Thanks Gary for your article.

Some know I am repeating myself but today Spengler wrote this article 'Why the West will attack Iran'.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/others/spengler.html

All his articles are thought provoking.

This development should shake us from our massive ignorance. An ignorance Daniel Pipes argued was almost preternatural in wickedness and self deception.

Hi Martin,

I have looked over your links and am going to get around to reading them, thanks and keep posting them as people will eventully pick up on them. I read Pipes often, hes a perceptive guy.

im hammerign these bits of info they are more localized the first is a survey result on sharia in Indo the second is what keysar trad actully thinks of Australia in his own words.

http://www.infid.be/radical_survey.htm#Intolerance%20Is%20Still%20Hig

http://www.islam.org.au/articles/16/RACISM.HTM

I am sick & tired of hearing Muslims use the argument that the west is hypocritical because we have nuclear technology, that it is their right also, and so on.

Nothing could be further from the truth. I don't know if any of you are into Star Trek, but in that excellent show, the Federation (which I see as basically the world in the future - where everyone respects western developed human rights & are enlightened as opposed to dogmatic) has what is called "THE PRIME DIRECTIVE". This is a policy whereby they aren't allowed to interfere with lesser cultures, can't give them technology and so on.

How dare Iran think they have a right to the pinnacle of western science? The Islamic world wouldn't even have electricity if not for the west, it is really frustrating that our leaders don't take this line. Why should a closed, dogmatic, misogynistic, racist, homophobic, society benefit from the ideas & labour of open democracies?

Daniel Pipes is a perceptive guy Meredith, and thanks for those links about Trad. He is a homophobic bigot who needs to be exposed. If you don't already know, here are some links to a meeting Trad attended in 2002 at the University of Western Sydney, where he told Muslims to ignore anti-discrimination laws regarding homosexuals.

http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2002/519/519p7b.htm

Further, there are Trad's comments on Iraqi aid worker Margaret Hassan, in which he said her death was "as callous as the death of an insurgent". Also, he commented that Australian captive Douglas Wood was "ungrateful, as they did feed & cloth him, and give him medicine" regarding the terrorists who kidnapped him.

Why the media speak to this bigot is beyond me. What says more though is how the Islamic community don't see the need to replace their bigoted leaders.

Meredith

I just read your link..unbelievable. It is disgraceful that this man can be so racist to say that Australians "have beer for blood", that our culture is one of "drunkeness & paedophilia" and not be in serious trouble. If he said those things to any other group he'd likely be killed for it.

But paedohilia part of Australian culture? How bizarre, especially considering the Prophet Mohammed, if alive today, would be arrested for being one. Also, Khoemeini, as well as many prominent Muslims, who took child brides to emulate the prophet. In Islam, a girl is considered a woman at age nine, and can be married. Thankfully, western influence has stopped this paedophillic practise in many parts, but there is still much work to do.

Trad must think this way as it is only our culture that acknowledges paedophilia exists, but to think it a western thing is nonsense. I saw a documentary last year about a mosque in England, where a family took the cleric to court for molesting their boy. Now, one would expect the parisheners to be supportive, but typically, they threatened them with death, spat at them, and so on. This was in England!

One can only imagine how bad it is in Islamic nations. Also,late last year on SBS there was an Aussie expat who set up TV station in Afghanistan. He made a program about (are you reading Trad) Afghanistans rampant paedophilia (which is easy to see when you look at all those filthy old men in the markets you always see) but the station was firebombed after it aired. It showed many families where fathers molested daughters, some using Islam as a defence.

But on Trad, it makes me ill that he thinks of himself as a leftie when he has said things not unlike NAZIs.

benjamin, you do know that without the muslim cultures of the past we would not be likely to have electricity either, or the atomic weapon.

Iran cannot have nuclear power or weapons because it has signed the nuclear non proliferation treaty, which legally binds them not to try and get them. If we explained to muslims that trying to develop nuclear weapons is like breaking an oath, perhaps they will listen given the high prominence of promises in their culture.

Should they withdraw from the treaty, or continue to develop weapons then surely we should go to war! (and it would be fully legal, as securing the implementation of one of humanity's most important agreements.

Your post, benjamin, regarding the west as having a right to these technologies, due to thier development, shows a marked lack of legal understanding.

Gary

I appreciate your presentation of the the political setting for a strike against Iran.

For my views on what TARGETS would be hit and WEAPONS used see the new article on my blog "Spookey Pete" on http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com/

Pete

Fide Mae: You are wrong about the NPT. It does not forbid acquisition of nuclear power or other civilian uses; only weapons are forbidden. Iran has the right to develop N-power under the treaty. Whether it is wise to excercise that right is of course another Q.

