Iran: novi front

[ManicMiner]

Stjuart, kao i obicno, mocno:

 

“The in-chamber response to this speech was by far the longest blowjob a Jewish man has ever received.”

 

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/04/jon_stewart_destroys_netanyahu_over_speech_to_congress/

[WTF]

Jos bolji je bio preksinoc http://on.cc.com/1Afftf9

[Prospero]

The Opinion Pages | Op-Ed Contributor

 

To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran

 

By JOHN R. BOLTON

MARCH 26, 2015

 

 

 

FOR years, experts worried that the Middle East would face an uncontrollable nuclear-arms race if Iran ever acquired weapons capability. Given the region’s political, religious and ethnic conflicts, the logic is straightforward.

 

As in other nuclear proliferation cases like India, Pakistan and North Korea, America and the West were guilty of inattention when they should have been vigilant. But failing to act in the past is no excuse for making the same mistakes now. All presidents enter office facing the cumulative effects of their predecessors’ decisions. But each is responsible for what happens on his watch. President Obama’s approach on Iran has brought a bad situation to the brink of catastrophe.

 

In theory, comprehensive international sanctions, rigorously enforced and universally adhered to, might have broken the back of Iran’s nuclear program. But the sanctions imposed have not met those criteria. Naturally, Tehran wants to be free of them, but the president’s own director of National Intelligence testified in 2014 that they had not stopped Iran’s progressing its nuclear program. There is now widespread acknowledgment that the rosy 2007 National Intelligence Estimate, which judged that Iran’s weapons program was halted in 2003, was an embarrassment, little more than wishful thinking.

 

Even absent palpable proof, like a nuclear test, Iran’s steady progress toward nuclear weapons has long been evident. Now the arms race has begun: Neighboring countries are moving forward, driven by fears that Mr. Obama’s diplomacy is fostering a nuclear Iran. Saudi Arabia, keystone of the oil-producing monarchies, has long been expected to move first. No way would the Sunni Saudis allow the Shiite Persians to outpace them in the quest for dominance within Islam and Middle Eastern geopolitical hegemony. Because of reports of early Saudi funding, analysts have long believed that Saudi Arabia has an option to obtain nuclear weapons from Pakistan, allowing it to become a nuclear-weapons state overnight. Egypt and Turkey, both with imperial legacies and modern aspirations, and similarly distrustful of Tehran, would be right behind.

 

Ironically perhaps, Israel’s nuclear weapons have not triggered an arms race. Other states in the region understood — even if they couldn’t admit it publicly — that Israel’s nukes were intended as a deterrent, not as an offensive measure.

 

Iran is a different story. Extensive progress in uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing reveal its ambitions. Saudi, Egyptian and Turkish interests are complex and conflicting, but faced with Iran’s threat, all have concluded that nuclear weapons are essential.

 

The former Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Turki al-Faisal, said recently, “whatever comes out of these talks, we will want the same.” He added, “if Iran has the ability to enrich uranium to whatever level, it’s not just Saudi Arabia that’s going to ask for that.” Obviously, the Saudis, Turkey and Egypt will not be issuing news releases trumpeting their intentions. But the evidence is accumulating that they have quickened their pace toward developing weapons.

 

Saudi Arabia has signed nuclear cooperation agreements with South Korea, China, France and Argentina, aiming to build a total of 16 reactors by 2030. The Saudis also just hosted meetings with the leaders of Pakistan, Egypt and Turkey; nuclear matters were almost certainly on the agenda. Pakistan could quickly supply nuclear weapons or technology to Egypt, Turkey and others. Or, for the right price, North Korea might sell behind the backs of its Iranian friends.

 

The Obama administration’s increasingly frantic efforts to reach agreement with Iran have spurred demands for ever-greater concessions from Washington. Successive administrations, Democratic and Republican, worked hard, with varying success, to forestall or terminate efforts to acquire nuclear weapons by states as diverse as South Korea, Taiwan, Argentina, Brazil and South Africa. Even where civilian nuclear reactors were tolerated, access to the rest of the nuclear fuel cycle was typically avoided. Everyone involved understood why.

 

This gold standard is now everywhere in jeopardy because the president’s policy is empowering Iran. Whether diplomacy and sanctions would ever have worked against the hard-liners running Iran is unlikely. But abandoning the red line on weapons-grade fuel drawn originally by the Europeans in 2003, and by the United Nations Security Council in several resolutions, has alarmed the Middle East and effectively handed a permit to Iran’s nuclear weapons establishment.

