The Obama Effect: 'nuclear diplomacy' edition

Bush and his advisers never did figure out why Putin always seemed to get the best of them

Barack Obama has only been president a week, and already he's had a major success in an area of foreign policy and national security in which Bush found only failure. In response to Obama's assertion that he will review Bush's proposed European missile shield, Vladimir Putin declared that Russia will suspend deployment of nuclear missiles near Kaliningrad. Those missiles had caused our allies in Poland great concern, as Kaliningrad is just just a few miles away from the Polish border.

During the run-up to the 2004 election, challenger John Kerry identified nuclear proliferation as the #1 security threat facing the US, and President Bush agreed. But during his administration, Bush backed out of a non-proliferation deal with North Korea, which responded by tested a nuclear warhead and several nuclear-capable missiles (thankfully, the tests failed and Bush was able to get the Koreans to agree to a deal almost identical to the one Bush had scrapped a couple of years previous).

But the North Korean fiasco was only the most spectacular of Bush's failures with regard to nuclear non-proliferation. Iran responded to Bush's belligerence by stepping up its program to enrich uranium for its civilian nuclear program, a program that could allow Iran to produce weapons-grade nuclear material in the future. Bush's plan to build a useless missile shield in Poland (ostensibly to protect West Europe from Iran's non-existent nuclear missiles) prompted Vladimir Putin to announce a plan to deploy nuclear missiles on the Polish border. And Bush's agreement to share nuclear technology with India, an agreement that violates the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, enraged the leaders of Pakistan and brought the two nuclear powers to the brink of war.

All of this happened while Bush chased after non-existent nuclear weapons in Syria and Iraq. Bush's only success against what he himself called the most serious security threat facing the country came when Moammar Gaddafi of Libya agreed to abandon a weapons development program. That success looks fairly modest in light of the fact that Libya's weapons program doesn't appear to have been anywhere near to bearing fruit.

After all that failure, you have to draw one of two conclusions. Either the task of containing nuclear proliferation is literally impossible, or Bush and his team didn't know what they were doing. And now Obama has answered that question for us by having immediate success that resulted from a reversal of Bush's policy.

***

Most leaders, even aggressive, militaristic leaders like Putin, are willing to engage diplomatically with their rivals and make compromises that are mutually beneficial. Unfortunately, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran isn't among the leaders who are willing to be reasonable. In response to Obama's firm but conciliatory rhetoric, Ahmadinejad demanded that Obama apologize to the Iranian people for past American policies. Presumably, that would mean apologizing for American support of the brutal Shah Mohammad Pahlavi and for the ongoing economic sanctions that continue to hurt Iran's economy.

Demanding an apology for the actions of Obama's predecessors as a condition for opening serious negotiations is obviously an attempt to ensure that such negotiations negotiations ever take place. It's easy to see why Ahmadinejad wants to avoid such negotiations. An American-led sanctions regime has greatly damaged the Iranian economy, but it's also enhanced Ahmadinejad's political stature at home. So on the one hand, it appears that not much has changed with regard to the US/Iran relationship.

But because of his conciliatory approach, Obama is in a much stronger position than Bush was. Under Bush, China and India voraciously consumed Iranian oil, while Russia provided Iran with advanced weaponry, nuclear power technology, and even enriched uranium. But under Obama, Iran is likely to find itself increasingly marginalized by the world community and increasingly unable to avoid engaging in good-faith diplomacy with the US.

(cross posted at appletree)

Bits about Israel, Gaza, White Phosphorous and worse

These first two photos show unmistakable white phosphorous bombs/shells indiscriminately showering down death upon the "caged" Palestinian civilian population.
















All the above Gaza photos are taken within the last 10/12 days - they are NOT from old archives. And many, many, many more are being "transmitted and received" all the time.

This is the truth of what Israel is visiting upon a place they have purposely turned into the most densely populated place on the planet. These poor people have nowhere to run to.

Can you even roughly estimate how much more murder and mayhem has ensued - just since you started looking at these photos? Can you?

PLEASE HELP by passing this on - and on - and on and...

(Cross posted across at 'appletree')

Analysts Dispute Photos of Alleged Syrian Nuclear Facility

If it turns out that the Bush administration is faking evidence of WMD in order to justify a war, it won't be for the first time.

