Don_Bacon's Comments

Information Clearing House - News you won't find on CNN : UN Sanctions Alone "Would Not Be Sufficient" to Change Iran's Behavior -- But Much More to Come&nbs

Fri, 11 Jun 2010 00:57:26 +0000

This 1-2-3 doesn't add up to anything. Whatever the US, Canada and three western European countries decide to do is inconsequential to Iran, which is in Asia and has strong trade and political relationships with important Asian countries, including Japan (the largest recipient of Iran petroleum exports), China (#2), India and Malaysia. The US, Canada and western Europe are currently in economic contraction, with negative GDP growth, while China is at 10% and India 8.5%. Are these countries going to stifle their own growth for an Israeli pipe dream? No way, Jose. So don't worry about the death cries of dying empires. Iran is doing quite well, thank you, especially with their new friendly neighbor next door -- Iraq. They thank the US for that.

Antiwar.com Original Articles : Not So New National Security Strategy

Fri, 4 Jun 2010 19:44:39 +0000

You missed the main point. The only security priorities listed in the NSS are nukes and terrorism. So why does the US need ten nuclear carrier fleets, fleets of bombers and fighter, fifty ton tanks, heavy artillery and two million people under arms during a time of economic hardship??

News From Antiwar.com : Turkey: Future Gaza Aid Ships Will Have Military Escorts

Tue, 1 Jun 2010 01:02:28 +0000

"Turkey: Future Gaza Aid Ships Will Have Military Escorts" There is no basis for this claim.

News From Antiwar.com : Diplomats Claim 'Annoyance' at Iran Enrichment

Sat, 13 Feb 2010 23:02:31 +0000

The ISAE can express "umbrage" til the cows come home, but in doing so they are acting outside the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) framework as obvious tools of the US and the other western powers that control the UNSC and often the IAEA. NPT extracts: Article III 1. Each non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes to accept safeguards, as set forth in an agreement to be negotiated and concluded with the International Atomic Energy Agency in accordance with the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Agencys safeguards system, for the exclusive purpose of verification of the fulfillment of its obligations assumed under this Treaty with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. 3. The safeguards required by this article shall be implemented in a manner designed to comply with article IV of this Treaty, and to avoid hampering the economic or technological development of the Parties or international cooperation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities, Article IV 1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with articles I and II of this Treaty. 2. All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. note particularly- ***the International Atomic Energy Agency . . . for the exclusive purpose of verification of the fulfillment of its obligations assumed under this Treaty with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.*** again- ***for the exclusive purpose. . .preventing diversion*** http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/npt/text/npt2.htm

News From Antiwar.com : Gates: Al-Qaeda Aims to Start India-Pakistan War

Wed, 20 Jan 2010 17:17:19 +0000

Al-Qaeda was responsible for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, so what's one more? The only negative aspect is that the US wouldn't be included in this one, so there's no potential profit in it -- that's what pisses Gates.

Antiwar.com Original Articles : Will You Love Every Future President?

Fri, 16 Oct 2009 05:06:52 +0000

How many presidential national emergencies are enough? There were nineteen (19) US national emergencies declared by President George W. Bush, and according to a law passed to eliminate such foolishness, they must be renewed on their anniversary or they expire. President Obama has renewed all fourteen of the NE's that were due to expire since his inauguration, with five to go. The first NE that Obama renewed deals with the terrible threat from the Ivory Coast: -- – "Because the situation in or in relation to Côte d'Ivoire continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, the national emergency declared on February 7, 2006, and the measures adopted on that date to deal with that emergency, must continue in effect beyond February 7, 2009." The most recent NE s Obama renewed were two that were due to expire in September on the terrorist threat. Two national emergencies on terrorism. The next NE Obama will undoubtedly renew will be on Sudan: -- "the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States constituted by the actions and policies of the Government of Sudan" , last renewed October 30, 2008.