Plantagenet: an excellent analysis on yr blog of options, weapons & platforms for a poss strike. Your warning about Russian op intell feed to Teheran is particularly cogent. Just the same I think the US or a surrogate might still make the attempt.

Thanks Mhoram

Yes I agree that if Iran continues its nuclear development a Western country or group of them will very likely strike Iran. If the US and perhaps the UK do not strike then I think Israel will attempt to hit Iran.

As a I said on my blog the real danger with Israel is that its aircraft and missiles weapons are far less numerous than the US's and of slightly lower quality.

This shortfall may encourage Israel to use "mininukes", particularly against deep bunker targets which have been theoretically impervious to conventional air attack.

First use of nuclear weapons in the Middle East would of course be a world wide military, economic and human disaster.

Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com/

Hmm yes this little man in power in Iran has already got to big for his boots, and i think he is leading his people into a nasty situation. He really needs to realize that saying things like he will goto MAX production of uranium for weapons has to one of the stupidest things i have ever seen a leader of a nation say in my life time.

He seriously wants to do it pretty quick, build his bombs, test them, because the west already as an arsenal that could basically wipe him and any and every other idiot nation from the surface of the earth.

But I think the USA or some one will hopefully just do an air strike and take out the reactor, cause a bit of a nuke waste problem in the country, stop all trade & starve there people, and put this truly crazy man out of power.

If they carry on after that, I guess the west will just have to do the unthinkable and remove Iran from the map, followed by anyone else who wants to basically insult the rest of the world.

It is sad but these people are pushing and pushing, and soon there going to find out what there really dealing with. and if it means a country like Iran is used to make an example to the rest of the world, then thats what it is going to take.

Someone needs to educate these people that the west has the hardware, and it is not going to let people like this destroy our way of life.

we will and can destroy them before they blink and eye lid, take the oil and go.

Also what happens to these poor people in 20 30 years when oil is over, they got nothing but a dust bowl, they should be planing for the future long term, making a friends not offending the richest and most powerful parts of the world.

I mean China are Smart, they making friends and trading partners as fast as they can, why don't these other people do the same?

Hi Meredith

You have to read this one from Daniel Pipes

http://jewishworldreview.com/0106/pipes2006_01_24.php3

Plantaganet:

Do U really think the Israelis wd be mad enough to use the 1st nuke in anger since Nagasaki? I really doubt that. If U R right then as U say it wd be a catastrophe of major proportions for future Mid E and global stability. I do not think the US wd countenance it, myself. I think the Israelis have nukes solely as insurance against being pushed into the sea by an overwhelming conventional offensive - any lesser threat wd be dealt with by lesser means. I hope.

Mhoram

I don't think it likely Israel, would use nuclear weapons against Iran, however Israel is very unpredictable.

Israel is treating the potential Iranian nuclear threat extremely seriously. As Gary stated "Like the famous Israeli strike against the main Iraqi nuclear facility over 20 years ago, strikes on Iranian nuclear plants would need to be executed before these plants (especially breeder reactors and weapons-grade enrichment facilities) came on stream. This is so because of the risk of massive pollution if functioning facilities were destroyed and also to prevent Iran creating a stockpile of weapons-grade nuclear material."

So I think Israel is in a hurry to do something about Iran and its basically lost its PM (Sharon) making Israeli politicians more uneasy.

So this creates a dangerous situation.

While I don't think Israel will use nukes. It will use the nuclear use possibility to persuade the US to take strong action against Iran (possibly an airstrike).

It was interesting reporting on tonights news of the militant force within Iran itself.

Explosions and bombing appear to be a common occurence by extremists elements within the country of Iran.

The regime or extemists as quoted, are representative of the minority Arab within Iran.

When we as a world, rationally look at the region in this part of the world it is not ready for the responsibility of a nuclear capability due to the instability within their leaderships.

It is also confusing why Iran is in such a need when its country in in abundance of oil reserves for energy use for their communities.

Is Nuclear the way to go?

The required management of used materials from creating this new form of energy needs long term storage utilities and be environmentally implemented and maintained for centuries.

What are we doing for our future? What would Iran be doing for theirs?

The problem is Iran now has a gov. that is religious in orientation, and the problem with that is that they seem to think that have to green from light "ala"to kill people that don't agree with them.

Personally I don't think it is just Israel that are not going to let this happen, but most of the Western world will not let it happen.

This little man they have running the show is a serious problem, I wonder personally how may days he's got left walking the earth, probably not to many if he does not pull he little head in, right in.

If he does not, I think some ones going to knocking it off his shoulders pretty soon, and i don't mean to sound Calais, but the world would properly be a better place if some one did.

