Text 14706, 108 rader
Skriven 2007-05-17 21:43:41 av Vorlonagent (1118.babylon5)
     Kommentar till en text av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Ärende: Re: unions
==================

"Josh Hill" <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:ov9p43du7go9ieetlj5lclhaprqja24hv9@4ax.com...

Unfortunately, with the data they have from the test, I doubt that a
second one would fail. It really isn't all that hard to build nuclear
weapons, now that the design information is available. The fuel is the
hard part, and they've mastered that.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Untrue.  A plutonium bomb casing is VERY difficult.  That's *why* K got a 
pop and not a boom.  Whereas with a uranium bomb it's the refining that's 
the hard part.

NK no doubt got some useful information from their "pop" but until they 
test, they don't know if they have it right.


>If you want to link the three events, I'd love to see a srtong enough link
>to overpower the regional factors.

It's also been argued that the negotiations leading to Libya's
downfall were underway before the invasion of Iraq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sure they were.  it's not like Khadaffy just decided to pick up the 
phone.  He decided to take the deal he was offerred.


That being said, I continue to believe that Iraq and the Axis of Evil
speech were primarily responsible for the developments in all three
countries. There are always diplomatic overtures in progress, and
countries toying with nukes. What Bush did, I think, is instill
genuine fear in these three regimes, and that pushed them into
exercising their available options -- surrender on the part of
Qadaffi, who seems to be a coward at heart (cf. his response to
Reagan's assassination attempt), and the threat of nuclearization on
the part of Iran and North Korea.

To put this in perspective, one of the objectives of Iran's peace
proposal was removal from the Axis of Evil:

'In the master document, Iran talks about ensuring "full transparency"
and other measures to assure the U.S. that it will not develop nuclear
weapons. Iran offers "active Iranian support for Iraqi stabilization."
Iran also contemplates an end to "any material support to Palestinian
opposition groups" while pressuring Hamas "to stop violent actions
against civilians within" Israel (though not the occupied
territories). Iran would support the transition of Hezbollah to be a
"mere political organization within Lebanon" and endorse the Saudi
initiative calling for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
...and you believe them?



'Iran also demanded a lot, including "mutual respect," abolition of
sanctions, access to peaceful nuclear technology and a U.S. statement
that Iran did not belong in the "axis of evil." Many crucial issues,
including verification of Iran's nuclear program, needed to be
hammered out.'

http://watandost.blogspot.com/2007/05/us-iran-relations-missed-opportunities.html


It's easy to underestimate how fearsome we are: even with the army
near its breaking point, we could take out Iran and North Korea in the
blink of an eye, and they know it. From their perspective, the
acquisition of nuclear weapons -- or the threat of acquiring nuclear
weapons -- was a logical step.
-------------------------------------------------------------

so is deneying them those weapons.


But -- and this is where I think the Adminstration let us down:

'Instead, Bush administration hard-liners aborted the process. Another
round of talks had been scheduled for Geneva, and Ambassador Zarif
showed up - but not the U.S. side. That undermined Iranian moderates.

My jaw fairly dropped when I read that.
-----------------------------------------------

You could only be disappointed if you thought the Iranians were being 
genuine.

You're projecting your own viewpoint onto the Iranians.


-- 
Q: There's a lot of debate right now over the best way to communicate about 
global warming and get people motivated. Do you scare people or give them 
hope? What's the right mix?

Gore: I think the answer to that depends on where your audience's head is. 
In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of 
unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any 
discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don't 
think there's a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is 
appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how 
dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to 
what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve 
this crisis.

Al Gore, Grist Magazine, 2006
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)