What the report didn't say



 Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus > What the report didn't say

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 2

1

 

2

 
Topic: Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus
User: "Perseid"
Date: 03 Apr 2005 08:06:03 PM
Object: What the report didn't say
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=679&ncid=742&e=18
&u=/usatoday/20050401/cm_usatoday/whatthereportdidntsay
Op/Ed - USATODAY.com
What the report didn't say...
Fri Apr 1, 6:16 AM ET
Sometimes the most intriguing news is found in what's left
unsaid. That was certainly true Thursday, as a presidential
commission issued a blistering, if unsurprising, indictment
of U.S. intelligence-gathering in the months leading up to
war in Iraq.
The commission found, as others had, that the nation's spy
agencies were "dead wrong" about Iraq having weapons of mass
destruction. It cited a panoply of failures - from a lack of
spies in the right places to the agencies' tendency to squash
dissenting views. The report describes how the agencies,
unwilling to admit that they lacked hard facts, instead relied
on worthless information, bad assumptions and a key source
who was lying.
Many of the same weaknesses persist today. The agencies "know
disturbingly little about the nuclear programs of many of the
world's most dangerous actors," the commission found.
On a practical level, those findings may help deter any
backsliding on changes already underway to unify the nation's
splintered intelligence system. Those reforms were driven by
an equally scathing report issued by the 9/11 Commission last
August.
More interesting, though, is what's missing from this new
report. The report didn't attempt to connect the intelligence
failures to the fateful decision they encouraged: to go to
war on what proved to be false grounds.
If the report is taken at face value, this was all the fault
of the spy agencies' blundering. The bipartisan commission
found no evidence that intelligence judgments were changed
because of political pressure. The commission chairs, senior
federal Judge Laurence Silberman and former Virginia senator
Charles Robb, reiterated that finding on Thursday.
But in a few telling paragraphs among more than 600 pages, the
panel allowed that some analysts were influenced by the
conventional wisdom, which said Saddam Hussein was hiding an
arsenal, and "the sense that challenges to it - or even
refusals to find its confirmation - would not be welcome."
Little wonder. In the months before the war, Vice President
Cheney said there was "no doubt" Saddam was amassing weapons.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that even "a trained ape"
knew it was true. President Bush repeatedly made the case not
just that war in Iraq was necessary, but that it was urgent.
That is not a climate that would lead anyone to conclude that
facts still needed to be discerned. And it is one that needs
change, beginning at the intelligence agencies.
Even 9/11 and the deaths of more 1,500 U.S. troops in Iraq
haven't budged them from bad habits, particularly refusals
to share information and encourage differing views, the
commission said. The nation's new intelligence czar will need
to knock heads.
For the political leadership, the task is simpler. They need
only leave room for facts to get in the way of their conclusions
- and use war only as a last resort.
.

User: "Su Zanadu"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 03 Apr 2005 09:44:40 PM
Um......the election is over, you know.
We lost! :(
Are we working on his impeachment now?
;)
SuZanne
.
User: "Perseid"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 03 Apr 2005 09:57:16 PM
(Su Zanadu) Spat the Words

Um......the election is over, you know.

We lost! :(

Are we working on his impeachment now?

Good idea. Let's make him hurt. Thanks Suz!


;)

SuZanne


.
User: "Su Zanadu"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 03 Apr 2005 10:22:10 PM

Perseid wrote:
Good idea. Let's make him hurt. Thanks
Suz!

hehehehehe! <evil grin>
SuZanne
.



User: ""

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 04 Apr 2005 06:31:54 PM
Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said they had
precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the more reason to
go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB
.
User: "Perseid"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 04 Apr 2005 10:03:06 PM
"leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au" <leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> Spat the Words

Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said they had
precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the more reason to
go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB


Yes... unlike Iraq, Iran does have an Islamic fundamentalist
government and is making obvious and verifiable progress
toward nuclear bombs. North Korea is a slightly different
story but has its own itchy trigger finger and sometimes
irrational leadership. These two countries are a problem
but I'm sure we don't see everything our intel services see.
.
User: "MonsieurStat"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 05 Apr 2005 06:52:14 AM
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962ED626B93CBrrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au" <leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> Spat the Words

Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said they had
precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the more reason to
go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB



Yes... unlike Iraq, Iran does have an Islamic fundamentalist
government and is making obvious and verifiable progress
toward nuclear bombs.

Who's verifying Iran's nuclear progress towards the bomb? Not the
inspectors!!
Stat.
North Korea is a slightly different

story but has its own itchy trigger finger and sometimes
irrational leadership. These two countries are a problem
but I'm sure we don't see everything our intel services see.

.
User: "Perseid"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 05 Apr 2005 08:16:29 AM
"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962ED626B93CBrrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au" <leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> Spat the Words

Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said they had
precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the more reason to
go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB



Yes... unlike Iraq, Iran does have an Islamic fundamentalist
government and is making obvious and verifiable progress
toward nuclear bombs.


Who's verifying Iran's nuclear progress towards the bomb? Not the
inspectors!!
Stat.

No, there's no inspectors in Iran, just 20,000 Russian
scientists and probably as many covert western operatives
listening to the chatter... also you've got dozens of
remote sensing satellites watching the country, and
hundreds of nuclear and intelligence experts analyzing
the information.


North Korea is a slightly different

story but has its own itchy trigger finger and sometimes
irrational leadership. These two countries are a problem
but I'm sure we don't see everything our intel services see.


.
User: "MonsieurStat"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 05 Apr 2005 06:03:17 PM
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962F4A00FBE2Errfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962ED626B93CBrrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au" <leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> Spat the Words

Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said they had
precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the more reason to
go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB



Yes... unlike Iraq, Iran does have an Islamic fundamentalist
government and is making obvious and verifiable progress
toward nuclear bombs.


Who's verifying Iran's nuclear progress towards the bomb? Not the
inspectors!!
Stat.


No, there's no inspectors in Iran, just 20,000 Russian
scientists and probably as many covert western operatives
listening to the chatter... also you've got dozens of
remote sensing satellites watching the country, and
hundreds of nuclear and intelligence experts analyzing
the information.



North Korea is a slightly different

story but has its own itchy trigger finger and sometimes
irrational leadership. These two countries are a problem
but I'm sure we don't see everything our intel services see.


.

User: "MonsieurStat"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 05 Apr 2005 06:07:41 PM
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962F4A00FBE2Errfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962ED626B93CBrrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au" <leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> Spat the Words

Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said they had
precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the more reason to
go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB



Yes... unlike Iraq, Iran does have an Islamic fundamentalist
government and is making obvious and verifiable progress
toward nuclear bombs.


Who's verifying Iran's nuclear progress towards the bomb? Not the
inspectors!!
Stat.


