None of this will work because you speak in abstracts. The only real solution is to remove the Bush/Cheyney kabal from office by any means available. It seems increduble to me that a President can be impeached for an indiscreet office affair with a willing and pliant secretary, but he cannot be impeached for lying about the reasons for going to war, for embarking on an illegal war without UN backing, for being the cause of three quarters of a million deaths in just three years and for misplacing 20billion dollars - mostly into the hands of the corrupt and murderous.

America has become the sick nation of the world and the only solution is to surgically remove the cancer which is Bush. Surely there must be some legal recourse. Stop pointing the finger at solutions out there.

AMERICA, HEAL THYSELF!

From what I’ve read about a possible attack on Iran, it seems unlikely it will happen because of the great and inevitable loss of innocent lives that would ensue since Iranian nuclear plants are located close to civilian areas.

It would simply be disastrous if the U.S. (or Israel) decided to bomb Iran on top of all the carnage that’s been inflicted on Iraq – it would just make things even worse for the US’s image and it would make it even more difficult in the future to use diplomatic means to solve conflicts in the Middle East.

Dr Davis is clearly right to stress how important it is to put as much effort as possible into finding a solution through diplomatic means. To threaten Iran like the Bush administration is doing is a strategy which could easily backfire.

Let’s hope that the Bush administration will realise that the only wise thing to do is to allow Iran to enrich uranium at the low levels needed for nuclear energy production (provided that UN inspectors will be given full access to Iran's nuclear energy facilities). It may not eradicate the risk that Iran may decide to produce atomic bombs in the future, but we have to accept that neither the U.S. nor Europe will probably ever be able to eradicate that risk without having to bomb Iran and risk making relations with the Middle East even worse than they already are.

It’s time for the Bush administration to wise up and to realize that using threats or violence will only make things worse in the long term.

Peace

What all western commentators fail to appreciate is the other viewpoint. Why should Iran not have a Nuclear defense program? I am against all nuclear weapons, but hey, let us show a little fairness here.

How would you like it if you were unable to develop technologies and defense systems in your country without the approval of other hypocritical and dangerous states?

Iran is not the rogue state here. It is the US, the UK and Israel who fly in the face of global opposition into serious conflicts. Iran is treated like some terrible global danger, yet Iran has attacked no one in the last 100 years, there has never been an Iranian terrorist apprehended anywhere in the world, there is no Iranian terrorist cell, in fact, Iran's only crime is that it kicked out the Americans and British that were looting the country of its wealth for 80 years and they held a bunch of American embassy staff hostage for a year, without harming a single one I may add.

It may be true that Iran gives financial and pollitical support to ligitimate groups such as Hizbullah, but these are only terrorist organisations in the eyes of a handful of Western governments. Hizbullah was democratically elected and its political fight against the occupation of Arab lands by people from Beverley Hills, and Europe is a perfectly ligitimate grievance.

On the other side you have America and Britain who have dropped bombs on about fifty other countries during the same period, most of them on civilians. The only places the US and and UK have not dropped bombs and sent in forces are countries that have a nuclear defense capability.

Does that tell you anything?

As long as Iran has no means of defending itself against these aggressors, the US and its pals will continue to dictate the agenda, an agenda which is foreign and self serving.

Taomaster: They are scared of nuclear bombs? America is known for its double standards. How is america to heal thyself now? When both parties are fighting like the muslim factions.

Great points, Taomaster. The US and Britain are the conquerers--the ones whom appoint themselves world-liberators--whom have the most nukes collectively in the world; whom absorb the wealth of other nations, so that theirs can continue?

gosh - it makes me laugh; to think we human beings, are so arrogant to believe we are an intelligent species.

When the north and south begin their quarrels-the world will be doomed to follow the path of total destruction.

what a shame.. it is such a beautiful planet, so much to offer to everyone on it.

it's ironic; that the most powerful, strongest, wisest, most intelligent, and highest educated(or not); are the ones destroying the planet; as they succumb to the anvils of evil, through greed, corruption and ego-compliance. Odd, how they are "actually" the weakest links in society?

I find it odd; that the US and UK--demand no other country in the world have nukes, except theirs?

I like my heat and hydro, and food. But, you know? There comes a time, we must realize, we in the western world; ride on the backs of the dead..from across the other side of the globe.

I don't know about anyone else; but, it gives me a certain degree of guilt, shame, remorse and helplessness; in knowing this truths.

