 Click to bookmark this page!
- Contact Me - Include your email address
 Just in case you weren't sure...
Please sign the Ted Kennedy Resignation Petition!
Shameless Self-PromotionBuy this book (not just because it contains two of my op-eds):
Americans on Politics, Policy, and Pop Culture: The 101 Best Opinion Editorials From OpEds.com

An Interview With the G-Man:
My first (hopefully not last) experience in live radio, being interviewed by G. Gordon Liddy!
Perspective Joe
MarianiNumber
of people freed from totalitarian dictatorships
by precision use of American military force
under George W. Bush: 50
million in just two years
Number
of people freed from totalitarian dictatorships
by anti-American Bush-bashing
terrorist-appeasing whining elitists: Zero. Ever.
...The problem seems to
me to be the definition of "free speech".
Liberals define it as anything they want to say
or do that opposes America. I say "speech" ends
where "action" begins. Once you pick up a gun
for the enemy, throw a rock at a cop during a
"peace" march, send money to a terrorist
organisation, or travel to Baghdad to block an
American JDAM with your ass, you have crossed the line from free speech to costly action. ...
Saying the War on Terror is all about al-Qaeda is like saying we should have fought the Japanese Naval Air Force after Pearl Harbor. Not the Japanese Navy, not the Japanese Army, not the Empire of Japan -- just the Naval Air Force. ...Complaining about the "waste" when human embryos are destroyed instead of being used in medical experiments is a lot like going to a funeral and complaining about the waste of perfectly good meat. ...Blaming CO2 for climate change is like blaming smoke for the fire. CO2 is largely a following, not a leading, indicator of a rise in temperature. ...
Cavalier's First Theorem: Every time, Liberals will fight to protect the guilty and kill the innocent, while Conservatives will fight to protect the innocent and punish the guilty.
Cavalier's Second Theorem: Liberals are just Socialists who want to be loved... then again, Socialists are just Communists who lack the courage of their convictions.
Cavalier's Third Theorem: Any strongly moral, hawkish or pro-American statement by a Liberal will inevitably be followed by a "but."
Top News Headlines
Iraq
Blogs
The Messopotamian Iraq at a Glance Iraq the Model
Hammorabi Iraq & Iraqis Nabil's Blog Road of a Nation The Sun of Iraq
Healing Iraq
Iraqi Bloggers Central
The Truth About Iraq Liberating Iraq
Pictures from Iraq The Iraqi Holocaust: a collection
Iraq's Mass Graves
Mudville Gazette: News the media can't use
The Other Iraq: The Iraq you never hear about in the MSM
Michael Yon - Online Magazine Dispatches not filed from the Baghdad Hilton hot tub
 United States Central Command
Humor
Infamous Monsters of Filmland
Day by Day:
Chris Muir's witty comic strip with a political
bent
The Ultimate War Simulation: Why does this scenario seem so familiar?
What Kind of Liberal Are You? Save me the trouble
of figuring out what kind of idiot you
are
Blame
Bush Because Bush is to blame... for
everything
Sacred Cow Burgers Web Archive
Satirical Political Beliefs
Test
Communists for Kerry
Cooper's Protester Guide
Fellowship 9/11: Sauron never attacked Rohan, Saruman did! Yet a small group of elitists convinced Middle-earth to divert resources from the real war to attack Mordor for personal gain.
Analysis
When Democrats Attack Did prominent Democrats switch positions on Iraq just to attack President Bush for political gain? (See the updated list.)
Was Iraqi Freedom Justified? An honest, step-by-step analysis of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq that Congress voted into law shows that it was.
Saddam's Philanthropy of Terror Details of solid ties to organised international terrorism
How The Left Betrayed Iraq by Naseer Flayih Hasan
Did We Botch The
Occupation? No, not of Iraq: of Germany. Read the
media's take on how we "lost the peace" in 1946
and compare.
Debunking 8 Anti-War Myths About the Conflict in Iraq
Pictures from Hate
Bush/Hate America/Hate Capitalism/Hate
Israel/general wacko rallies - by
Zombie
Jihad Watch
2004 Election Links
Looosers: Sorry, Everybody!
Winners: You're Welcome, Everybody!
