ISRAEL can do but not IRAN. Israel does not even a Member of the Nuclear Non – Proliferation Treaty even though it is an open secret that Israel has several warheads pointing at all directions to Muslim countries in the Middle East. US had warned Israel not to attack Iran alone because US want to be an ally joining the fun to destroy Iran as what they had done to Iraq and Afghanistan. Pakistan was lucky because Musharaf gave Bush the air traffic lane to bombard Afghanistan.
Pakistan, however still not secured as US would penetrate slowly but surely on the context that Al Qaeda is in Pakistan and setting bases. The CIA and Mossads are working hard at all borders of Pakistan so that excuses can be created Pakistan to be invaded on the pretext of War on Terror.
Muslims all over the world should realize what’s happening at all Muslims countries and do not easily trapped into the American and Zionist agenda. At the same time, also think of your own country. The hard work of our parents and grandparents toiled and patience to make Malaysia of today can be destroyed within a wink of an eye if we are not rational in our thinking.
War on Terror cannot be eliminated by War with bombs and bullets, what more with nuclear war heads. War on Terror must be approach with round table. Hear what and why and justices must be seen and done. There must be reasons behind any uprisings. There are reasons why people retaliate.
Read on............................
Barrack Hussein Obama.
Hussein?? Sadam Hussein, for what I know was hanged by the American conspiracy.
President Barack Obama managed to avoid Israel’s nuclear program nearly entirely for the high profile nuclear summit, but was unable to successfully dodge a question at the closing press conference about Israel’s non-membership in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Though the bulk of Obama’s talks dealt with securing the weapons grade nuclear stockpiles of such rogue nations as Canada and Chile, when pressed he eventually insisted that he wanted every nation, including Israel to sign the NPT. He also insisted that this position was nothing new.
The cartoon said it all............
Yet in September the Obama Administration vigorously opposed a vote by IAEA member states calling on Israel to join the NPT, calling it unfair to single out Israel, the only nation in the Middle East that is not a signatory.
When the September IAEA vote happened, Israel reacted with official outrage. When in May a US official made comments suggesting that the Obama Administration wanted every nation to join the NPT the Israeli government had a veritable conniption fit, with several officials coming out to publicly condemn the NPT on principle and vow that Israel would never sign it. The Israeli Foreign Ministry even demanded a US “clarification” of the comment.
So far Israel’s government has yet to respond to Obama’s latest call, but the predictable reaction will be negative, as the government is loathe to even admit it has nuclear weapons, let alone to subject them to international oversight.
Obama’s Nuclear-Weapons Conference Fatally Flawed before It Began.
by William Pfaff,
The meeting on nuclear security convoked by Barack Obama this week was meant to prevent nuclear proliferation. This is a worthy cause, but – while I am writing before the meeting closes – I would assume that it will at best produce empty promises, as the meeting itself is fatally flawed. Its conceptual basis is that the United States is a disinterested world leader, calling on others to do what is self-evidently in the general interest. This is not true.
The underlying incitement to nuclear proliferation is the permanent veto exercised over Security Council decisions by the five nuclear-armed permanent members, a result of the Second World War and now widely considered unfair or outdated. It nonetheless is unlikely to change.
The specific inspiration for weapons proliferation (or for countries to achieve "last-stage" status, which is to say a complete technological capacity to produce nuclear weapons, able to be activated if needed) is deterrence.
Japan is thought to possess last-stage status, and many think that this is the status Iran seeks. Israel is an (undeclared) major nuclear power and is determined to remain one. North Korea presents itself as a nuclear-weapons power, and may be one.
The most important force at work among vulnerable third-world states is the desire to have a nuclear deterrent against invasion or attack by the United States (or in the Iran case, Israel), or by some other nation in the future. Iran seeks to protect itself while reestablishing its regional influence. The claim that if it possessed nuclear weapons, it would aggressively attack Israel (or the U.S. or Europe) is mendacious propaganda, since nations, intelligent ones, such as Iran, are not given to committing suicide.
This threat is put about because Israel wishes the United States preemptively to demolish Iran as it already has demolished Iraq. One assumes that Barack Obama, also intelligent, will not do so, and his administration has already gone to great lengths to convince Israel not to attack Iran on its own.
Bush and Ehud Olmert.
Obama and Netanyahu.
Bush / Obama with Ahmadnijad????
At the very least, candidates for proliferation wish to create uncertainty about possession of a nuclear deterrent, even if it consists of a single weapon. (This is one interpretation of the situation of North Korea. Combined with the demonstrated recklessness of the North Korean leadership, it has placed North Korea in a strong enough position vis-à-vis its enemies that it has been able to blackmail them on certain issues.)
As for the threat that President Obama described in calling this meeting, that terrorists would obtain nuclear weapons, this seems to me extremely unlikely, if only because no government possessing these weapons would imagine giving such power to terrorists, or allowing weapons to be stolen. The world would hold them, not the terrorists, responsible for what followed, and they would themselves become the victim of retaliation.
A different problem, complicated by the U.S. itself, might have found a solution at this meeting. Mr. Obama met separately with the leaders of Pakistan and India on Sunday, a day earlier than the plenary meeting. This was because the United States, during the George W. Bush administration, seemed to reward India’s secret introduction of nuclear weapons into South Asia. Pakistan had already followed India’s example, to have a deterrent ready to set against India’s new weapons. There was then, and remains, a Cold-War style balance of terror between the two countries.
Washington, under George W. Bush, granted a special nuclear relationship to India, promising to supply it with technology and fuel to build power plants. This represented a vast change from during the Cold War, when India – which had a "neutralist" policy – was viewed with hostility by the United States.
During this same period, Pakistan was a Cold-War ally of the United States, as it today remains an ally in the Afghanistan war, though influential members of the Pakistani elite had provided other countries with the means for nuclear proliferation.
Now American ally Pakistan is adding to its nuclear facilities so as to be in a position to construct second-generation weapons. When challenged, it replies that since the United States is giving civilian nuclear help to India, it is allowing India to use its existing facilities to build new weapons, which Pakistan must counter. Mr. Bush seems not to have thought about this when making India a new American ally.
It is not only dangerous but grotesque that India and Pakistan should be wasting their resources to enlarge the nuclear dimension in their lethal rivalry of more than 60 years, going back to Partition.
It is not only an unreasonable and quite unnecessary conflict, which steadily has generated wars and hatred, focusing upon the status of Kashmir (whose Hindu prince adhered to India at the time of Partition despite the fact that Kashmir’s population is Muslim). India sent troops to reinstall the prince and suppress the revolt of the Muslim population, subsequently refusing plebiscite and negotiation initiatives.
Solving the Kashmir problem could be more of a benefit to peace than anything else that comes out of Mr. Obama’s conference.
Note: pictures inserted by Pakmus.
No comments:
Post a Comment