Direct Link to Latest News

Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | ShareThis icon Facebook icon Twitter icon Email icon
 

Nuclear Iran - Flimsy Pretext for Aggression

January 3, 2012


irannuclear_20111105_182133.jpgFar from causing war, nuclear weapons  prevent war. Except when the Rothschild-prostituted West uses them as an pretext for aggression. 




by Andrew Smith
(henrymakow.com)
 

I view the hysteria in this country over Iran's nuclear energy program with amusement.

Here we are holding the largest stockpile of NUKES on the planet--AND A HISTORY OF USING THEM--telling the rest of the world who can and can't have them.

To say this is hypocrisy at it's height is a gross understatement. It's out there in the stratosphere of hubris and arrogance. People forget that without NUKES, we would have had several more world wars after WWII ended.

If Russia had no nukes to DETER AMERICA, we would have been at war in a WEST against EAST conflagration.

Iran needs nukes beyond the obvious deterrent capability against Israel (which has NUKES) but also more importantly--in my opinion--nuclear power is a technology that cannot be ignored if a nation intends to stay on its evolutionary path of technological progress.

Abdicating that right of knowledge in the field of nuclear technology is condemning that nation to a second class status in the technological world. When Iran says it wants to build nuclear power plants for peaceful purposes and how its research on this technology is aimed towards peaceful pursuits as well, it's funny how the American media people dismiss that notion out of hand. Yet they know it was the study of atoms which opened the door towards advancement in the nuclear biology field and discovery of DNA.

ONLY America has used nukes on another nation. Israel has placed its future on the deterrence capability of it's nuclear arsenal. Pakistan acquiring nukes actually prevented another India/Pak war. They fought three times and once they acquired nukes, it seems deterrence works. They were nose to nose only two decades ago--with over a million troops a stone throw away from each other--and now seem to be talking more and on a political track to resolving their outstanding issues. Absent nukes in this equation, we could have seen war number 4 between those two adversaries.

How can we allow Pakistan, which aids the Taliban, to have nuclear weapons, but not Iran?

Iran has no choice but to pursue nuclear technology. Bush made that clear when he invaded Iraq. It's insane for any country in that region, evermore so for Iran, to have Israel with nukes.

And yet while India, Pakistan, Russia, and China also have these weapons--not to mention countries in Europe--but Iran--THE PROUD PERSIAN PEOPLE-- should be denied this deterrence?

bankerwarsuffering.jpegGet a grip on your gullibility because the American news services are preparing us to go to war with Iran. You may wonder why? The Iranians are close to producing clean, reliable nuclear energy like the United States, Japan, France, Germany, Brazil, Russia, South Korea, Ukraine, Canada, United Kingdom, Spain, Sweden, Belgium Taiwan, India, Pakistan, and about 25 other nations.

So why can't the Persian people of Iran use Nuclear Energy too? And even if they produced nuclear weapons, they could never test them without immediate detection.

 If they produced nuclear weapons, they know they would be "toast" if they used them. Iran did fight back after we armed Iraq and Iran had to fight back, but besides that purely defensive maneuver the Persians have done nothing aggressive in 3000 years. Sadly we can't say the same for the USA, UK or modern Israel.

The genie is out of the bottle.

We need to get over it.

-




Scruples - the game of moral dillemas

Comments for "Nuclear Iran - Flimsy Pretext for Aggression "

Dan said (January 4, 2012):

Adrian [below] missed the point that the article isn't about the pros and cons of "nuclear power" - the article is about 'Flimsy Pretext for Aggression'.

Adrian's comment is really the last sentence. "These facts make the US/Israel versus Iran warmongering over "nuclear energy" a complete charade, on BOTH sides. Energy rich Iran could cooperate on thorium with their allies China or develop the new proven energy science".

To that I say two things. The US/Israel aren't interested in solving Iran's energy problems. If Adrian thought it through, he's saying Iran should abandon nuclear development and let their pal China give them free energy technology. The assumption is that will make the US and Israel happy.