2008 ElectionPeace Through Strength PAC Duncan Hunter in 2008 official site
Click to join duncanhunterforpresident2008 at Yahoo! Groups
Useful Links
FamilyWishList Share your wish list with friends and family
Virtual Tourist Travel tips from real travelers
RemBot.com Appointment calendar with email/wireless notification
PriceGrabber.com Convenient comparison shopping
Reading
MaterialRightWingNews
The best right-wing news and commentary
GOP USA Commentary
Corner
Men's News Daily The New Media
OpinionEditorials.com a project of Frontiers of Freedom
ChronWatch SF Chronicle watchdog and conservative news
American Daily Analysis with political and social commentary
The Conservative Voice Conservative news and opinion
News By Us ...not news bias
IntellectualConservative.com Conservative and Libertarian Intellectual Philosophy and Politics
CommonConservative.com Practical conservatism for the common man
USASentinel Analysis, Commentary and Opinion on the Real World
PhillyFuture.org Philly news and blogs
Now ReadingThe Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism by F. A. Hayek

Articles Previously Published at
Useless-Knowledge.com
- When Good Liberals Go
Bad - 05/29/03 - How Stupid Do Democrats Think You
Are? - 05/31/03 - Who Are These 'Rich' Getting Tax
Cuts, Anyway? - 06/02/03 - How Can We Miss The Clintons If
They Won't Go Away? - 06/04/03 -
Whining of Mass Distraction: How
To Discredit A President -
06/05/03 - Liberal "Rules" for Arguing
- 06/10/03 - Liberalism: Curable or
Terminal? - 06/14/03 - Filibustering Judges: Hijacking
Presidential Powers? - 06/17/03 -
Is Hamas Exempt from the War on
Terror? - 06/22/03 - How Malleable Is The
Constitution? - 06/26/03 - Rejecting Our Biological and
Cultural Heritage - 06/30/03 - I Need Liberal Assistance,
Now! - 07/02/03 - Bring Them On -
07/03/03 - We Need You Arrogant Warmongering
Americans...Again - 07/09/03 - Much Ado About Nothing, Again
- 07/13/03 - Double Standard: Blindly Blame
Bush - 07/18/03 - Was WWII Also Unjustified?
- 07/20/03 - Clinton Backing Bush? Don't Bet On
It! - 07/24/03 - How To Be A Hypocritical
Liberal - 07/28/03 - The Clinton Legacy: In Answer to
Mr. Stensrud - 07/30/03 -What Is 'Good News' To
Liberals? - 08/02/03 - Bush's Big Blunder -
08/06/03 - The Meaning of Right - Why I
Supported the Iraq War -
08/10/03 - More Liberal "Rules" for
Arguing - 08/14/03 - You Can Have Cary Grant; I'll Take
John Wayne! - 08/19/03 - Where Is The ACLU When It's
Actually Needed? - 08/25/03 - Who's Afraid Of The Big Bad Ten
Commandments? - 08/28/03 - From The Weasels: Thanks For
Nothing - 08/30/03 - The Liberal
Superfriends - 09/02/03 - Liberal Superfriends 2: The
Sequel - 09/05/03 - Saddam and 9/11: Connect the
Dots - 09/08/03 - Throwing Away the Southern
Vote - 11/02/03 - Libya: The First Domino
Falls - 12/20/03 - Is the UN Playing Games with
American Politics? - 03/04/04
Blogs to Browse
Across the Pond
AlphaPatriot
Arts for Democracy
Betsy's Page
Bill Karl
Blonde Sagacity
Bull Moose Strikes Back
Common Sense & Wonder
Conservative Pleasure
Dangerous Logic
DowneastBlog
ElectionProjection
Everything I Know Is Wrong
Freedom of Thought
Sally Girl
Korla Pundit
LogiPundit.com
MarkLevinFan
Mark Nicodemo
Michelle Malkin
Moonbattery
My Arse From My Elbow
QandO Blog
RadioBS.net
Rebel Rouser
RightThinkingGirl
Sally Girl
Samantha Burns
Semi-Intelligent Thoughts
Sighed Effects
Sister Toldjah
Stark Truth
Take A Stand Against Liberals
The Resplendent Mango
The Right Society
The YNC
Tom's Common Sense
Tom DeLay
Tomfoolery of the Highest Order
Trying to Grok
TS Right Dominion
Violent Daydreams
Watcher of Weasels
Word Around the Net
WuzzaDem.com
|
|
|
 |
|
Sunday, June 13, 2004
Iran's Growing Nuclear Threat
Iran's Growing Nuclear Threat
For years, the Iranian government has been playing games with the world about its nuclear program, claiming that they were only interested in peaceful nuclear development. That lie is about to be disproved in the most terrible way possible -- by the emergence of Iran as a nuclear power.