No, there's no inspectors in Iran, just 20,000 Russian
scientists and probably as many covert western operatives
listening to the chatter... also you've got dozens of
remote sensing satellites watching the country, and
hundreds of nuclear and intelligence experts analyzing
the information.

You've never heard of the extensive on-going inspections of IAEA into Iran's
nuclear program? The head of IAWA almost lost his job because they couldn't
find any shred of evidence of bomb building activities. As for the remote
sensing devices, and intelligence experts, I assure you they are the same
devices and experts who had "sensed" WMD in Iraq.
Stat.



North Korea is a slightly different

story but has its own itchy trigger finger and sometimes
irrational leadership. These two countries are a problem
but I'm sure we don't see everything our intel services see.


.
User: "Perseid"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 05 Apr 2005 10:24:14 PM
"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962F4A00FBE2Errfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962ED626B93CBrrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au" <leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> Spat the
Words

Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said they had
precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the more reason
to go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB



Yes... unlike Iraq, Iran does have an Islamic fundamentalist
government and is making obvious and verifiable progress
toward nuclear bombs.


Who's verifying Iran's nuclear progress towards the bomb? Not the
inspectors!!
Stat.


No, there's no inspectors in Iran, just 20,000 Russian
scientists and probably as many covert western operatives
listening to the chatter... also you've got dozens of
remote sensing satellites watching the country, and
hundreds of nuclear and intelligence experts analyzing
the information.


You've never heard of the extensive on-going inspections of IAEA into
Iran's nuclear program? The head of IAWA almost lost his job because
they couldn't find any shred of evidence of bomb building activities.

I have heard of a large underground facility that could only
be used to refine Uranium (to bomb-making grade, far more than
needed for energy production).

As
for the remote sensing devices, and intelligence experts, I assure you
they are the same devices and experts who had "sensed" WMD in Iraq.

Are you sure they're the same ones ?

Stat.



North Korea is a slightly different

story but has its own itchy trigger finger and sometimes
irrational leadership. These two countries are a problem
but I'm sure we don't see everything our intel services see.





.
User: "MonsieurStat"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 05 Apr 2005 10:37:28 PM
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FD9BBFAA1rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962F4A00FBE2Errfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962ED626B93CBrrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au" <leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> Spat the
Words

Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said they had
precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the more reason
to go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB



Yes... unlike Iraq, Iran does have an Islamic fundamentalist
government and is making obvious and verifiable progress
toward nuclear bombs.


Who's verifying Iran's nuclear progress towards the bomb? Not the
inspectors!!
Stat.


No, there's no inspectors in Iran, just 20,000 Russian
scientists and probably as many covert western operatives
listening to the chatter... also you've got dozens of
remote sensing satellites watching the country, and
hundreds of nuclear and intelligence experts analyzing
the information.


You've never heard of the extensive on-going inspections of IAEA into
Iran's nuclear program? The head of IAWA almost lost his job because
they couldn't find any shred of evidence of bomb building activities.


I have heard of a large underground facility that could only
be used to refine Uranium (to bomb-making grade, far more than
needed for energy production).

I've heard that the 9-11 attacks were fully planned, organised, and
carried-out by the CIA and the Pentagone at the request of the Israelis.

As
for the remote sensing devices, and intelligence experts, I assure you
they are the same devices and experts who had "sensed" WMD in Iraq.


Are you sure they're the same ones ?

Positive. If it looks like a duck, walks like duck, quacks like a duck, it
must be a duck.
Stat.

Stat.



North Korea is a slightly different

story but has its own itchy trigger finger and sometimes
irrational leadership. These two countries are a problem
but I'm sure we don't see everything our intel services see.






.
User: "Perseid"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 05 Apr 2005 11:19:52 PM
"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FD9BBFAA1rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962F4A00FBE2Errfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962ED626B93CBrrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au" <leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> Spat the
Words

Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said they had
precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the more

reason

to go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB



Yes... unlike Iraq, Iran does have an Islamic fundamentalist
government and is making obvious and verifiable progress
toward nuclear bombs.


Who's verifying Iran's nuclear progress towards the bomb? Not the
inspectors!!
Stat.


No, there's no inspectors in Iran, just 20,000 Russian
scientists and probably as many covert western operatives
listening to the chatter... also you've got dozens of
remote sensing satellites watching the country, and
hundreds of nuclear and intelligence experts analyzing
the information.


You've never heard of the extensive on-going inspections of IAEA into
Iran's nuclear program? The head of IAWA almost lost his job because
they couldn't find any shred of evidence of bomb building activities.


I have heard of a large underground facility that could only
be used to refine Uranium (to bomb-making grade, far more than
needed for energy production).


I've heard that the 9-11 attacks were fully planned, organised, and
carried-out by the CIA and the Pentagone at the request of the Israelis.

And this has 'what' to do with the Iranian nuclear facilities ?
The IAEA inspectors were saying the Iranians don't need bomb-grade
uranium for their nuclear power plant... but the Iranians want
the bomb-grade uranium anyway (and you're asking why we're
spying on the Iranians).



As
for the remote sensing devices, and intelligence experts, I assure you
they are the same devices and experts who had "sensed" WMD in Iraq.


Are you sure they're the same ones ?


Positive. If it looks like a duck, walks like duck, quacks like a duck,

it

must be a duck.

Could be a canadian goose (walks like a duck, quacks like a duck)

Stat.




Stat.



North Korea is a slightly different

story but has its own itchy trigger finger and sometimes
irrational leadership. These two countries are a problem
but I'm sure we don't see everything our intel services see.









.
User: "MonsieurStat"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 05 Apr 2005 11:59:30 PM
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FE32ACFC00rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FD9BBFAA1rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962F4A00FBE2Errfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962ED626B93CBrrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au" <leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> Spat the
Words

Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said they had
precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the more

reason

to go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB



Yes... unlike Iraq, Iran does have an Islamic fundamentalist
government and is making obvious and verifiable progress
toward nuclear bombs.


Who's verifying Iran's nuclear progress towards the bomb? Not the
inspectors!!
Stat.


No, there's no inspectors in Iran, just 20,000 Russian
scientists and probably as many covert western operatives
listening to the chatter... also you've got dozens of
remote sensing satellites watching the country, and
hundreds of nuclear and intelligence experts analyzing
the information.


You've never heard of the extensive on-going inspections of IAEA into
Iran's nuclear program? The head of IAWA almost lost his job because
they couldn't find any shred of evidence of bomb building activities.


I have heard of a large underground facility that could only
be used to refine Uranium (to bomb-making grade, far more than
needed for energy production).


I've heard that the 9-11 attacks were fully planned, organised, and
carried-out by the CIA and the Pentagone at the request of the Israelis.


And this has 'what' to do with the Iranian nuclear facilities ?

It's all propoganda my friend.