Fear is the root of paranoia. The reverse side of the coin of paranoia is grandiosity. Remember the cold war when the USA and USSR were armed with squillions of hydrogen bombs? We were/are only minutes from anhialation. T'was the American loonies that let off two atom bombs to see if they worked? They did. We know what will happen if Israel bombs its neighbours, they will be poisoned too. Many countries have nuculure (American pronunciation) weapons now - WMD. So what? So Syria has a grandiose president. Well we have a paranoid President. They kinda go together really. Two sides of the same coin. The Syrian's are rightly afraid of the us western nutters. Americans, backed by Little Johnny and the bloody cross of England is something to be feared, really feared, for we attack those who dare against us. We just need a good excuse......

no one has mentioned the alternative to US dollars for oil that iran is starting up and how this affects things.
currently the US has a fantastic ~$8 trillion debt which would kill any economy except that the denomination of oil in US dollars guarantees it as a world reserve currency.
iran has been or is just about to start selling in euros - as saddam did months before he got invaded by the US.

This rival oil exchange which was going to open up this march is motivation enough for the US to intervene-i mean, the US has intervened on much less in the past.

on nuclear for power generation, its true iran oil will not last say 20 years... what then? if they stopped exporting oil now, they'd have enough for their own consumption for a long time.. but what would you suppose happen if they decided to do that? I think europe would LOVE the new iranian oil bourse in euros, but its in their best interests to make sure the US has no reason to invade bcos when iraq was invaded the US quickly changed the oil back to to US dollars.

on a protection point of view, if you are surrounded by countries with nuclear capabilities and you are in a world where the nuclear non-prolif treaty is being stomped on by the the big players, and pre-emptive strikes on "national interests" are being exercised next door, what do you do?
you have a look at what happened in iraq and what happened in north korea -that's what you do, and you see what possible differences there are. Gee nth-korea seems to be off the hook.. they have nukes, iraq didn't.. north korea isn't sitting on a strategic sea of oil, iraq is. Ignoring religious issues (which is usually a tool to do get something done) ,if you were running iran, what would you do to safeguard your country into the future?

all i'm saying is these set of events are entirely predictable without even playing the "crazy west-hating muslim leader" card.

Except that it doesn't explain why Muslims, kill those who disagree with them, put fatwahs on this and that person, teach their children anti-semetic propaganda in schools, speak at rallies about their success in conquering Europe so far, flying planes into buildings, rich educated Muslims (especially Arab Academics in the US) organsing terrorism, blowing themselves up in buses, in trains, torturing and killing Christians, Jews, homosexuals, women, apostates, limb amputation for theft, etc etc. Close to 80% of lebanese muslims fly overseas to find a muslim wife rather than intermarry like all other immigrant communities that have settled here. Too many hate this dar al harb and instead do as Mohammed and Allah commanded by striving quietly and patiently to make Australia a place where divine Sharia is in force.

Apart from those Muslim gems who are moderate and common sensical enough to reject the violent aspects. They are not 'good' Muslims in the sense that the scriptures handed down to them, (the eternal word of God dictated by Gabriel) are abrogated for 'western' law and institutions. But thank God they're not. We need them very much. They are the salt of the Earth in this respect. They will be attacked as apostates (Muslim scholars say Islam is in no need of reform)and we should support them where ever we find them.

I'm not denying economics is a factor we're human after all, but explaining away the theological has been our trouble from the beginning. I think it is arrogant to not bother to understand the religion that (going only by what the terrorist and Arab Muslims say) is used to justify their attacks on us.

Why ignore what they say? Why ignore the content of their scriptures? It can't be ignored anymore.

oh, i'm not saying to ignore the problems of religion, but in the case of iran at the moment it's easy to cloak the real problems and solutions under the sensitivities of religion. You just have to look at the problems they had in northern ireland.
the real problems are almost always political, but the average Joe (or average Mohammed) on the street isn't going to know or understand very much about them. instead there's just going to be this general feeling of bitterness which will fuel general hatred.
Then it becomes people against people which is a disaster; both sides declaring "you started it"..etc.. no one can possibly win nor afford to lose and the original grievances are practically forgotten and it just becomes a cycle of retaliation.

if we really care, lets look at the real problems not the affects the problems have on people. if we pay attention to the legitmate grievances of the passive supporters of terror then the minority that carries it out are easily mopped up.

darn it- this iran topic morphs too easily into a terrorist topic...

DDT
Thats because it is, Iran wants nukes and has an insane fundi leader.

Ben,
Thank you for that link, i have posted it on a few blogs here and there. I have heard comment there is a split in the left, over islamic support. i am generally right natured myself, but support a few issues usually classified as left, i just distance from anyone i consider an idiot left or right.

Martin,
Yes i am on the mailing list, BinLadin the press agent, oh boy! Is it Norway's left as well who are defending the right to have Bin Lids garbage published under the guise of free speech? Personally im glad we dont have Nazi scripture in our highschools.