Russian bombers intercepted off Alaska

[John317]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

Immature and irresponsible:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/hongop.shtml

racist, but he did apologize for it though to his credit

Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father.

Funny, yet ignorant . Definetly unfit quote for a president.

I don't think that Ahmenidejad ever advocated bombing anyone to send them a message .

But the things you are quoting McCain saying were obviously jokes, and nothing more. I wouldn't say those things. (For one thing, I don't think Chelsea is ugly at all.)

A joke, though, however bad taste or stupid it is, doesn't make a man (or woman) unfit to be president. If that was the case, you would probably have to conclude that Clinton and just about every man was unfit to be president.

However, Ahmenidejad WAS NOT JOKING when he made his statements. He was giving interviews to reports asking questions and he was talking to students and the whole world. That is the essential difference.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

I do not believe that the US would stop Israel from destroying the nuclear reactors in Iran if they decided Iran was close to completing the construction of a nuclear bomb. The only way we could stop Israel is if we do it ourselves. Israel knows it would be destroyed by a single nuclear weapon.

You say you don't want Israel to have the bomb. But most authorities on the subject believe Israel is already in possession of it. http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cpc-pubs/farr.htm

.... Do you remember what happened in Chernobil? Bombing a nuclear power station in Iran will have similar consequences. I pray to God that will not happen....

I don't think the US would bomb Iran if we believed it would cause that kind of destruction and damage. Israel's bombing of the Iraqi nuclear reactor in the early 80s did not have that effect.

On the other hand, Iran is defying the UN resolutions by continuing to build instruments capable of making a nuclear weapon. Just yesterday Iran came out with an announcement that they were going ahead with their plans to build things with such capabilities. Even Russia is, I understand, trying to discourage Iran from doing these things. Russia has to realize that Russia cannot stand in the way of a forceful Israeli or American response to Iran if that nation reaches a point where we believe it is close to the production of a nuclear weapon. I believe the attack will be made before the weapon is capable of doing harm; that is, it will be done, if possible, at the same point as it was done when the Iraqis were building their weapon.

What do you think?

[John317]

.... We need to stop generalizing and branding. This is a pitfall of the consumer culture that wants a fast pre-packaged and digested information. People and ideologies are not all the same even within the major ideologies. There is a radical movement in Islam, as well as there is a radical movements in Christianity. Both caused a great deal of people killed in past millennium, and these are one of the major reasons why my parents reject God. These kind of people give bad name to religion as a whole... which I think why today any type of organized religion is looked upon with suspicion.

I hope that you can at least partly agree with me on these.

Yes, I can agree with you on those points. I am not generalizing to the point of saying all Muslims are extremists or that they all support the violence done in the name of Islam. However, I know that many Muslims are unwilling to denounce what extremists are doing, because Muslims themselves are often afraid of the extremists and also because they do not want to be seen as arguing in public with fellow Muslims. But there are many Muslims who consider groups like Al-Qaeda as nothing more than criminals using Allah for their own evil and selfish designs.

(I was in the process of Instant Messaging a Muslim in west Africa the morning of 9/11, and when I told her that Muslims had flown planes into the Twin Tower, this Muslim told me that they were nothing but criminals merely using the good name of Allah for their own political aims. I agree wholeheartedly with that.)

I agree with that much that you say here, but I do think that it ought to be taken into account that many members of one religion blow themselves and even children up in order to kill innocent civilians, and the members of the other religions do not.

The question needs to asked why and answered.

It also ought to be taken into account that dedicated Christian individuals are not part of the killing. There are nations consisting of many millions of Christian citizens among millions of other, non-Christians, who have taken part in the fight, but that is not the same as the church taking part in the wars-- at least in modern times. That makes a big difference. After all, the US has a wall dividing church and state. It's not like it is in Iran or Iraq or Afghanistan, where the religion and religious teachers are directly involved in control of the government. In the US, religious leaders have access to the President if he wants to listen to them, the same as anyone else, but the church or religious organizations cannot set or dictate policy. Of course we both believe that will someday change.

[John317]

Quote:

I agree that after they developed the bombs, it makes it very dangerous to our own troops as well as to our allies for us to try to take them out after they already have them.

And that's exactly why Iran is trying to acquire nukes . Put yourself in their shoes. Coming back to the topic... that's why Russia is interested in bringing nuclear technology to Iran. It will bring about some balance of power as they see it.