The IAEA inspectors were saying the Iranians don't need bomb-grade
uranium for their nuclear power plant... but the Iranians want
the bomb-grade uranium anyway (and you're asking why we're
spying on the Iranians).

They're saying they don't want to be limited in their technological
capacities on the *assumption* that they will use that technology to make
atomic bombs. Many countries around the world have these technologies, but
are not making bombs. Iranians are saying us too. Please welcome us to the
nuclear club, we want to play with the other boys. Most of the boys don't
mind, but there is Moose who says, No Iranians Allowed. Iranians say why?
Moose says because you are fundamentalist Muslims bent on destroying our
Liberty and Freedom, and therefore we will deprive you of your freedom to
make sure you don't take away ours.
Stat



As
for the remote sensing devices, and intelligence experts, I assure you
they are the same devices and experts who had "sensed" WMD in Iraq.


Are you sure they're the same ones ?


Positive. If it looks like a duck, walks like duck, quacks like a duck,

it

must be a duck.


Could be a canadian goose (walks like a duck, quacks like a duck)

Stat.




Stat.



North Korea is a slightly different

story but has its own itchy trigger finger and sometimes
irrational leadership. These two countries are a problem
but I'm sure we don't see everything our intel services see.










.
User: "Perseid"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 06 Apr 2005 12:44:26 AM
"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FE32ACFC00rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FD9BBFAA1rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962F4A00FBE2Errfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962ED626B93CBrrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au" <leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> Spat the
Words

Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said they

had

precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the more

reason

to go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB



Yes... unlike Iraq, Iran does have an Islamic fundamentalist
government and is making obvious and verifiable progress
toward nuclear bombs.


Who's verifying Iran's nuclear progress towards the bomb? Not the
inspectors!!
Stat.


No, there's no inspectors in Iran, just 20,000 Russian
scientists and probably as many covert western operatives
listening to the chatter... also you've got dozens of
remote sensing satellites watching the country, and
hundreds of nuclear and intelligence experts analyzing
the information.


You've never heard of the extensive on-going inspections of IAEA into
Iran's nuclear program? The head of IAWA almost lost his job because
they couldn't find any shred of evidence of bomb building activities.


I have heard of a large underground facility that could only
be used to refine Uranium (to bomb-making grade, far more than
needed for energy production).


I've heard that the 9-11 attacks were fully planned, organised, and
carried-out by the CIA and the Pentagone at the request of the

Israelis.


And this has 'what' to do with the Iranian nuclear facilities ?


It's all propoganda my friend.


The IAEA inspectors were saying the Iranians don't need bomb-grade
uranium for their nuclear power plant... but the Iranians want
the bomb-grade uranium anyway (and you're asking why we're
spying on the Iranians).


They're saying they don't want to be limited in their technological
capacities on the *assumption* that they will use that technology to make
atomic bombs.

Those underground enrichment facilities have capacity many
times larger than necessary to provide energy fuel. No *assumption*
is needed. They're planning a whole lot more than energy production.
The mullahs are thumbing their nose at the western powers.

Many countries around the world have these technologies, but
are not making bombs. Iranians are saying us too. Please welcome us to

the

nuclear club, we want to play with the other boys. Most of the boys don't
mind, but there is Moose who says, No Iranians Allowed. Iranians say why?
Moose says because you are fundamentalist Muslims bent on destroying our
Liberty and Freedom, and therefore we will deprive you of your freedom to
make sure you don't take away ours.

Actually Moose doesn't like the instability of totalitarian
regimes in general, and especially dislikes those controlled
by religious extremists, and allowing them nuclear capability
invites disaster. Which world city will be the first to feel
the nuclear fire of Allah ?

Stat




As
for the remote sensing devices, and intelligence experts, I assure

you

they are the same devices and experts who had "sensed" WMD in Iraq.


Are you sure they're the same ones ?


Positive. If it looks like a duck, walks like duck, quacks like a duck,

it

must be a duck.


Could be a canadian goose (walks like a duck, quacks like a duck)

Stat.




Stat.



North Korea is a slightly different

story but has its own itchy trigger finger and sometimes
irrational leadership. These two countries are a problem
but I'm sure we don't see everything our intel services see.













.
User: "MonsieurStat"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 06 Apr 2005 09:49:49 PM
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FF18116A2rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FE32ACFC00rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FD9BBFAA1rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962F4A00FBE2Errfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962ED626B93CBrrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au" <leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> Spat the
Words

Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said they

had

precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the more

reason

to go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB



Yes... unlike Iraq, Iran does have an Islamic fundamentalist
government and is making obvious and verifiable progress
toward nuclear bombs.


Who's verifying Iran's nuclear progress towards the bomb? Not the
inspectors!!
Stat.


No, there's no inspectors in Iran, just 20,000 Russian
scientists and probably as many covert western operatives
listening to the chatter... also you've got dozens of
remote sensing satellites watching the country, and
hundreds of nuclear and intelligence experts analyzing
the information.


You've never heard of the extensive on-going inspections of IAEA into
Iran's nuclear program? The head of IAWA almost lost his job because
they couldn't find any shred of evidence of bomb building activities.


I have heard of a large underground facility that could only
be used to refine Uranium (to bomb-making grade, far more than
needed for energy production).


I've heard that the 9-11 attacks were fully planned, organised, and
carried-out by the CIA and the Pentagone at the request of the

Israelis.


And this has 'what' to do with the Iranian nuclear facilities ?


It's all propoganda my friend.


The IAEA inspectors were saying the Iranians don't need bomb-grade
uranium for their nuclear power plant... but the Iranians want
the bomb-grade uranium anyway (and you're asking why we're
spying on the Iranians).


They're saying they don't want to be limited in their technological
capacities on the *assumption* that they will use that technology to make
atomic bombs.


Those underground enrichment facilities have capacity many
times larger than necessary to provide energy fuel. No *assumption*
is needed. They're planning a whole lot more than energy production.
The mullahs are thumbing their nose at the western powers.

So says Moose, but IAEA disagrees and *capacity* to do something doesn't
automatically mean you would do it. (I am quite sure you have the capacity
to pick up a shot gun and shoot a few of your neighbors. But will you do it?
Should we disallow you to go out of your house because you may decide to go
to a gun shop, pick up a gun and start shooting it at your neighbors?

Many countries around the world have these technologies, but
are not making bombs. Iranians are saying us too. Please welcome us to

the

nuclear club, we want to play with the other boys. Most of the boys don't
mind, but there is Moose who says, No Iranians Allowed. Iranians say why?
Moose says because you are fundamentalist Muslims bent on destroying our
Liberty and Freedom, and therefore we will deprive you of your freedom to
make sure you don't take away ours.


Actually Moose doesn't like the instability of totalitarian
regimes in general, and especially dislikes those controlled
by religious extremists, and allowing them nuclear capability
invites disaster.