Antiwar.com Original Articles : Obama Should Sanctify IAEA Safeguarded Facilities

Sun, 11 Oct 2009 03:35:18 +0000

Iran, as an NPT signatory, has the right to pursue a peaceful nuclear program, and the IAEA is EXCLUSIVELY limited to verifying the non-diversion of nuclear energy to weapons programs. While the IAEA has consistently and repeatedly determined that there has been no diversion, the IAEA has been roped into UN politics for other purposes which are outside of its legal purview. Article III, NPT 1. Each non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes to accept safeguards, as set forth in an agreement to be negotiated and concluded with the International Atomic Energy Agency in accordance with the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Agencys safeguards system, for the exclusive purpose of verification of the fulfillment of its obligations assumed under this Treaty with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. ** for the exclusive purpose of verification of the fulfillment of its obligations assumed under this Treaty with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy** 3. The safeguards required by this article shall be implemented in a manner designed to comply with article IV of this Treaty, and to avoid hampering the economic or technological development of the Parties or international cooperation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities, including the international exchange of nuclear material and equipment for the processing, use or production of nuclear material for peaceful purposes in accordance with the provisions of this article and the principle of safeguarding set forth in the Preamble of the Treaty. **to avoid hampering the economic or technological development of the Parties or international cooperation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities** Article IV 1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with articles I and II of this Treaty. **the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes**

News From Antiwar.com : Pakistani Army Slams 'Insulting' US Aid Bill

Thu, 8 Oct 2009 03:30:15 +0000

The basic problem is that Pakistanis don't like Americans. form the latest Pew Global Attitudes Project, Aug 13, 2009: "Opinions of America and its people remain extremely negative. Barack Obama's global popularity is not evident in Pakistan, and America's image remains as tarnished in that country as it was in the Bush years. Only 22% of Pakistanis think the U.S. takes their interests into account when making foreign policy decisions, essentially unchanged from 21% since 2007. Fully 64% of the public regards the U.S. as an enemy, while only 9% describe it as a partner." http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID... Fully 64% of the public regards the U.S. as an enemy, that's not good.

Antiwar.com Original Articles : Fire McChrystal and Get Out of Afghanistan

Thu, 8 Oct 2009 01:00:30 +0000

General McChrystal should go for the insubordination mentioned above, plus the insolence he displayed in wearing his cammies for the 25-minute dress-down by the CINC on Air Force One. McChrystal had worn his Class A's for the London speech, but went to the Class C's for the President. Not only was this insolent, but it was in violation of Army Regulation 670-1 which says that Class A's (greens) should be worn on public occasions, and utility uniforms are reserved for specific duties in the field, in hospitals etc.

Antiwar.com Original Articles : Fire McChrystal and Get Out of Afghanistan

Wed, 7 Oct 2009 14:20:30 +0000

Take up the largest drill you can find and bring it over to Phoenix. Start drilling straight in on a constant latitude and eventually that drill will emerge on the other side of the world, in the barren hills of the Hindu Kush. Well, not entirely barren, because the US has military outposts there, protecting Americans including the millions in Phoenix. Makes sense to me.

News From Antiwar.com : US Senators Threaten New Sanctions Against Iran

Wed, 7 Oct 2009 14:14:58 +0000

on the Banking Committee: "Now known as the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs to underscore the diversity of issues under its purview, the Committee plays an integral role in managing legislation that affects the lives of many Americans. These areas of jurisdiction include, but are not limited to: banking, insurance, financial markets, securities, housing, urban development and mass transit, international trade and finance, and economic policy." The Committee has done such a fine job in those areas that it will now tackle Iran. Why not?

News From Antiwar.com : US Officials Hope to Spin IAEA Inspection Timetable as Threat

Sat, 3 Oct 2009 14:34:56 +0000

Meanwhile there have been new allegations by David Albright which were supposedly gleaned from the "smoking laptop" that has been around for a couple years, even though it has been thoroughly debunked. Albright's ISIS website has "excerpts" from a purported IAEA 67-page long report titled “Possible Military Dimensions of Iran's Nuclear Program.” http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iran/IAEA... So we can look forward to the possibility of hearing these new "revelations" from the bomb-Iran crowd. Perhaps Gordon Prather is on it.

News From Antiwar.com : Gen. McChrystal Rejects Call to Scale Back War Goals

Fri, 2 Oct 2009 14:47:50 +0000

You didn't remember correctly. In a democracy the people, acting through the Congress, are the deciders. Okay, I know it isn't being done, but now with Antiwar.com and blog-power just think of the possibilities!

News From Antiwar.com : Gen. McChrystal Rejects Call to Scale Back War Goals

Fri, 2 Oct 2009 05:16:20 +0000

At least there might be some discussion now about the mission, the goal, which should precede any discussion of strategy. What is the objective? Is it really to build a democratic government in a tribal country that has never had a strong central government? After eight years of combat it's about time that someone raised the question about where we expect to go. Obama's goal as announced in March was to go after al-Qaeda. Then six weeks later Petraeus said AQ was not in Afghanistan. All summer McChrystal talked about fighting Taliban. Last month Obama said we have to narrow the goal in Afghanistan to fighting AQ. Total confusion. Total BS. The President needs to say what the goal is. NOW. Otherwise Gen. McChrystal (as he has) will determine the goal, even though it's 'way above his pay grade.

