What nonsense? You are the idiot that implied Iran had no interest in building a bomb because of some bullshit fatwa. Still not sure what that has to do with the USSR and now Russia viewing the US as a rival. Which is the original topic.
Since we’re going to call people names, idiot, you asked Lixy directly about Iran and nuclear weapons. Your right, Iran has little to do with Russia, or gay people, which you brought up.
Maybe you could stay on topic also.
Dustin[/quote]
It looks like you are having a hard time following the thread. If you would like me to lay it out for you I will but I will not waste my time if you are not interested.
They kept us at arms length and blackmailed us into giving them billions or else they would “accidentally” lose nuclear weapons to terrorists.
If I point a gun at your head will you pay me and thank me for the privilege? quote]
… and the parting point of the book: post-A.Q.Khan the proliferation continues with your newly-“elected” president of? … Pakistan, in charge.
Deception: Pakistan, the United States, and the Secret Trade in Nuclear Weapons
“Most global terrorist plots since 9/11 can be traced back to these areas. And Pakistan’s military regime, not Iran, has been the main source of rogue nuclear proliferation. It is therefore the U.S. partnership with military rulers in Pakistan that has been and is the problem, not the solution.”
“The Bush administration’s nightmare scenario – the convergence of terrorism and nuclear weapons – is happening right now, and in Pakistan, not in Iraq or Iran.”
Why are you quoting me? What is your point? How does this relate to the topic or are you merely pointing out that an Islamic country developing the bomb is a bigger danger than than Russia?
If that is your point I agree.
Has it occurred to Zap that the Russians know who caused their defeat in Afghanistan, and that for the problem that Pakistan has become may become another Vietnam for the U.S. Some in Russia may find that poetic?
Knowledge of the proliferation has been around for over a decade in spite of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. You would do well to read the book I referenced. There are more dimensions to this than streamlining Zap’s thread experience on T-Nation.
Focus on this Zap: prollferation by Pakistan is on-going by our ally in the “War on Terror”.
You seem to be rambling here.[/quote]
Owned.
Cheerleaders, crowd-workers, Brown Shirts, and NSA agents. Any others I’ve missed?
Conserva-boys, as championed by Zap in this particular thread: it’s time to man-up and admit your president has had knowledge of Pakistan’s nuclear proliferation activities since the beginning of his first term AND that it continues to this day. The “War on Terror” is phony and has made the world a much more dangerous place. The “War on Terror” is coup government.
Cheerleaders, crowd-workers, Brown Shirts, and NSA agents. The conserva-boys of T-Nation are as phony as Bush’s “War on Terror”.
[quote]Damici wrote:
Imagine if the Russians said they were going to install a “defensive missile shield” in the Dominican Republic to defend their friend Cuba against possible missile threats from Chile. That’s how fucking stupid that is. Literally.
[/quote]
Damici, you make some excellent points. I must point out that a similar situation to the above has already occured.
It was called the “Cuban Missile Crisis”. Basically after the US had launched the “Bay of Pigs” the year before, the sovereign nation of Cuba decided to erect weapons with the help of Russians. The US blockaded Russian vessels going into Cuba.
My point is not to defend Cuba or the Soviet Union/Russia. However, it is to support what I understand Damici to have said: that the US doesn’t like people meddling in its own back yard but has no problem meddling EVERYWHERE in the world. Neo-cons like to always talk about “American Exceptionalism”. Well, to use the term slightly different from them, somehow the American govt often likes to make an exception of its own meddling-it always has a GOOD REASON- and points the finger at anybody else who does the same or who gets angry about US meddling.
[quote]Limbic wrote:
…
Conserva-boys, as championed by Zap in this particular thread: it’s time to man-up and admit your president has had knowledge of Pakistan’s nuclear proliferation activities since the beginning of his first term AND that it continues to this day. …[/quote]
Are you joking? Pakistan’s proliferation activities is part of the case against Iran!
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
…
Soviet Russia did not have imperialist ambitions. Stalin was pretty much an isolationist…
Is that why he invaded Poland and Finland?