For reference, ordinary natural uranium has an atomic weight of 238. Only .72 percent of naturally-occurring uranium consists of an unstable isotope with a weight of 235. Various complex methods can be used to separate the lighter uranium from the mix; the most common is by gas centrifuge, of the sort that was found buried under a rosebush in Iraq. Highly-enriched uranium (HEU) contains more than 20 percent Uranium-235. Weapons-grade HEU consists of more than 90 percent pure U-235. A power-generating reactor can be fueled with lower grades of uranium; there is no need for HEU unless you want a sustained nuclear fission reaction -- in other words, a nuclear bomb.
After months of playing hide-and-seek with the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran has taken a hard-line stance against any restrictions on its nuclear program. Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi said, "Iran has a high technical capability and has to be recognized by the international community as a member of the nuclear club. This is an irreversible path." The "nuclear club" consists of those countries that admit to having nuclear weapons -- the US, the UK, France, Russia, China, and most recently Pakistan and India. North Korea claims to have working nuclear weapons, but has not yet openly tested one, and Israel is suspected of having them. Libya was close to achieving nuclear capability, but Moammar Ghaddafi wisely gave up his ambitions in that direction after the US-led coalition removed Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq in March 2003. Though Iran claimed to have halted its uranium enrichment program, inspectors from the IAEA have repeatedly found traces of highly-enriched uranium at multiple sites in Iran.
Iran has been caught in lies regarding its nuclear weapons programs before, and has covered up very badly. When IAEA inspectors tried in May 2004 to visit suspicious sites they had seen only months earlier, they found that the sites themselves had vanished. The buildings that the inspectors believed contained working enrichment facilities were gone, and in their place were freshly-planted flowerbeds. The Iranians pretended that no buildings had ever been there, even when shown aerial and satellite photographs of the missing buildings. Now, they refuse to keep up even a weak pretense. What else could it mean but the imminence of their nuclear ambition being fulfilled?
A radical fundamentalist government which sponsors global terrorism gaining nuclear capability is a horror that cannot be allowed to happen. If terrorists are willing to blow themselves up in cars packed with explosives or strap on "bomb belts" in order to kill innocent civilians in restaurants and buses, why would they balk at using nuclear weapons in the same way? If they believe they will be rewarded in the afterlife for killing a few children on a schoolbus, what reward do they think they'll receive for wiping an entire city off the map? It's no longer a matter of if, but when. If we allow Tehran to create nuclear weapons, how long will it be before we wake up to find that a nuclear bomb has destroyed a major city like Tel Aviv, Baghdad, Paris, New York, London or Washington DC? Every place on Earth that terrorists have struck, they would have attacked with nuclear weapons if it had been possible. Next time, it might be.
What can be done to stop this threat? If we think we have the time -- and that depends entirely on our intelligence services, which have not exactly had a good track record in the Middle East -- we can attempt to impose sanctions. Most of Iran's oil exports are shipped through the Straits of Hormuz, which can be blockaded with just a small percentage of America's naval force. With the bulk of its oil income halted, the Iranian economy would collapse, but not overnight. Will we have the determination to keep up the blockade long enough? Other oil-exporting nations would undoubtedly halt their exports to any participating nations, and gas and oil prices would rise higher than ever before. (One has to wonder whether this is why President Bush refuses to release oil from the nation's emergency reserve.) The only other option is to strike Iran's suspected nuclear facilities before they can enrich enough uranium to build a weapon, although knowing their locations depends on our intelligence services as well.
The only certainty either way is that the "mainstream" media, Democrats and Liberals would vilify President Bush even more than they already do, if that's even possible. One really has to wonder whose side they're on. Of course, they wouldn't be too kind to him if whole cities began to disappear, either.