 

The inescapable conclusion is that Iran will not negotiate away its nuclear program. Nor will sanctions block its building a broad and deep weapons infrastructure. The inconvenient truth is that only military action like Israel’s 1981 attack on Saddam Hussein’s Osirak reactor in Iraq or its 2007 destruction of a Syrian reactor, designed and built by North Korea, can accomplish what is required. Time is terribly short, but a strike can still succeed.

 

Rendering inoperable the Natanz and Fordow uranium-enrichment installations and the Arak heavy-water production facility and reactor would be priorities. So, too, would be the little-noticed but critical uranium-conversion facility at Isfahan. An attack need not destroy all of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, but by breaking key links in the nuclear-fuel cycle, it could set back its program by three to five years. The United States could do a thorough job of destruction, but Israel alone can do what’s necessary. Such action should be combined with vigorous American support for Iran’s opposition, aimed at regime change in Tehran.

 

Mr. Obama’s fascination with an Iranian nuclear deal always had an air of unreality. But by ignoring the strategic implications of such diplomacy, these talks have triggered a potential wave of nuclear programs. The president’s biggest legacy could be a thoroughly nuclear-weaponized Middle East.

 

 

John R. Bolton, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, was the United States ambassador to the United Nations from August 2005 to December 2006.

 

poslednji bold je mogući ishod, na žalost, na stranu ludovanje teksta.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Prospero

[Lord Protector]

Bolton je beše onaj jastreb među neokonima?

Edited March 31, 2015 by slow

[Prospero]

šta je "jastreb među neokonima"? :D

 

da, recimo

[Lord Protector]

jastreb na steroidima bi bilo bolje

 

On i Srđa Trifković su imali nekih dodirnih tačaka, ne znam da li je pisao za Chronicles...

Edited March 31, 2015 by slow

[Prospero]

Iranian journalist seeks political asylum at nuclear talks

DUBAI

 

(Reuters) - An Iranian journalist who previously served as a media advisor to President Hassan Rouhani has sought political asylum in Switzerland where he was reporting on Iran's nuclear negotiations, Iranian news websites reported.

 

Iranian news website Tabnak named the journalist as Amir Hossein Motaghi, who helped Rouhani to his landslide win in the 2013 presidential elections.

 

Britain's Daily Telegraph quoted Motaghi complaining about censorship, saying he could "only write what he was told".

 

"My conscience would not allow me to carry out my profession in this manner any more," the Telegraph reported him as telling IraneFarda, an opposition news website based in London.

 

Motaghi was in Lausanne covering the nuclear talks for the Iran Student Correspondents Association (ISCA) but that organization said it had now ended its relationship with him.

 

"Following reports of a known person seeking asylum ... ISCA informed the (Iranian foreign) ministry it had cut all ties with this individual," the ministry said in a statement cited by Iran's Fars news agency.

 

The Swiss authorities declined to comment.

 

"For reasons of protecting personal data, we never give any information about individual cases," said Celine Kohlprath, spokeswoman of the Swiss state secretariat for migration.

 

 

(Reporting by Sam Wilkin; additional reporting by Stephanie Nebehay in Geneva; editing by Robin Pomeroy)

 

[Roger Sanchez]

 

Edited April 2, 2015 by Roger Sanchez

[Prospero]

jedva čekam reakciju GOP47 :D

[Roger Sanchez]

Čekaaaaj, neće se oni niđe pokretat dok im Bibi svima ne podijeli radne zadatke

 

 

e!: Opaaa

 

Iranci zbilja dali sve od sebe da ovo bude probavljivo..

Edited April 2, 2015 by Roger Sanchez

[Prospero]

Brookings FP ‏@BrookingsFP · 2m2 minutes ago

EU's Mogherini says Arak to be redesigned with international help. No reprocessing. UN will review sanctions. #IranTalks

Adam Nima Pourahmadi ‏@ANPour · 3m3 minutes ago

EU will terminate all economic and nuclear sanctions and the US will terminate all similar sanctions as the IAEA verifies #IranTalks

 

 

 

 

pretty good day :)

Edited April 2, 2015 by Prospero

[Roger Sanchez]

Počelo slikavanje

[Roger Sanchez]

Odlična Barryjeva prezentacija.

[borris_]

Dvije najvece svjetske sile na suprotnim stranama, pudlice odma do njih, pa onda wanabe svijetske sile i u sredini uljez.

[MancMellow]

pretty good day :)

 

+1