Of course, Moose thinks he has patented running totalitarian regimes
controlled by religious extremists.
Which world city will be the first to feel

the nuclear fire of Allah ?

You probably know that the only cities that have felt the nuclear fire are
in Japan.
Iranians have no reason to attack anybody with or without nukes.
Stat.

Stat




As
for the remote sensing devices, and intelligence experts, I assure

you

they are the same devices and experts who had "sensed" WMD in Iraq.


Are you sure they're the same ones ?


Positive. If it looks like a duck, walks like duck, quacks like a duck,

it

must be a duck.


Could be a canadian goose (walks like a duck, quacks like a duck)

Stat.




Stat.



North Korea is a slightly different

story but has its own itchy trigger finger and sometimes
irrational leadership. These two countries are a problem
but I'm sure we don't see everything our intel services see.














.
User: "Perseid"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 06 Apr 2005 10:31:35 PM
"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FF18116A2rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FE32ACFC00rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FD9BBFAA1rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962F4A00FBE2Errfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962ED626B93CBrrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au" <leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> Spat
the Words

Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said
they

had

precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the more

reason

to go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB



Yes... unlike Iraq, Iran does have an Islamic fundamentalist
government and is making obvious and verifiable progress
toward nuclear bombs.


Who's verifying Iran's nuclear progress towards the bomb? Not
the inspectors!!
Stat.


No, there's no inspectors in Iran, just 20,000 Russian
scientists and probably as many covert western operatives
listening to the chatter... also you've got dozens of
remote sensing satellites watching the country, and
hundreds of nuclear and intelligence experts analyzing
the information.


You've never heard of the extensive on-going inspections of IAEA
into Iran's nuclear program? The head of IAWA almost lost his job
because they couldn't find any shred of evidence of bomb building
activities.


I have heard of a large underground facility that could only
be used to refine Uranium (to bomb-making grade, far more than
needed for energy production).


I've heard that the 9-11 attacks were fully planned, organised, and
carried-out by the CIA and the Pentagone at the request of the

Israelis.


And this has 'what' to do with the Iranian nuclear facilities ?


It's all propoganda my friend.


The IAEA inspectors were saying the Iranians don't need bomb-grade
uranium for their nuclear power plant... but the Iranians want
the bomb-grade uranium anyway (and you're asking why we're
spying on the Iranians).


They're saying they don't want to be limited in their technological
capacities on the *assumption* that they will use that technology to
make atomic bombs.


Those underground enrichment facilities have capacity many
times larger than necessary to provide energy fuel. No *assumption*
is needed. They're planning a whole lot more than energy production.
The mullahs are thumbing their nose at the western powers.


So says Moose, but IAEA disagrees and *capacity* to do something doesn't
automatically mean you would do it. (I am quite sure you have the
capacity to pick up a shot gun and shoot a few of your neighbors. But
will you do it?

If I were down-trodden, never had much real power, was a religious
zealot, and felt the world needed to be converted to my belief, then
suddenly had power to kill with impunity, I would be more likely to
use that shotgun than not.
Tell me Stat, how long as Mohammad Khatami been in power ?

Should we disallow you to go out of your house because
you may decide to go to a gun shop, pick up a gun and start shooting it
at your neighbors?


Many countries around the world have these technologies, but
are not making bombs. Iranians are saying us too. Please welcome us to

the

nuclear club, we want to play with the other boys. Most of the boys
don't mind, but there is Moose who says, No Iranians Allowed. Iranians
say why? Moose says because you are fundamentalist Muslims bent on
destroying our Liberty and Freedom, and therefore we will deprive you
of your freedom to make sure you don't take away ours.


Actually Moose doesn't like the instability of totalitarian
regimes in general, and especially dislikes those controlled
by religious extremists, and allowing them nuclear capability
invites disaster.


Of course, Moose thinks he has patented running totalitarian regimes
controlled by religious extremists.

Which world city will be the first to feel

the nuclear fire of Allah ?


You probably know that the only cities that have felt the nuclear fire
are in Japan.

Yes, the first country ever to develop the nuclear weapon was
the US, and we've restrained ourselves from using them for 60
years.

Iranians have no reason to attack anybody with or without nukes.

Iran wants 'The Bomb'. Don't ever try to deny that.
The only thing bombs are good for is to blow things up and
as deterrence. Playing deterrence with the US would be
pointless since we've got 1000 times more nuclear weapons
than Iran will ever have. So who is Iran trying to deter ?

Stat.

Stat




As
for the remote sensing devices, and intelligence experts, I assure

you

they are the same devices and experts who had "sensed" WMD in
Iraq.


Are you sure they're the same ones ?


Positive. If it looks like a duck, walks like duck, quacks like a
duck,

it

must be a duck.


Could be a canadian goose (walks like a duck, quacks like a duck)

Stat.




Stat.



North Korea is a slightly different

story but has its own itchy trigger finger and sometimes
irrational leadership. These two countries are a problem
but I'm sure we don't see everything our intel services see.

















.
User: "MonsieurStat"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 06 Apr 2005 11:14:01 PM
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9630DAFB198A4rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FF18116A2rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FE32ACFC00rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FD9BBFAA1rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962F4A00FBE2Errfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962ED626B93CBrrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au" <leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> Spat
the Words

Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said
they

had

precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the more

reason

to go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB



Yes... unlike Iraq, Iran does have an Islamic fundamentalist
government and is making obvious and verifiable progress
toward nuclear bombs.


Who's verifying Iran's nuclear progress towards the bomb? Not
the inspectors!!
Stat.


No, there's no inspectors in Iran, just 20,000 Russian
scientists and probably as many covert western operatives
listening to the chatter... also you've got dozens of
remote sensing satellites watching the country, and
hundreds of nuclear and intelligence experts analyzing
the information.


You've never heard of the extensive on-going inspections of IAEA
into Iran's nuclear program? The head of IAWA almost lost his job
because they couldn't find any shred of evidence of bomb building
activities.


I have heard of a large underground facility that could only
be used to refine Uranium (to bomb-making grade, far more than
needed for energy production).


I've heard that the 9-11 attacks were fully planned, organised, and
carried-out by the CIA and the Pentagone at the request of the

Israelis.


And this has 'what' to do with the Iranian nuclear facilities ?


It's all propoganda my friend.


The IAEA inspectors were saying the Iranians don't need bomb-grade
uranium for their nuclear power plant... but the Iranians want
the bomb-grade uranium anyway (and you're asking why we're
spying on the Iranians).


They're saying they don't want to be limited in their technological
capacities on the *assumption* that they will use that technology to
make atomic bombs.


Those underground enrichment facilities have capacity many
times larger than necessary to provide energy fuel. No *assumption*
is needed. They're planning a whole lot more than energy production.
The mullahs are thumbing their nose at the western powers.


