decade interval was meant to assure that even with political changes, there would be a collective remembrance of the last event, as well as Hiroshima and Nagasaki.)

Maybe what the world needs now is just such a history lesson, in case we've forgotten over the last half century. If we go over the nuclear cliff like lemmings, the result will be unpredictable chaos.
 
Brad - thanks for the original posting. Turns out that Hirsch has a large number of interesting and compelling articles. Also interesting that he is physics prof at UCSD and one of (or maybe primary) author of recent petition regarding changes in US nuclear policy.

As a follow-up to your posting of the options for attacks: you mention the restraints on Iran attacking Israel but not the other way around. What are the restraints on Israel or the US from launching first strike against Iran? Hirsch has written much more on this subject. It is not a pretty picture.

Agnew's idea sounds good. Unfortunately 'our leaders' don't even have a realistic picture of common warfare let alone nuclear warfare.
 
Some of my best friends are rightish.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?