Both invasions were undertaken for strategic purposes during a World War. You know this, right?
[/quote]
So was his invasion of Germany. Thankfully retreated from eastern Europe and didn’t start an evil empire after WWII was over and went back to being an isolationist.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
…
Soviet Russia did not have imperialist ambitions. Stalin was pretty much an isolationist…
Is that why he invaded Poland and Finland?
Both invasions were undertaken for strategic purposes during a World War. You know this, right?
[/quote]
Nominal, I agree with you up to a certain extent. One must give the SU its due for being a major player in breaking Hitler’s back. However, I would say that Stalin did meddle in Eastern Europe’s politics post-WWII and that was a kind of imperialism. The pro-soviet goverments would not have so easily come to power if the SU had not had troops there and if the pro-soviet forces had not been helped by the SU.
Stalin was more of a nationalist than a good communist IMHO. He wanted weak puppets in the countries surrounding the SU. A case in point is China. Actually Stalin originally supported the Guomindang over the Communists. He realized that Mao would be a strong leader and did not want such a charismatic, strong leader in a position of power in a country that bordered the SU.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Limbic wrote:
…
Conserva-boys, as championed by Zap in this particular thread: it’s time to man-up and admit your president has had knowledge of Pakistan’s nuclear proliferation activities since the beginning of his first term AND that it continues to this day. …
Are you joking? Pakistan’s proliferation activities is part of the case against Iran! [/quote]
So saith Zap the Befuddler, member of the “exuberance” team.
It looks like you are having a hard time following the thread. If you would like me to lay it out for you I will but I will not waste my time if you are not interested.[/quote]
Are you drunk, man? Seriously, it’s New Years Eve and I wouldn’t judge you if you’ve been on a 2 or 3 day bender. I’ve been on leave the last two weeks and have drank quite a bit myself, so it’s cool if you are drunk.
I’m not a having any trouble following the thread, but thanks for your concern. I am puzzled as to how you’ve managed to go so far off the deep end in this thread.
I am interested in this discussion, which is why I’ve been reading it and posting.
If you’ll go back and read my first post, I laid everything out, step by step. I even copied and pasted your posts.
Iran, nuclear weapons, and fatwas are certainly pertinent to the discussion, since you directly asked lixy a question regarding Iran and nuclear weapons. That is relevant. The treatment of gays in Iran, in contrast, is not relevant. Since you made that comment, you’ve gone out of your to say that lixy was off-topic.
Now, if you intended to make a different point, which I’m sure that’s what you’ll say as an excuse, then say it again because I can’t read your mind.
It looks like you are having a hard time following the thread. If you would like me to lay it out for you I will but I will not waste my time if you are not interested.
Are you drunk, man? Seriously, it’s New Years Eve and I wouldn’t judge you if you’ve been on a 2 or 3 day bender. I’ve been on leave the last two weeks and have drank quite a bit myself, so it’s cool if you are drunk.
I’m not a having any trouble following the thread, but thanks for your concern. I am puzzled as to how you’ve managed to go so far off the deep end in this thread.
I am interested in this discussion, which is why I’ve been reading it and posting.
If you’ll go back and read my first post, I laid everything out, step by step. I even copied and pasted your posts.
Iran, nuclear weapons, and fatwas are certainly pertinent to the discussion, since you directly asked lixy a question regarding Iran and nuclear weapons. That is relevant. The treatment of gays in Iran, in contrast, is not relevant. Since you made that comment, you’ve gone out of your to say that lixy was off-topic.
Now, if you intended to make a different point, which I’m sure that’s what you’ll say as an excuse, then say it again because I can’t read your mind.
Dustin[/quote]
LOL
To address Zap’s problem as “drunk” is the first step of a long journey. He probably posts from a beerhall in Munich, only pretending to be an American.
Dustin, since Zap feels I’m only to be diverted or ignored you could ask him this: “Do the Russians know the true nature of the “War on Terror”?” He will feel at the least that you are staying “on topic”.
Gkhan wrote:
They have as much to fear from the islamists in Paksitan.