Posted at Sunday, June 13, 2004 by CavalierX
 |  |  | Jamie June 13, 2004 06:51 PM PDT
Its frightening when you think about it. The majority of the people in the ME do not have any idea of what a nuclear bomb can do. When India and Pakistan were facing off at each other and there was talk of using nukes, the interviews with the average "man on the street" in both countries were saying things like "Let them send their bombs, we are stong and brave, they will not harm us". They haven't a clue as to the destructive power of a nuclear bomb. So, not only should we fear the terrorists and the governments in that region, we also have to fear the uneducated citizens who might overthrow their governments and get their hands on them. It would be nothing like the Cold War. It could mean the devastation of huge areas of the earth. |  |
  |  |  | Michael Cosyns June 15, 2004 01:22 PM PDT
Cav, excellent article as always, but you need to get a wider audience. I'm gonna link to you more. I just read that Ron Reagan, the son, slapped the President and that former top officials, one of whom was ambassador to Israel, are going to submit a letter to State Department that the Bush Admin is following the wrong path.
This can't go on like that. It's as if they were trying to impeach FDR for the initial screwups in North Africa. Sheesh, at times like these all Americans ought to rally around Bush. Looks like many caught the European disease. |  |
  |  |  | Peddler June 15, 2004 02:38 PM PDT
' Well let me tell you directly what it is," he told guests at a $1 million fund-raiser hosted by rock star Jon Bon Jovi at his riverside mansion in Middletown, New Jersey on Monday night.
"I'm running for president to put America back to work ... I'm running for president because health care is not a benefit for the wealthy or the elected or the connected ... I'm running for president because I know that we could be a hell of a lot stronger in the world if we were to secure our freedom ... I'm running for president because I believe we can build an even more effective military."
|  |
  |  |  | JM June 15, 2004 02:42 PM PDT
It truly amazes me that anyone could buy into his line of transparent BS. Has he advanced any soprt of actual concrete PLAN for anything yet, or is he still running on blurbs and BS? What the hell does "we could be a hell of a lot stronger in the world if we were to secure our freedom" mean? |  |
  |  |  | Michael Cosyns June 15, 2004 05:08 PM PDT
JM, ignore Peddler. I spotted him today on several Iraqi sites. He's a loonylefty who would be well at ease with the Euroweenies over here.
Now is it just me or do I seem to notice that evidence of SH's WMD's is growing? It looks like something is piling up or ready to pop open. Read an interview with an Iraqi Air Force officer today. There was also the story of half-scrapped missiles found in Rotterdam (!), Turkey and Jordan. I recall too that nine Iraqi WMD scientists have been killed over the past year, as have been two ISG employees. |  |
  |  |  | JM June 15, 2004 08:25 PM PDT
Evidence is being accumulated even as we speak. Why, the UN itself had to admit that evidence shows Saddam moved his WMD before, during and even after the war began: http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/breaking_1.html Note the reference to fermenters and reactor vessels. Plus, evidence of Saddam's ties to al-Qaeda are accumulating just as quickly if not quicker. I have a funny feeling this is ALL going to come out at once toward the end of the summer -- after Kerry accept the Dem nomination but before Bush accept the Republican, leaving him free to buy tons of ad time to tell the world about this stuff. While Kerry is trying to play checkers with the election, Bush is playing chess. "King me!" "Uhh... checkmate!" |  |
  |  |  | Jamie June 15, 2004 08:25 PM PDT
Its not just you, there has been more reports surfacing about Iraq's WMDs. The U.N. even came out in a report a few days ago with information about Saddam getting rid of his WMDs early in 2003. Go here: http://tinyurl.com/l55p to read about it.