Anyhow, this morning I found that his news on China starting a cold fusion research project is true. So I'll share with you what I found.

However, Adrian's assumption Iran should quit it's nuclear power development and let China give them a free energy solution presupposes that China can already build free energy electric plants, and that the US and Israel would be appeased if Iran ceases development.

But China doesn't have free energy plants. Coal, and fission reactors are going to be the only viable engine of power for at least 30 more years.

Adrian said (January 4, 2012):

Nuclear Iran - Flimsy Pretext for Aggression

"nuclear power is a technology that cannot be ignored if a nation intends to stay on its evolutionary path of technological progress"

The author is extremely out of touch and is not precise enough when he uses the term nuclear.
The situation in Japan will frighten any sane nation away from dangerously radioactive nuclear fission of uranium/plutonium, the supplies of which are limited to 20-30 years only!
A little known fact is that Los Alamos had two projects. One based on uranium and one based on thorium. The former was chosen because with the latter no atomic bombs can be made.
The Chinese are developing thorium as announced as around last April. This will provide safe energy for 100 000 years.
Last year Nasa, the US Navy, physics nobels and many actors have declared the science of "free energy" (LENR) to be proven! Some companies are claiming commercial products for sale this year!
http://ecatnews.com/?p=1784

These facts make the US/Israel versus Iran warmongering over "nuclear energy" a complete charade, on BOTH sides. Energy rich Iran could cooperate on thorium with their allies China or develop the new proven energy science of LENR.

However, their leaders have to play their role in the show leading up to WWIII.

Dan said (January 3, 2012):

As always, the back story on current events is necessary to know.

Iran is the last obstacle to the US/UK/NATO control of Middle East energy. At the turn of the 20th century an agent of the British Home Office bought the exclusive concession of Iranian Oil for a song, from a feeble minded Shah that was deeply in debt and was desperate for money At that time Iran was a poor country without the means to access it's incredibly rich oil reserves.

The swindle was called the D'Arcy Oil Concession and locked up Iran's oil for 60 years. Only forty days after handing over Iran's key natural recourse for only £20,000 (yes, that's thousands - not millions) , the Shah died of heart failure. The result was the Anglo-Persian Oil Company, which later became BP (British Petroleum). BP's fantastic wealth and power was built on 60 years worth of swindled Iranian oil.
It wasn't until after WW II that the Iranian Parliament and upper classes decided it was time to renegotiate the deal with the British who still getting oil for nothing.
There had been a shakeup in the Persian monarchy in 1941 when MI6 backed the Crown Prince Mohammad Reza Pahlavi to force his father to abdicate. London did that because the Shah was going to allow the German's passage through Iran during the war. Keep in mind that Iran was never a British Colony.
Meanwhile Iran had developed a middle class, educated in Europe and America, who were calling for democratic reform. A power struggle ensued in 1950. A strong national movement was incensed that Saudi Arabia had been given a 50/50 cut of oil revenue in their deal with US owned Aramco oil. The British refused, so national unrest ensued demanding nationalization of Iranian oil.

The Shah depended upon MI6 to support nationalization, and wasn't powerful enough to prevent the Iranian parliament democratically electing the popular nationalist Mohammad Mosaddegh as prime minister in April, 1951. Simultaneously parliament voted to nationalize Iranian oil. In June Mosaddegh enacted 100% nationalization of Iran's oil industry. He also enacted sweeping social reforms, winning enthusiastic support of the Iranian public at large.
Two years later, during August 1953, Shah Pahlavi executed what was called the 28 Mordad coup which overthrew Mosaddegh and his democratic government.
With it, the Shah ended the Constitutional Monarchy and became a dictator. In 1997 CIA documents were finally made public that the coup was planned, orchestrated and deployed co-operatively by CIA, MI6, and the Shah's secret police. The code terms for the coup were TPAJAX Project and Operation Ajax.

For the real story behind UK, US/Iran relations since 1953, you can get it in a few minutes here:

History of Modern Iran (since 1953)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy3KDYE5KQE&feature=related

Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at

Archives >>