So says Moose, but IAEA disagrees and *capacity* to do something doesn't
automatically mean you would do it. (I am quite sure you have the
capacity to pick up a shot gun and shoot a few of your neighbors. But
will you do it?


If I were down-trodden, never had much real power, was a religious
zealot, and felt the world needed to be converted to my belief, then
suddenly had power to kill with impunity, I would be more likely to
use that shotgun than not.

Maybe... Still an assumption. But Iran's behavior in the International
Community in past 20 years has nothing to do with what you describe here.
They haven't invaded any countries, haven't sent spies to other countries,
have been paying their debts, are running a good economy, have signed and
respected most International treaties, are a member of the UN and have no
outstanding resolutions against them concerning other countries. Compare
their record with any other country in the region, or if you like just
compare it to Israel, and it is not so hard to see who the real lunetic is.
The oppression of Iranian people at the hands of the Mullahs is a different
subject. The only people who should fear Mullah's nukes are actually
Iranians, and they are backing the Mullah's on this one, because this
question goes beyond politics. It's a question of national independence,
even long term survival. Iranians didn't have a revolution to have goons
tells them what they can or cannot do in their own country.

Tell me Stat, how long as Mohammad Khatami been in power ?

Will be 8 years soon. There are presidential elections in Iran this Summer.
And hopefully the next one (Khatami can't run again) will be more moderate
that him, as he was more moderate than the last one, who was more moderate
than the one before. Moose of course will say that it was because of all the
pressure he exerted on Iran that Iran is becoming more moderate, but we
don't give a *****, as long as he stops bothering us.

Should we disallow you to go out of your house because
you may decide to go to a gun shop, pick up a gun and start shooting it
at your neighbors?


Many countries around the world have these technologies, but
are not making bombs. Iranians are saying us too. Please welcome us to

the

nuclear club, we want to play with the other boys. Most of the boys
don't mind, but there is Moose who says, No Iranians Allowed. Iranians
say why? Moose says because you are fundamentalist Muslims bent on
destroying our Liberty and Freedom, and therefore we will deprive you
of your freedom to make sure you don't take away ours.


Actually Moose doesn't like the instability of totalitarian
regimes in general, and especially dislikes those controlled
by religious extremists, and allowing them nuclear capability
invites disaster.


Of course, Moose thinks he has patented running totalitarian regimes
controlled by religious extremists.

Which world city will be the first to feel

the nuclear fire of Allah ?


You probably know that the only cities that have felt the nuclear fire
are in Japan.


Yes, the first country ever to develop the nuclear weapon was
the US, and we've restrained ourselves from using them for 60
years.

Iranians have no reason to attack anybody with or without nukes.


Iran wants 'The Bomb'. Don't ever try to deny that.
The only thing bombs are good for is to blow things up and
as deterrence. Playing deterrence with the US would be
pointless since we've got 1000 times more nuclear weapons
than Iran will ever have. So who is Iran trying to deter ?

Iran doesn't need nukes to deter the US. They have enough fire power to
deactivate most oil production in the region for a good 5-10 years. This
basically means the end of the world as we know it and guess who will be the
biggest losers in that game? Those who have to most to win from the actual
situation. Let's all keep our fingers crossed and hope that the head lunatic
sitting in Washington doesn't get any new inspirations. Iran is not Iraq and
Afghanistan...
Stat.

Stat.

Stat




As
for the remote sensing devices, and intelligence experts, I assure

you

they are the same devices and experts who had "sensed" WMD in
Iraq.


Are you sure they're the same ones ?


Positive. If it looks like a duck, walks like duck, quacks like a
duck,

it

must be a duck.


Could be a canadian goose (walks like a duck, quacks like a duck)

Stat.




Stat.



North Korea is a slightly different

story but has its own itchy trigger finger and sometimes
irrational leadership. These two countries are a problem
but I'm sure we don't see everything our intel services see.


















.
User: "Perseid"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 07 Apr 2005 12:14:32 AM
"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9630DAFB198A4rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FF18116A2rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FE32ACFC00rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962FD9BBFAA1rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962F4A00FBE2Errfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns962ED626B93CBrrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

"leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au" <leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> Spat
the Words

Yes but the report also ( Ihope it was that one) also said
they

had

precious little on Iran and North Korea, oh well all the
more

reason

to go and look see.
They must have have something to hide.
LB



Yes... unlike Iraq, Iran does have an Islamic fundamentalist
government and is making obvious and verifiable progress
toward nuclear bombs.


Who's verifying Iran's nuclear progress towards the bomb? Not
the inspectors!!
Stat.


No, there's no inspectors in Iran, just 20,000 Russian
scientists and probably as many covert western operatives
listening to the chatter... also you've got dozens of
remote sensing satellites watching the country, and
hundreds of nuclear and intelligence experts analyzing
the information.


You've never heard of the extensive on-going inspections of IAEA
into Iran's nuclear program? The head of IAWA almost lost his
job because they couldn't find any shred of evidence of bomb
building activities.


I have heard of a large underground facility that could only
be used to refine Uranium (to bomb-making grade, far more than
needed for energy production).


I've heard that the 9-11 attacks were fully planned, organised,
and carried-out by the CIA and the Pentagone at the request of the

Israelis.


And this has 'what' to do with the Iranian nuclear facilities ?


It's all propoganda my friend.


The IAEA inspectors were saying the Iranians don't need bomb-grade
uranium for their nuclear power plant... but the Iranians want
the bomb-grade uranium anyway (and you're asking why we're
spying on the Iranians).


They're saying they don't want to be limited in their technological
capacities on the *assumption* that they will use that technology to
make atomic bombs.


Those underground enrichment facilities have capacity many
times larger than necessary to provide energy fuel. No *assumption*
is needed. They're planning a whole lot more than energy production.
The mullahs are thumbing their nose at the western powers.


So says Moose, but IAEA disagrees and *capacity* to do something
doesn't automatically mean you would do it. (I am quite sure you have
the capacity to pick up a shot gun and shoot a few of your neighbors.
But will you do it?


If I were down-trodden, never had much real power, was a religious
zealot, and felt the world needed to be converted to my belief, then
suddenly had power to kill with impunity, I would be more likely to
use that shotgun than not.


Maybe... Still an assumption. But Iran's behavior in the International
Community in past 20 years has nothing to do with what you describe
here. They haven't invaded any countries, haven't sent spies to other
countries, have been paying their debts, are running a good economy,
have signed and respected most International treaties, are a member of
the UN and have no outstanding resolutions against them concerning other
countries. Compare their record with any other country in the region, or
if you like just compare it to Israel, and it is not so hard to see who
the real lunetic is. The oppression of Iranian people at the hands of
the Mullahs is a different subject. The only people who should fear
Mullah's nukes are actually Iranians, and they are backing the Mullah's
on this one, because this question goes beyond politics. It's a question
of national independence, even long term survival. Iranians didn't have
a revolution to have goons tells them what they can or cannot do in
their own country.