And I've also noticed that there is also more coming out about supposedly non-existent link between Saddam and Al Qaida.
|  |
  |  |  | JM June 15, 2004 08:26 PM PDT
Hah, Jamie, I just barely beat you. ;) |  |
  |  |  | Jamie June 15, 2004 08:43 PM PDT
Darn it. Oh, well. I just went looking for some articles about the Saddam/Al Qaeda link and read a really interesting one on Slate about the Czech connection. Go here: http://slate.msn.com/id/2091354 |  |
  |  |  | JM June 15, 2004 09:02 PM PDT
Yes, good article. Edward Jay Epstein was also one of the few people who reported on the court decision last May that found Saddam materially responsible for training the 9/11 hijackers at Salman Pak. |  |
  |  |  | Jamie June 15, 2004 09:13 PM PDT
I surely hope you are right about it all coming to a head just before the election. That's when a lot of people start paying attention to politics. Did you read about the letter from Al Zarqawi where he says its getting tougher for them in Iraq?
And did you see where Iran is moving troops near the Iraq border? I'll bet they are just waiting for Kerry to be elected, then they will make their move. |  |
  |  |  | JM June 16, 2004 05:24 AM PDT
Well, they'll make their move if we withdraw too quickly, which I can see us doing under Kerry. |  |
  |  |  | Lea June 16, 2004 02:26 PM PDT
Perhaps Israel will do us all a favor and take out their nuclear reactors like they did in Iraq in 1981.
I still have hope that the truth will come out before the election. I cannot imagine a US with Kerry as Pres. |  |
  |  |  | Name June 18, 2004 11:07 AM PDT
G.W. is the most likely to start a world war based on lies. The Bush administration is already responsible for presenting false and fabricated evidence to justify war with Iraq to the United Nations thus making our job in Iraq that much harder and justifying Frances threatened veto (a jury presented with a liar in the courtroom would not vote in favor of that liars evidence).
Furthermore, their was no supposed Al Queda connection and the evidence for that Al Queda connection came from Chalabi. The evidence was a spacious at best and should not have been trusted. The other point is that many of the same people that thought that it was a bright idea to make Saddam Hussein an ally in the 1980s are the same people that are running the war in the current Bush administration. These are some of the same people that sold Saddam Chemical and Biological warfare technologies in the 80s, not to mention the fact that they are also the same people that trained many of the Al Queda terrorist and made Osama Bin Laden a ally in the 1980s also. They should not have been trusted to wage the war on terrorism because in the least, they are horrible at judging character and at worst they are complicit with the Saddam Hussein and the terrorists.
More importantly, I never forgot about that Israeli foreign policy paper called "A Clear Break" that urged the Israeli govenment to lobby the United States to invade Iraq in order to aid the Israelis as the Israelis strongarm the Palestinians into giving up the "Right of Return". The Israelis also wanted Iraqi oil because no Arab country would sell oil to Israel (the Israelis had to get oil from elsewhere at a premium). Here is a foreign policy paper written for Israel and you will find many of the authors of that paper working as advisors in the Bush Administration. The foreign policy paper is called "A Clear Break" (Look it up). In it you will find Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, and John Bolton authored that foreign policy paper on behalf of Israel. And what a coincidence, these very same people are working for the United States government advising G.W. The invasion of Iraq stunk from the beginning!
I realise that the false and fabricated evidence is not the creation of the Bush administration and that they did not intentionally use the false and fabricated evidence, but the Bush administration should've known better. When I vote in the November elections, I will hold the Bush administration responsible for their horrible judgement. Mine is a vote against Bush. |  |
  |  |  | Paul June 18, 2004 11:20 AM PDT
Wow.. what do you SAY to a pack of lies and DNC talking points like that? Hey, buddy... try looking at the facts instead of Michael Moore's colon from the rear entrance, if you know what I mean. |  |
  |  |  | JM June 18, 2004 02:00 PM PDT
Interestingly enough, it turns out to have been Vladimir Putin who passed on information about Saddam's terrorism ties: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040618/D839GN0G0.html |  |
  |  |  | Jamie from Alabama June 18, 2004 03:53 PM PDT
I heard about that. Imagine that, the Russians passing information to us. I suppose that this, too, will be discounted by those who want to close their eyes and say "I don't see any connection" and put their fingers in their ears and say "I can't hear you!" so they don't have to hear the truth. |  |
  |  |  | Laura June 18, 2004 05:21 PM PDT
Name 11:07 -
Your post sounds exactly like the liberal dogma I've read on other boards. Who writes the script? If Kerry gets elected we're in big trouble. Appeasement, containment and negotiation will not work with terrorists. Open your eyes and your mind. |  |
|
|
|