Ever since Israel bombed a site they claimed was a nuclear reactor inside Syria, the Bush administration cited the facility as evidence that Syria is pursuing nuclear weapons, and that North Korea is providing the necessary technology (link). We're told that recently-declassified photos prove that if Israel had not destroyed the facility, it would soon be making bomb-grade nuclear material. Now, North Korea's own nuclear device didn't work, so it's hard to see how they could provide Syria with a usable weapon. But forget the details-- we've got sabers to rattle!

Unfortunately for the warmongers in the Bush administration, it looks like the their smoking gun is a fake:

The CIA published three aerial photographs last week purporting to show a Syrian nuclear reactor, bombed by Israel last September. But are the pictures all that they seem? Doubts about their authenticity have been raised by Professor William Beeman, head of anthropology at the University of Minnesota, who has had a long involvement with the Middle East.

He posted on a Los Angeles Times website a note received from a "colleague with US security clearance" pointing out "irregularities". The unnamed colleague said a picture taken before the bombing looked as if it had been digitally enhanced, noting that the lower part of the building, the annexe and the windows pointing south appeared much sharper than the rest.

He also questioned why the alleged reactor had no air defences, no military checkpoints and no powerlines. Turning to two shots of the bombed building, he noted that the first showed a rectangular building and the second a square one. Were they the same building?

In fact, one of the photos looks so unreal that it's hard to believe that the administration tried to pass if off as genuine:



Here's what the LA Times' blogger has to say about it:

The lower part of the building, the annex, and the windows pointing south appear much sharper than the rest of the photo, suggesting that they were digitally improved.

The author points to more questions about the photographs of the Syrian site.

1. Satellite photos of the alleged reactor building show no air defenses or anti-aircraft batteries such as the ones found around the Natanz nuclear site in central Iran.

2. The satellite images do not show any military checkpoints on roads near the building.

3. Where are the power lines? The photos show neither electricity lines or substations.

4. Here is a link to a photo of the North Korean facility that the Syrian site was based on. Look at all the buildings surrounding it. The Syrian site was just one building.

So it looks like Bush is trying to lie us into a war yet again. And at the same time, the administration is pursuing a policy that will ensure that one day an unfriendly Middle Eastern nation will have nuclear weapons. Because in the end, it matters little whether Syria, Iran, or any other country in the region is currently pursuing nuclear weapons. As long as Israel remains the only nuclear power in the region, Israel's neighbors will periodically embark on programs to manufacture nuclear weapons of their own. And one of these days, despite our efforts, they will succeed.

The first step toward ensuring that Syria and Iran don't develop nuclear weapons, then, is to persuade Israel to disarm. Naturally, Barack Obama is the only candidate with a foreign policy adviser who's honest enough to state the obvious:

Israel should give up its nuclear weapons to ensure Iran halts its illicit nuclear program, argues an adviser on nuclear issues to Sen. Barack Obama.

Joseph Cirincione, director of nuclear policy at the Center for American Progress, also previously dismissed reports Israel's Sept. 6 airstrike targeted a Syrian nuclear reactor as "nonsense" and called Damascus' nuclear program "miniscule."

Immediately following Israel's air raid, Cirincione listed "Israelis [who] want to thwart any dialogue between the U.S. and Syria" as among those spreading rumors Syria was constructing a nuclear facility.

Cirincione was commenting on a Sept. 13 Washington Post story about possible links between Syria and North Korea.

(cross posted at Liberal Avenger and appletree)

Special: US & UK War Crimes: Sick, Shock And Shame Edition ...

*

Here's how we feel right now.



Today, we tried to run before we could walk, so to speak.

You know, we overdid things -- proper post-op recouperation period -- and all that palava.

Crazy couple of creaking codgers -- we should have more sense at our age. After all, we're damned well old enough to know better than to (try) do what we did.

Anyway, the result was a bit of a relapse.

But now, tonight, we're even sicker. And shocked. And ashamed.

Wondering why?

Well, here's one reason why.

And here's another reason why.



So, as we said -- sick, shocked, ashamed.

But enough of us for now.

How are you feeling?

Better or worse than you felt before following our links?

*(Cross posted at Appletree)

Oh, Shit! Israel Suddenly Starts Shouting About America's New Iran Intelligence Report ...