Tell me Stat, how long as Mohammad Khatami been in power ?


Will be 8 years soon. There are presidential elections in Iran this
Summer. And hopefully the next one (Khatami can't run again) will be
more moderate that him, as he was more moderate than the last one, who
was more moderate than the one before. Moose of course will say that it
was because of all the pressure he exerted on Iran that Iran is becoming
more moderate, but we don't give a *****, as long as he stops bothering
us.

I'm reading that ultimate power and authority is still vested
in the supreme cleric (starting with Khomeini). Why should we
trust a state that doesn't maintain political leadership ?
Nuclear bombs are too powerful to be controlled by an individual
whose authority can't be questioned.


Should we disallow you to go out of your house because
you may decide to go to a gun shop, pick up a gun and start shooting
it at your neighbors?


Many countries around the world have these technologies, but
are not making bombs. Iranians are saying us too. Please welcome us
to

the

nuclear club, we want to play with the other boys. Most of the boys
don't mind, but there is Moose who says, No Iranians Allowed.
Iranians say why? Moose says because you are fundamentalist Muslims
bent on destroying our Liberty and Freedom, and therefore we will
deprive you of your freedom to make sure you don't take away ours.


Actually Moose doesn't like the instability of totalitarian
regimes in general, and especially dislikes those controlled
by religious extremists, and allowing them nuclear capability
invites disaster.


Of course, Moose thinks he has patented running totalitarian regimes
controlled by religious extremists.

Which world city will be the first to feel

the nuclear fire of Allah ?


You probably know that the only cities that have felt the nuclear fire
are in Japan.


Yes, the first country ever to develop the nuclear weapon was
the US, and we've restrained ourselves from using them for 60
years.

Iranians have no reason to attack anybody with or without nukes.


Iran wants 'The Bomb'. Don't ever try to deny that.
The only thing bombs are good for is to blow things up and
as deterrence. Playing deterrence with the US would be
pointless since we've got 1000 times more nuclear weapons
than Iran will ever have. So who is Iran trying to deter ?


Iran doesn't need nukes to deter the US. They have enough fire power to
deactivate most oil production in the region for a good 5-10 years.

More like, we could blow away large chunks of the earth (to our
own detriment). If any country understands the destructive
power of nuclear weapons it's the US.

This
basically means the end of the world as we know it and guess who will be
the biggest losers in that game? Those who have to most to win from the
actual situation. Let's all keep our fingers crossed and hope that the
head lunatic sitting in Washington doesn't get any new inspirations.
Iran is not Iraq and Afghanistan...

Yes, we all know how much power the US has and which it doesn't
routinely use, but the question I asked was who is such a threat
to Iran that it requires deterrence ? If Iran doesn't require
deterrence then why does it need 'The Bomb' ?

Stat.


Stat.

Stat




As
for the remote sensing devices, and intelligence experts, I
assure

you

they are the same devices and experts who had "sensed" WMD in
Iraq.


Are you sure they're the same ones ?


Positive. If it looks like a duck, walks like duck, quacks like a
duck,

it

must be a duck.


Could be a canadian goose (walks like a duck, quacks like a duck)

Stat.




Stat.



North Korea is a slightly different

story but has its own itchy trigger finger and sometimes
irrational leadership. These two countries are a problem
but I'm sure we don't see everything our intel services see.





















.
User: "MonsieurStat"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 07 Apr 2005 01:53:48 AM
Perseid wrote:
snip...

Yes, we all know how much power the US has and which it doesn't
routinely use, but the question I asked was who is such a threat
to Iran that it requires deterrence ? If Iran doesn't require
deterrence then why does it need 'The Bomb' ?

Deterrence is a completely Western concept, imported now a little all
over the place. Iranians, even the Mullahs, don't think that way. But if
they feel threatened, yes, of course they do. Two of Iran's neighbors,
Russia and Pakistan have nukes. Not far down the road, Israel, a country
with a hideous record is sitting on huge stock piles of nukes. US of
course has enough nukes in the region to destroy the whole ME. So right
here you have four countries with fanatical tendencies and aggressive
policies in possession of nukes. In all fairness, Iran's foreign policy
and record has been much more civilized than any of the above mentioned
countries. So in the best of the worlds and if we want to be very
optimistic, US's containment policy in case of Iran basically comes down
to not allowing it to get nukes just in case they decide to repost if
they get nuked first. A way to keep things under control a little bit...
From Iran's point of view, this is crazy! Because developing an
advanced, independent nuclear technology is essential to Iran's long
term survival. Oil reserves in the world are running very very low. In
2-3 years time the supply will fall short of the demand. It will take
the world a good 7 to 10 years - maybe more - to make the necessary
adjustments. During that time, countries like Iran will have a window of
opportunity to catch up with the industrialized world, by cashing in
revenues from oil sales in the tune of 200+ dollars per barrel. But at
the same time, Iran's own energy demands will increase. If they already
have an independent, advanced nuclear technology in place, they can use
it as the foundation of their industrial infrastructure (the one they
will be building by selling most of their oil). Otherwise they will have
to just sit on that oil for their own use until it runs out. It's
actually quite simple and logical if you filter out all the propaganda
about fanatical Iranians bent on destroying the world. Asking countries
to limit their technological development because they might use it for
bad things, is like asking someone not to use a computer because they
might use it to hack other computers. I don't see any reason why Iran
would want to attack any country, even if they do get the nukes. If it
is for power, the oil will be the most powerful weapon, because money
talks, Cowboys walk.
Stat.
.
User: "Perseid"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 07 Apr 2005 08:29:48 AM
MonsieurStat <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words

Perseid wrote:


snip...

Yes, we all know how much power the US has and which it doesn't
routinely use, but the question I asked was who is such a threat
to Iran that it requires deterrence ? If Iran doesn't require
deterrence then why does it need 'The Bomb' ?



Deterrence is a completely Western concept, imported now a little all
over the place. Iranians, even the Mullahs, don't think that way. But if
they feel threatened, yes, of course they do. Two of Iran's neighbors,
Russia and Pakistan have nukes. Not far down the road, Israel, a country
with a hideous record is sitting on huge stock piles of nukes. US of
course has enough nukes in the region to destroy the whole ME. So right
here you have four countries with fanatical tendencies and aggressive
policies in possession of nukes.

But all those countries have secular leadership. Iran is the
only country whose leader (the supreme cleric) listens only
to his 'feeling' about what Allah wants him to do. You yourself
have said the Iranian mullahs and clerics are crazy. Once again,
why should we trust a country that maintains no political
leadership ?

In all fairness, Iran's foreign policy
and record has been much more civilized than any of the above mentioned
countries. So in the best of the worlds and if we want to be very
optimistic, US's containment policy in case of Iran basically comes down
to not allowing it to get nukes just in case they decide to repost if
they get nuked first.