In some respects yes, in others no. Russia, unlike the rest of Europe, does not have a major demographics problem with respect to immigrants coming in from the brown countries. And the country is on the right track, unlike so many others. Russia already had it’s major crisis. Europe is still waiting for the ball to drop. Another 5-10 years, it isn’t going to be pretty.[/quote]
They do not need a large amount of immigrants coming in from brown countries…half of the former USSR was brown countries. Those people are already there.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
…
Soviet Russia did not have imperialist ambitions. Stalin was pretty much an isolationist…
Is that why he invaded Poland and Finland?[/quote]
Read the “Rise and Fall of the Third Reich”. The USSR eyed all of Eastern Europe. This lead to the conflict with the Axis powers in Europe. Russia ended up with everything they wanted and more after the war.
Pre-emptive nuclear strike a key option, Nato told
" … the nuclear non-proliferation regime is under enormous pressure".
Naumann suggested the threat of nuclear attack was a counsel of desperation. “Proliferation is spreading and we have not too many options to stop it. We don’t know how to deal with this.”
They have the options and they choose not to implement them. Desperation is not what they are engineering.
This book is on the shelves in the bookstores now. Buy it.
"The engines of proliferation are the European countries who are members of the non-proliferation treaty and other technology-denial regimes. "
" … to refuse to sell enrichment and reprocessing equipment to any state that does not already possess full-scale functioning and reprocessing plants is intriguing.
The only instance of this type is China establishing a plutonium reactor and providing assistance for a reprocessing plant in Pakistan. Mr Bush is silent on China, which is not a member of the NSG. "
"The NPT has been wrecked by proliferation by Khan, China, North Korea and European nations and the permissiveness towards it by Washington during the 80s and 90s. "
" … critics noted that virtually all of Khan’s overseas travels, to Iran, Libya, North Korea, Niger, Mali, and the Middle East, were on official Pakistan government aircraft which he commandeered at will, given the status he enjoyed in Pakistan. Often, he was accompanied by senior members of the Pakistan nuclear establishment.
Renewed Calls for IAEA Access to Khan
Since 2005, and particularly in 2006, there have been renewed calls by IAEA officials, senior U.S. congressmen, EC politicians, and others to make Khan available for interrogation by IAEA investigators, given lingering skepticism about the “fullness” of the disclosures made by Pakistan regarding Khan’s activities. In the U.S., these calls have been made by elected U.S. lawmakers rather than by the U.S. Department of State …
In May 2006, the U.S House of Representatives Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation held a hearing titled, “The A.Q. Khan Network: Case Closed?” Recommendations offered by legislators and experts at this hearing included demanding that Pakistan turn over Khan to the U.S. for questioning as well as that Pakistan make further efforts to curb future nuclear proliferation.
In June 2006, the Pakistani Senate, subcommittee hearing, issued a unanimous resolution criticizing the committee, stating that it will not turn over Khan to U.S. authorities and defending its sovereignty and nuclear program.
Release from house arrest
In July 2007, two senior government officials told the Associated Press that restrictions on Khan had been eased several months earlier, and that Khan could meet friends and relatives either at his home or elsewhere in Pakistan. The officials said that a security detail continued to control his movements."
Looking Beyond Feudal Politics in Pakistan
Many Denounce Country’s Feeble Democratic Tradition
“As Pakistan prepares for elections scheduled for Feb. 18, political analysts say the country’s feudal political system – organized around ethnic tribes, family dynasties and personality cults – has retarded the development of democracy. Numerous seats in the National Assembly have been kept in families for generations, and the military regularly uses political turmoil as an excuse to seize power, the analysts said.”
“There’s no hope with the current political parties, because none are committed to public service” but instead are based on personalities, dynasties and profit, said Rasul Bakhsh Rais, a political scientist at Lahore University of Management Sciences who was targeted for arrest by the government of President Pervez Musharraf last year for his outspokenness. “They don’t have democracy within themselves, and they have poor leadership. The ruling class in Pakistan has lost its sense of humanity and balance. They are not givers, they are takers.”