*

Oh, shit!

Oh, no!



Just one day ago we finished our piece on the sudden American U-Turn re: their latest Iranian intelligence, with the sentence shown below.

Seriously, from where we're sitting this sudden turn of events smells strangely fishy, and we strongly suspect it's merely the first chapter of a distinctly new yarn story, as is yet to be told.

Just minutes ago we read this.

JERUSALEM - A U.S. intelligence assessment that Iran has stopped developing atomic weapons is putting a burden on the Jewish state, which has long relied on Washington to lead the international charge against Iran's nuclear ambitions.

With the U.S. now less likely to take military action, an increasingly nervous Israel might feel compelled to strike out on its own if it perceives a dangerous threat.

Israeli officials say their intelligence forces believe Iran is still working aggressively to build nuclear arms.

(snip)

In 1981 Israeli warplanes penetrated deep into Iraq to destroy an unfinished nuclear reactor near Baghdad to prevent its use in a weapons program.

Israel has since taken delivery of about 80 aircraft fitted with long-range fuel tanks that would allow them to reach Iran, and it has acquired three German-built submarines reportedly capable of firing nuclear-armed missiles, with two more under construction.

Read the rest of this brand NEW, VERY worrying report.

Please, someone, anyone, anywhere ... for God's sakes, say it isn't so.

*

G.W. Bush & Co - Worldwide Warmongers - The Most Popular YouTube Video Ever

Ten thousand thanks to regular reader, commenter, brother Brit and blogger buddy R.J. Adams of Sparrowchat for pointing us toward the most popular 'YouTube' video ever -- anywhere and everywhere.



And still these lying liars get away with it. Even after all this time.

What in the world is the matter with us all?

Our question of course is rhetorical. We wouldn't want any among us standing up, speaking out, being counted and incriminating ourselves, would we?

After all, isn't aiding and abetting criminals to commit crimes a crime in itself?

As we said before - the question posed is purely rhetorical.

So, it's best for all concerned if nobody bothers offering any answers.

Eh?

After all, maybe sometime, somewhere, some of us will stumble upon some sort of soft hearted god who'll forgive us.

Eh?

Btw, don't answer that one either.

Weapons Of Mass Destruction Are All Around America ...

After all the blood spilled, limbs lost, tears shed, and time, money and lives spent wasted searching for hidden WMDs in far off Iraq, it turns out there's an absolute bloody abundance of the buggers 'laying low' all around America.

Moreover, they're much, much closer to home than most folk could ever have imagined.

Quickly cast you eyes across this quote clipped from 'Crooks and Liars'.

It is no secret that the U.S. military has used the ocean as trashcan for munitions in the past. Peter discussed at the Old DSN how federal lawmakers were pressing the US Army to reveal everything it knows about a massive international program to dump chemical weapons off homeland and foreign shores.

“The Army now admits that it secretly dumped 64 million pounds of nerve and mustard agents into the sea, along with 400,000 chemical-filled bombs, land mines and rockets and more than 500 tons of radioactive waste - either tossed overboard or packed into the holds of scuttled vessels.”

Read all about this real and present terror-threat, right here.

We think that to say something stinks here is a understatement -- of massive measure.

But hey, we can almost hear some (suckers) say, the US government's a very busy bunch of guys.

Right?

You know, what with cleaning up & clearing out all the evils of the wicked, wider world and all.

Eh?

Well, we still say something stinks - to high heaven - about this shocking sort of sickening and literally poisonous 'homegrown' shit.

After all, as far as we're aware neither successive American administrations nor the high & mighty crooks and liars of the Military Industrial Complex ever did damn well own either the Atlantic or Pacific ocean. Well, did they it?

Aren't the planet's life giving (and sustaining), waters as just much yours and ours as theirs? And what about our kids and grand kids?

Furthermore, this scandalous state of affairs isn't down to just America's military & political masters. Since, just the same as the seas 'assaulted', this genuine terror threat neither respects nor indeed recognises any borders at all. Least of all it's own.

We bet that you - like ourselves - always thought all those scary sea monster stories were simply silly science fiction, eh?

Then try telling that to your young ones today - with your hand on your heart (or your Bible), and in all clear conscience.


Btw, we bet a lot of old Marines, soldiers and sailors will believe you -- even if the little ones are loathe to.