So far I haven't heard of any US policy with respect to the
Iranian nuclear question (except try to go along with European
diplomacy). Who's assuming now ?

A way to keep things under control a little bit...
From Iran's point of view, this is crazy! Because developing an
advanced, independent nuclear technology is essential to Iran's long
term survival. Oil reserves in the world are running very very low.

Your evidence for this ?

In
2-3 years time the supply will fall short of the demand.

Your evidence for this ?

It will take
the world a good 7 to 10 years - maybe more - to make the necessary
adjustments. During that time, countries like Iran will have a window of
opportunity to catch up with the industrialized world, by cashing in
revenues from oil sales in the tune of 200+ dollars per barrel. But at
the same time, Iran's own energy demands will increase. If they already
have an independent, advanced nuclear technology in place, they can use
it as the foundation of their industrial infrastructure (the one they
will be building by selling most of their oil). Otherwise they will have
to just sit on that oil for their own use until it runs out. It's
actually quite simple and logical if you filter out all the propaganda
about fanatical Iranians bent on destroying the world.

The risk is more about having nuclear weapons controlled by persons
who are in power for life and are answerable to no one. Most Iranians
seem pretty cool and desire a more democratic type government. It's
the top religious establishment that is holding things back. They
tend to shuffle the same people around to different top-level jobs
and they inter-marry to maintain power.

Asking countries
to limit their technological development because they might use it for
bad things, is like asking someone not to use a computer because they
might use it to hack other computers.

Irans history and ties to terror groups like hizbollah would warrant
the denial of nuclear technology. When a person or group has a history
of criminal violence then you do lock him up and deny him certain rights.

I don't see any reason why Iran
would want to attack any country, even if they do get the nukes. If it
is for power, the oil will be the most powerful weapon, because money
talks, Cowboys walk.
Stat.






.
User: "MonsieurStat"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 07 Apr 2005 07:31:00 PM
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns96314C430D4D6rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

MonsieurStat <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words

Perseid wrote:


snip...

Yes, we all know how much power the US has and which it doesn't
routinely use, but the question I asked was who is such a threat
to Iran that it requires deterrence ? If Iran doesn't require
deterrence then why does it need 'The Bomb' ?



Deterrence is a completely Western concept, imported now a little all
over the place. Iranians, even the Mullahs, don't think that way. But if
they feel threatened, yes, of course they do. Two of Iran's neighbors,
Russia and Pakistan have nukes. Not far down the road, Israel, a country
with a hideous record is sitting on huge stock piles of nukes. US of
course has enough nukes in the region to destroy the whole ME. So right
here you have four countries with fanatical tendencies and aggressive
policies in possession of nukes.


But all those countries have secular leadership. Iran is the
only country whose leader (the supreme cleric) listens only
to his 'feeling' about what Allah wants him to do. You yourself
have said the Iranian mullahs and clerics are crazy. Once again,
why should we trust a country that maintains no political
leadership ?

They have been maintaining a very strong political leadership. The Supreme
leader doesn't make that many critical decisions. He determines the general
policy, not according to his "feelings", but by interpreting the Quran. His
role is mainly to watch over the judicial system and the president. Iran is
a theocracy, and as such has to operate within a very specific framework.
The job of the Supreme Leader is to make sure that the framework is
respected.

In all fairness, Iran's foreign policy
and record has been much more civilized than any of the above mentioned
countries. So in the best of the worlds and if we want to be very
optimistic, US's containment policy in case of Iran basically comes down
to not allowing it to get nukes just in case they decide to repost if
they get nuked first.


So far I haven't heard of any US policy with respect to the
Iranian nuclear question (except try to go along with European
diplomacy). Who's assuming now ?

You're wrong. US has outlined a very clear (and aggressive) policy vis-a-vis
Iran. I'll pull up some documents for you when I have a chance. In any case,
you can just listen to CNN and Fox to get an idea about that policy.


A way to keep things under control a little bit...
From Iran's point of view, this is crazy! Because developing an
advanced, independent nuclear technology is essential to Iran's long
term survival. Oil reserves in the world are running very very low.


Your evidence for this ?

In
2-3 years time the supply will fall short of the demand.


Your evidence for this ?

Well, look at the rising oil prices today. Many people attribute this to
what's going on in Iraq, and a few other incedents. But in fact, markets are
moving higher and higher because it looks like the world is actually running
out of oil. There's been a big dispute about this in the oil industry for a
long time; but the Unocal takeover is one example of this. The oil companies
can't find more oil, and so they're buying other companies in order to
increase their reserves. We're facing a structural change in the oil and
energy industry that's likely to be permanent, and that structural change is
that the output cannot keep up with demand; and what you have to add to the
equation is surging demand for oil around the world, especially in the
United States, China, Japan, Europe and India. And the global oil industry
is simply not capable of satisfying this rising level of demand and won't be
so far as we could tell for the rest of the petroleum era. So there's going
to be intense competition. And then you add on top of that political
instability in Venezuela and Nigeria and Angola and Saudi Arabia and Iraq,
and you can understand why prices will just keep going up.

It will take
the world a good 7 to 10 years - maybe more - to make the necessary
adjustments. During that time, countries like Iran will have a window of
opportunity to catch up with the industrialized world, by cashing in
revenues from oil sales in the tune of 200+ dollars per barrel. But at
the same time, Iran's own energy demands will increase. If they already
have an independent, advanced nuclear technology in place, they can use
it as the foundation of their industrial infrastructure (the one they
will be building by selling most of their oil). Otherwise they will have
to just sit on that oil for their own use until it runs out. It's
actually quite simple and logical if you filter out all the propaganda
about fanatical Iranians bent on destroying the world.


The risk is more about having nuclear weapons controlled by persons
who are in power for life and are answerable to no one. Most Iranians
seem pretty cool and desire a more democratic type government. It's
the top religious establishment that is holding things back. They
tend to shuffle the same people around to different top-level jobs
and they inter-marry to maintain power.

You're right about that, and as I said before the oppression of Iranians in
the hand of the Mullahs is not really disputable. However, from the
perspective of the International community, Iran has a government who fully
participates in the UN, respects and follows the rules, has a better overall
record than most it's neighbors, and has basically proven to be of no danger
to anybody. For other countries such as the US to impose a particular form
of government on Iran is pure and simple interventionism.
And as much as I am personally against a theocracy in Iran (as are most
Iranians), or anywhere else for that matter (including the US), I have to
sadly admit that any other form of government in Iran would not have been
able to withstand external and internal pressures after the revolution.The
US gave Iran a very rough ride after the revolution, and it's just a miracle
that the country was able to stay intact. So I guess, as in the case of
Cuba, sure, a theocracy or a communist dictatorship are the last things that
the people want, but they seem to be the only anti-dotes that *sometime*
work against American imperialism.

