First a couple of definitions:
Proliferate: rapid reproduction; reproducing freely; multiply; increase in number or extent
Treaty: agreement or arrangement made by negotiation; a document in which a contract of such (between to political authorities) is put down.
They questioned the timing of the reports, coming just ahead of key six-party talks
How Dare They--they should have waited until AFTER the talks to let the world know what's happening in Syria! How Dare they try to head all this off at the pass!
"There is supposed to be an effort by some officials to torpedo the...nuclear deal by portraying North Korea as a 'proliferator,'" said Joseph Cirincione, a weapons expert, who was once a key advisor to Congress.
Ohhh yeah! We all know what a great job the advisors to Congress have been! No, N. Korea isn't stock piling? How could they be....its all on Syria's lands? Its the IRS dodgers of the nuclear weapons industry....or maybe its more like "money laundering" only with nuclear devises.
He likened the reports to those that surfaced in the run up to the...invasion of Iraq in 2003 during which officials provided apparently incorrect intelligence information about...Hussein's...weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
Yeah the reports that the UN sat on for 18 months while Syria and Saddam got them the heck out of there; you will never convince me that he didn't have them or had intent to use them...ask any Kurd or Kwaiti.
(D.C.) for decades has accused North Korea, which carried out a nuclear weapons test in October 2006, of WMD proliferation. US officials have charged Syria with bankrolling terrorism groups in the Middle East.
"for decades"...why that puts it way before President Bush's time in office....in fact, that puts it into Clinton's timeline if not a tad farther back....but never mind the facts of the matter. Actually looking at the paragraph makes one wonder why these two sentences were put together unless the writer wanted the readers to take from it that North Korea should be considered, or rather that D.C. for decades has considered, them to be a terrorist group. Sorry I don't see the connection....one doesn't necessarily mean the other, nor have I heard it come out of D.C. as such
"The potential nexus between WMD and terrorism is the biggest threat to the security of the US and its allies," said the conservative opinion page of the Wall Street Journal on Friday...
WSJ has a conservative opinion page? Funny I don't remember ever seeing that--I thought it was just an Opinion page. Silly me. Oh, and the link of terrorism and WMD--No f-ing DUH!!
"If North Korea is moving its nuclear facilities to Syria -- or 'merely' proliferating -- it would undermine everything at the heart of that (aid-for-disarmament) agreement, as well as cross a long-stated American red line..."
"aid for disarmament"...that's poli-speak for "Hush Money"....we pay them, they stop making the bombs....right....until they need more money again.
The evidence of the North Korea-Syrian links include satellite imagery....Israel reconnaissance flights over Syria took pictures of possible nuclear installations that Israeli officials believed might have been supplied with material from North Korea...
Wait a minute....why are we going by what Isreali officials believe? Isn't this what started the fuss over the info we got about Saddam??
The Syrian nuclear program has been around for 40 years, Cirincione said.
"It is a basic research program built around a tiny 30 kilowatt reactor that produced a few isotopes and neutrons. It is no where near a program for nuclear weapons or nuclear fuel," he said.
Wait so let me get this straight...they have a nuclear reactor that does what then if it can't even make nuclear fuel....or perhaps "nuclear fuel" is not the same as "nuclear power"....I don't know, I'm not a nuclear scientist (query: do nuclear scientists radiate?)
Over a dozen countries have helped Syria develop its nuclear program, including Belgium, Germany, Russia, China and even the United States, by way of training of scientists, he said.
"If North Korea gave them anything short of nuclear weapons, it's of little consequence," Cirincione said.
Little consequence??? You have got to be shitting me! Since when is the hiding of nuclear intent or abilities of a country of "little consequence"....my gods! That's like saying that the authorities shouldn't procecute someone who hides an alleged criminal because its of "little consequence"....no, it is of significant consequence because we need to deter countries from hiding their abilities or intent.
Most people set this up as "why can we have weapons and other countries not?"...to me its a simple answer of "because they may not have the knowledge of what to do in an emergency situation or they may not be of the mind set to ask for help. If a country is hiding the fact that it has a refinery in its country, then when something goes significantly wrong (say a major melt-down or spillage) they are less likely to ask for help or report damage to the enviroment {ozone layer, cough, cough} for fear of letting the world know what's going on.
The world powers seem to be run by a group of school children afraid to hold up their hands to ask questions for fear of looking stupid in front of the rest of the class...you know what? Its really true that the only dumb question is the one that isn't asked. Okay, maybe "What did you name the other one?"....I'll post that joke here in a second :-)
Click to join MonthlyDishcloths
No comments:
Post a Comment