When North Korea acquired the nuclear technology and demonstrated that they could and will use it in case of any threat by US... you agree that US backed off somewhat and has to tiptoe around. When you make a preemptive war a just cause and a solution, other nations have no choice but resorting to radicalism in effort of self-preservation. Let's not pretend about current US religious ambitions in the Middle East too.

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/106/story_10687_1.html

If we examine the history of North Korea's development of nuclear weapons, we can see reasons for being very concerned about Iran, because the same pattern is being followed. Denial, denial, denial, only to find out too late that the weapons were already armed. By that time, the US did not take action because the US values the lives of people living close to the nuclear reactors, both Koreans and Americans in Korea, as well as the Japanese not far from Korean shores. Please see below how it occurred:

North Korea conducted an underground nuclear explosive test on October 16, 2006. The estimated yield of the test was less than one kiloton.

In a roundtable discussion with the United States and China in Beijing on April 24, 2003, North Korean officials admitted for the first time that they possessed nuclear weapons. Furthermore, North Korean officials claim to have reprocessed spent fuel rods and have threatened to begin exporting nuclear materials unless the United States agrees to one-on-one talks with North Korea.

Tensions between the United States and North Korea have been running especially high since, in early October of 2002, Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly informed North Korean officials that the United States was aware that North Korea had a program underway to enrich uranium for use in nuclear weapons. Initially North Korea denied this, but later confirmed the veracity of the US claim. In confirming that they had an active nuclear weapons program, they also declared the Agreed Framework nullified.

The Agreed Framework signed by the United States and North Korea on October 21, 1994 in Geneva agreed that:

North Korea would freeze its existing nuclear program and agree to enhanced International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards

Both sides would cooperate to replace the D.P.R.K.'s graphite-moderated reactors for related facilities with light-water (LWR) power plants.

Both countries would move toward full normalization of political and economic relations.

Both sides will work together for peace and security on a nuclear-free Korean peninsula.

And that both sides would work to strengthen the international nuclear non-proliferation regime.

Prior to the establishment of the Agreed Framework, intelligence sources believed that North Korea could have extracted plutonium from their reactors for use in nuclear weapons; perhaps enough for one or two nuclear weapons.

Nevertheless, it has remained unclear whether North Korea had actually produced nuclear weapons due to difficulties in developing detonation devices.

History

North Korea maintains uranium mines with an estimated four million tons of exploitable high-quality uranium ore. Information on the state and quality of their mines is lacking, but it is estimated that the ore contains approximately 0.8% extractable uranium. In the mid-1960s, it established a large-scale atomic energy research complex in Yongbyon and trained specialists from students who had studied in the Soviet Union. Under the cooperation agreement concluded between the USSR and the DPRK, a nuclear research center was constructed near the small town of Yongbyon. In 1965 a Soviet IRT-2M research reactor was assembled for this center. From 1965 through 1973 fuel (fuel elements) enriched to 10 percent was supplied to the DPRK for this reactor.

In the 1970s it focused study on the nuclear fuel cycle including refining, conversion and fabrication. In 1974 Korean specialists independently modernized Soviet IRT-2M research reactor in the same way that other reactors operating in the USSR and other countries had been modernized, bringing its capacity up to 8 megawatts and switching to fuel enriched to 80 percent. Subsequently, the degree of fuel enrichment was reduced. In the same period the DPRK began to build a 5 MWe research reactor, what is called the "second reactor." In 1977 the DPRK concluded an agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency [iAEA], allowing the latter to inspect a research reactor which was built with the assistance of the USSR.

The North Korean nuclear weapons program dates back to the 1980s. In the 1980s, focusing on practical uses of nuclear energy and the completion of a nuclear weapon development system, North Korea began to operate facilities for uranium fabrication and conversion. It began construction of a 200 MWe nuclear reactor and nuclear reprocessing facilities in Taechon and Yongbyon, respectively, and conducted high-explosive detonation tests. In 1985 US officials announced for the first time that they had intelligence data proving that a secret nuclear reactor was being built 90 km north of Pyongyang near the small town of Yongbyon. The installation at Yongbyon had been known for eight years from official IAEA reports. In 1985, under international pressure, Pyongyang acceded to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). However, the DPRK refused to sign a safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), an obligation it had as a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

In July 1990 The Washington Post reported that new satellite photographs showed the presence in Yongbyon of a structure which could possibly be used to separate plutonium from nuclear fuel..........