Asking countries
to limit their technological development because they might use it for
bad things, is like asking someone not to use a computer because they
might use it to hack other computers.


Irans history and ties to terror groups like hizbollah would warrant
the denial of nuclear technology. When a person or group has a history
of criminal violence then you do lock him up and deny him certain rights.

LOL
I guess everything is relative, but by all accounts and any measure of
imagination the US has a much worse record of criminal violence than any
country on earth or history. If we qualify as criminal violence the giving
of a few bucks to a legitimate political party in another country, how are
you going to qualify the long list of extremely violent aggressions of the
US in the past 50 years?
Stat.

I don't see any reason why Iran
would want to attack any country, even if they do get the nukes. If it
is for power, the oil will be the most powerful weapon, because money
talks, Cowboys walk.
Stat.







.
User: "Perseid"

Title: Re: What the report didn't say 07 Apr 2005 10:11:21 PM
"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns96314C430D4D6rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

MonsieurStat <monsieurstat@gmail.com> Spat the Words

Perseid wrote:


snip...

Yes, we all know how much power the US has and which it doesn't
routinely use, but the question I asked was who is such a threat
to Iran that it requires deterrence ? If Iran doesn't require
deterrence then why does it need 'The Bomb' ?



Deterrence is a completely Western concept, imported now a little all
over the place. Iranians, even the Mullahs, don't think that way. But
if they feel threatened, yes, of course they do. Two of Iran's
neighbors, Russia and Pakistan have nukes. Not far down the road,
Israel, a country with a hideous record is sitting on huge stock piles
of nukes. US of course has enough nukes in the region to destroy the
whole ME. So right here you have four countries with fanatical
tendencies and aggressive policies in possession of nukes.


But all those countries have secular leadership. Iran is the
only country whose leader (the supreme cleric) listens only
to his 'feeling' about what Allah wants him to do. You yourself
have said the Iranian mullahs and clerics are crazy. Once again,
why should we trust a country that maintains no political
leadership ?


They have been maintaining a very strong political leadership. The
Supreme leader doesn't make that many critical decisions. He determines
the general policy, not according to his "feelings", but by interpreting
the Quran. His role is mainly to watch over the judicial system and the
president. Iran is a theocracy, and as such has to operate within a very
specific framework.

Yes we know. The Supreme Guardian Council is able to nullify
and make void any legislation, referendum, or election result
which 'they deem' is contrary to islamic law, thus ensuring
there can never be any change to their government... no real
reform can ever happen.
Let's get on this Stat. I want you to go back over there and
kick some mullah butt ! The fate of millions is in your hands.

The job of the Supreme Leader is to make sure that
the framework is respected.


In all fairness, Iran's foreign policy
and record has been much more civilized than any of the above
mentioned countries. So in the best of the worlds and if we want to be
very optimistic, US's containment policy in case of Iran basically
comes down to not allowing it to get nukes just in case they decide to
repost if they get nuked first.


So far I haven't heard of any US policy with respect to the
Iranian nuclear question (except try to go along with European
diplomacy). Who's assuming now ?


You're wrong. US has outlined a very clear (and aggressive) policy
vis-a-vis Iran. I'll pull up some documents for you when I have a
chance. In any case, you can just listen to CNN and Fox to get an idea
about that policy.

I don't watch either of those news channels. Do you have any
reputable sources ? It doesn't really matter. Iran will not
be allowed to get 'the bomb' . The Iranian power structure is
much like the old Christian monarchys... these types of setups
don't serve the people - they serve a few power elite and have
implemented some weirdo's notion of how god's law should pertain
to citizens. It's a system that just doesn't work. The sooner
the mullahs, the high cleric, and supreme council get kicked out
on their butt, the better off everyone will be.



A way to keep things under control a little bit...
From Iran's point of view, this is crazy! Because developing an
advanced, independent nuclear technology is essential to Iran's long
term survival. Oil reserves in the world are running very very low.


Your evidence for this ?

In
2-3 years time the supply will fall short of the demand.


Your evidence for this ?


Well, look at the rising oil prices today. Many people attribute this to
what's going on in Iraq, and a few other incedents.

Could also be due to China.

But in fact, markets
are moving higher and higher because it looks like the world is actually
running out of oil.

Your facts and figures ?

There's been a big dispute about this in the oil
industry for a long time; but the Unocal takeover is one example of
this. The oil companies can't find more oil, and so they're buying other
companies in order to increase their reserves.

Of course there's a finite amount of resources on planet earth
but the exact time frame before we run out of oil is still a
point of disagreement (and those who do know aren't saying).

We're facing a structural
change in the oil and energy industry that's likely to be permanent, and
that structural change is that the output cannot keep up with demand;
and what you have to add to the equation is surging demand for oil
around the world, especially in the United States, China, Japan, Europe
and India.

Yes, and when prices get high enough it will curb consumption
and demand (it's great how these market forces work).

And the global oil industry is simply not capable of
satisfying this rising level of demand and won't be so far as we could
tell for the rest of the petroleum era. So there's going to be intense
competition. And then you add on top of that political instability in
Venezuela and Nigeria and Angola and Saudi Arabia and Iraq, and you can
understand why prices will just keep going up.

No. They will stop somewhere. When energy costs cut too deeply
into peoples' disposable income the demand and usage of it will
decline.



It will take
the world a good 7 to 10 years - maybe more - to make the necessary
adjustments. During that time, countries like Iran will have a window
of opportunity to catch up with the industrialized world, by cashing
in revenues from oil sales in the tune of 200+ dollars per barrel. But
at the same time, Iran's own energy demands will increase. If they
already have an independent, advanced nuclear technology in place,
they can use it as the foundation of their industrial infrastructure
(the one they will be building by selling most of their oil).
Otherwise they will have to just sit on that oil for their own use
until it runs out. It's actually quite simple and logical if you
filter out all the propaganda about fanatical Iranians bent on
destroying the world.


The risk is more about having nuclear weapons controlled by persons
who are in power for life and are answerable to no one. Most Iranians
seem pretty cool and desire a more democratic type government. It's
the top religious establishment that is holding things back. They
tend to shuffle the same people around to different top-level jobs
and they inter-marry to maintain power.


You're right about that, and as I said before the oppression of Iranians
in the hand of the Mullahs is not really disputable. However, from the
perspective of the International community, Iran has a government who
fully participates in the UN,

Stat, the Iraqis and Baghdad Bob were all fully participating
in the UN too... but they were a regime that was corrupt to the
core.

respects and follows the rules, has a
better overall record than most it's neighbors, and has basically proven
to be of no danger to anybody. For other countries such as the US to
impose a particular form of government on Iran is pure and simple
interventionism.

You should expect intervention in this case. The Iranians have