The Easy way to Total Nuclear Disarmament: Wishful thinking vs Realizable Goal

Achieving a world devoid of nuclear weapons is simple.
We just need to track the same steps that we followed. Let’s go back to the first creation of the N-bomb in 1945, the Trinity, developed by the US.
It is a classic case of the US leading by example. Once the US showed the world what it was capable of, the production of Trinity (and the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki), it didn’t take too long for every other capable country to produce their own. The then USSR, UK, France and a list of states followed suit.
Simple. You have it, why can’t I? And deterrence has been an important rhetoric ever since and their reason for Nuclear arms.
The world’s countries are now racing towards more and more weapons, advancement in their missile technology and trying to outdo each other in the deadly arms race.
If the world (especially the US) is so particular about Iran and North Korea not getting their hands on the weapons, then they have to practice what they preach. Yes, obvious. But the fact that it is obvious does not mean it needs no reiteration.

Lots of arms regulations and Disarmament agreements – Non-proliferation treaty (NPT), Nuclear Weapons Free Zones (NWFZ), Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), Partial Test Ban Treaty etc - have been created to one end. Phase out nuclear weapons from the world.
Why is it so hard to understand?
Let’s come to the solution at hand. All we need to do is start with the US. Let the US once again ‘lead by example’. Let the world follow the ‘leader’ but this time instead of creating the N-bombs, let them start disarming, not just dismantling, but complete disarmament.
That means reduction of Active Warheads from their respective nuclear stockpiles. The US and Russia each have more than 5000 active warheads and the UK, France, China, India and Pakistan together boast hundreds of active warheads. It is so ironic because these are the very same countries that talk about spreading peace and prosperity in the world.

Isn’t that the world (civil society, not Governments) wants and needs?
When the US does this, it will no doubt be a Confidence Building Measure (CBM) for every other nation that is a nuclear state or those aspiring to be one. That is why, the first biggest step should be the US’s.
It might seem outrageous to governments, defense analysts and the ‘decision-makers’ of foreign policy to even think of this possibility. But what is actually outrageous is that they don’t get that it’s what the people of the world want. The collective majority.

Now after the Iraq war, the American public image has been so tarnished that it can only be regained by gaining the world’s confidence. The ‘super-power’ image is not something one should strive for, because there is a negative egotistical stigma attached to the word ‘power’ when it applies to countries. And when we want to create a nuclear weapons free world, we can forgo this very word, idea, and concept of who is the biggest power because that in itself can be a major factor in one’s perception of themselves and others.

If the US wants to be loved and embraced by the world, it has to shed its current unilateral stance and be open to truly multilateral endeavors. If it wants to fight terrorism around the world, it should spend more on humanitarian needs and collaborations than (hundreds of billions) on futile wars. It has to understand that terrorism is a concept not a physical entity that can be crushed by brute force.
By complete disarmament, the US can truly gain the world’s trust. These Confidence-Building Measures are the greatest change that can psychologically make other nuclear states like India and Pakistan disarm completely and even stop nuclear aspiring states like North Korea or Iran.
If the US decides to ‘lead by example’ in this case, it can create waves of positive change and can thereby change the course of the arms imbroglio in the long-term.
Though the first logical steps would be to become signatories of the NPT (188 sovereign states), the CTBT (176 states), the possible Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT) and many more it would make more sense to also implement a No-Use Treaty. A Treaty of this sort may seem unachievable and infeasible but this should be in the big picture because we have to see ourselves as a world going towards complete nuclear disarmament and peace. This has to come from within, as the world has to realize the impact of long-term security that can arise. Of course, other aspects to be focused on are the conversion of High Enriched Uranium (HEU) to Low Enriched Uranium (LEU), halting the production of plutonium and other fissile material as would be included in the FMCT.

http://acchor.blogspot.com
www.AccessibleHorizonFilms.com

The Easy way to Total Nuclear Disarmament: Wishful thinking vs Realizable Goal

Achieving a world devoid of nuclear weapons is simple.
We just need to track the same steps that we followed. Let’s go back to the first creation of the N-bomb in 1945, the Trinity, developed by the US.
It is a classic case of the US leading by example. Once the US showed the world what it was capable of, the production of Trinity (and the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki), it didn’t take too long for every other capable country to produce their own. The then USSR, UK, France and a list of states followed suit.
Simple. You have it, why can’t I? And deterrence has been an important rhetoric ever since and their reason for Nuclear arms.
The world’s countries are now racing towards more and more weapons, advancement in their missile technology and trying to outdo each other in the deadly arms race.
If the world (especially the US) is so particular about Iran and North Korea not getting their hands on the weapons, then they have to practice what they preach. Yes, obvious. But the fact that it is obvious does not mean it needs no reiteration.