News From Antiwar.com : Obama Endorses Iran Proposal on Uranium Enrichment

Fri, 2 Oct 2009 00:33:39 +0000

Apparently Obama has stopped saying that Iran has a nuclear weapons program, which if true is a major change for him.

News From Antiwar.com : Clinton: Nothing Iran Can Do to Convince US Nuclear Program Is Peaceful

Mon, 28 Sep 2009 05:26:29 +0000

Well, gosh darn, if that seasoned diplomat Hillary Clinton, the Secretary of the State Department with the motto "Diplomacy in Action", has said she doesn’t expect diplomacy to work with Iran then I guess it's a lost cause. I guess war is inevitable; let's go kill us some Persians. It'll get Americans' minds off festering domestic problems like housing, jobs and health care, and we all know that Iran is a major threat to our way of life. Thanks, Hillary, for all you do. You and Monica.

Antiwar.com Original Articles : Enough Rope Yet?

Sat, 26 Sep 2009 04:48:04 +0000

"Now, surely Obama is not as dumb as Dubya." Surely? Mar 2, 2007. . .Obama: The world must work to stop Iran’s uranium enrichment program and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons July 25, 2008 . .Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, nearing the end of a fast-paced international campaign trip, warned Iran today, "don't wait for the next president" to take office before yielding to Western demands to dismantle its nuclear weapons program. . .Iran poses "an extraordinarily grave situation." He said the world must send "a clear message to Iran to end its illicit nuclear program." Sep 6, 2008 ...Iran is a “major threat” and it would be “unacceptable” for the rogue nation to develop a nuclear weapon, Barack Obama said Nov 7, 2008 ... U.S. President-elect Barack Obama said in Chicago on Friday that Iran's development of nuclear weapons is unacceptable. Dec 7, 2008 . . .Obama: "We need to ratchet up tough but direct diplomacy with Iran, making very clear to them that their development of nuclear weapons would be unacceptable" Jan 11, 2009 . . .Obama: "[Iran is] pursuing a nuclear weapon that could potentially trigger a nuclear arms race in the Middle East." April 5, 2009 . . .Obama: "So let me be clear: Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile activity poses a real threat, not just to the United States, but to Iran's neighbors and our allies." Sep 12, 2009, WH spokesman Robert Gibbs: "The Iranians have a responsibility to the international community to walk away from their illicit nuclear weapons program."

News From Antiwar.com : US Mulls Increasing Drone Strikes in Pakistan

Fri, 25 Sep 2009 04:56:16 +0000

“emphasize Pakistan” from the Pew Global Attitudes Project, released Aug 13, 2009: Sixteen percent pf Pakistanis have a favorable view of the US, and fully 64% of the public regards the U.S. as an enemy, while only 9% describe it as a partner. Pakistanis express overwhelmingly positive opinions about China – 84% have a favorable view of China and 80% consider China a partner to their country. Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari's ratings have plummeted: Last year, 64% had a favorable opinion of him; now just 32% hold this view. http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID...

News From Antiwar.com : US Commander: No Sign of al-Qaeda Presence in Afghanistan

Sat, 12 Sep 2009 16:06:57 +0000

On March 27, 2009, "the President announced a comprehensive, new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan that is the culmination of a careful 60-day, interagency strategic review. . .The strategy starts with a clear, concise, attainable goal: disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda and its safe havens." http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Whats-... Six weeks after the White House announced that elimination of al Qaeda was Job One, on Sunday, May 10, 2009, General Petraeus, the head of U.S. Central Command, said that Al Qaeda is no longer operating in Afghanistan. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/10/petrae...

News From Antiwar.com : Lack of Evidence Over Iran 'Nukes' Alarms US

Thu, 10 Sep 2009 01:22:45 +0000

You have to look at the subtleties. Actually the administration's claim that Iran could develop a nuke represents a back-track from Obama's position in January that Iran already is "pursuing" a nuke. recent news report: Washington's chief envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency says a recent report by the nuclear watchdog shows that Iran is now either very near or already has enough low-enriched uranium to produce one nuclear weapon. Glyn Davies says that could happen if Iran made a decision to further enrich the material to weapons grade. http://wire.antiwar.com/2009/09/09/us-serious-con... Obama, Jan. 11, 2009 . . .they [i.e. Iran] are pursuing a nuclear weapon that could potentially trigger a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/Economy/Story?id=6...