Lots of arms regulations and Disarmament agreements – Non-proliferation treaty (NPT), Nuclear Weapons Free Zones (NWFZ), Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), Partial Test Ban Treaty etc - have been created to one end. Phase out nuclear weapons from the world.
Why is it so hard to understand?
Let’s come to the solution at hand. All we need to do is start with the US. Let the US once again ‘lead by example’. Let the world follow the ‘leader’ but this time instead of creating the N-bombs, let them start disarming, not just dismantling, but complete disarmament.
That means reduction of Active Warheads from their respective nuclear stockpiles. The US and Russia each have more than 5000 active warheads and the UK, France, China, India and Pakistan together boast hundreds of active warheads. It is so ironic because these are the very same countries that talk about spreading peace and prosperity in the world.

Isn’t that the world (civil society, not Governments) wants and needs?
When the US does this, it will no doubt be a Confidence Building Measure (CBM) for every other nation that is a nuclear state or those aspiring to be one. That is why, the first biggest step should be the US’s.
It might seem outrageous to governments, defense analysts and the ‘decision-makers’ of foreign policy to even think of this possibility. But what is actually outrageous is that they don’t get that it’s what the people of the world want. The collective majority.

Now after the Iraq war, the American public image has been so tarnished that it can only be regained by gaining the world’s confidence. The ‘super-power’ image is not something one should strive for, because there is a negative egotistical stigma attached to the word ‘power’ when it applies to countries. And when we want to create a nuclear weapons free world, we can forgo this very word, idea, and concept of who is the biggest power because that in itself can be a major factor in one’s perception of themselves and others.

If the US wants to be loved and embraced by the world, it has to shed its current unilateral stance and be open to truly multilateral endeavors. If it wants to fight terrorism around the world, it should spend more on humanitarian needs and collaborations than (hundreds of billions) on futile wars. It has to understand that terrorism is a concept not a physical entity that can be crushed by brute force.
By complete disarmament, the US can truly gain the world’s trust. These Confidence-Building Measures are the greatest change that can psychologically make other nuclear states like India and Pakistan disarm completely and even stop nuclear aspiring states like North Korea or Iran.
If the US decides to ‘lead by example’ in this case, it can create waves of positive change and can thereby change the course of the arms imbroglio in the long-term.
Though the first logical steps would be to become signatories of the NPT (188 sovereign states), the CTBT (176 states), the possible Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT) and many more it would make more sense to also implement a No-Use Treaty. A Treaty of this sort may seem unachievable and infeasible but this should be in the big picture because we have to see ourselves as a world going towards complete nuclear disarmament and peace. This has to come from within, as the world has to realize the impact of long-term security that can arise. Of course, other aspects to be focused on are the conversion of High Enriched Uranium (HEU) to Low Enriched Uranium (LEU), halting the production of plutonium and other fissile material as would be included in the FMCT.

http://acchor.blogspot.com
www.AccessibleHorizonFilms.com

Amen and amen

peace comes from peace not, I've got enough bombs to destroy life as we know it.

The US should be the leaders and blast all of our nuclear bombs into space for a great fireworks show.

I believe such an act would be followed with a global applause, and much dancing in the streets.

We are stuck in a very old tug of war, someone has to have the courage to let go of the rope.

True leaders listen to their people.

WE WANT TO LET GO OF THE ROPE!

Some country has to be the first to say no to war. The country that does will be highly respected.

derek

It is patently disgraceful, even pompous, to attempt lecturing Iran on nuclear 'temperance', especially if you are the United States.

It's quite easy to see actually before the deadline, that it's going to be a stalemate. We don't need Einstein's Intelligence to know this. Neither of the two parties have any saints in it. So, it's quite easy to see where it will head.

Dear Taomaster,

I had not been to this thread until last night. After reading your posts I was silent and went to bed. Asolutely nothing needed to be said and I still feel the same way. Thank you for speaking out so wonderfuly

And what is best, you point out to the simple facts.

Are any of the "victims" interested in simple facts...or just play the victims?

And Vladimir Puttin has already made it public. Several nations are rushing into getting more weapons to defend themselves from being invaded. He said that they listen to speeches on democracy but he does not see these countries being treated democratically. And he also said that they (those countries) have the right to know who will be the next on the political/military agenda. This was on the news!

And what if they all unite?

All the theoretical/scientific/spiritual blah blah blah are just words if facts are not taken seriously.

Drop the dominant ego and face the facts.