The following is an absolutely priceless exchange between Merlin and Mark McCarron from another board.
This exchange should not be lost for as we know AR is infamous for deleting posts;
closing topics; vanishing identities; and arbitrary censoring.Mark J McCarron
Member
Member # 287
Rate Member posted 03-04-2007 07:37
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The conflict with Al-qeada is going to continue until some form of formal talks are held.
This is not a winnable war, by either side.
Thus, at some point, someone is going to bite the bullet and offer to talk about what these guys want.
If they don't, this conflict will continue and major terrorist campaigns will be shifted to the US mainland.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
There is no evidence of a weapons program. Iran's enrichment process does not violate international law. Even if they were to have a weapons program, that in itself, is not a violation of international law. Only the agressive use of such weapons would violate international law.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's see... In order: Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. You went 0 for 4, or in percentage form 0%.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
hmmm....
Right then...
1. Show us the evidence for this nuclear weapons program.
2. Show this specific breaches of International law and I don't mean some ad-hoc resolutions by countries that enrich uranium themselves. Double standards don't count.
3. Again, the same for the weapons program. Double standards don't apply.
4. Show were the non-agressive development of a nuclear weapon, by a state, is illegal.
This should be interesting...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 2104 | From: Derry, Northern Ireland | Registered: Dec 2000 | Logged: 220.235.49.184 |
Merl
Member
Member # 4913
Member Rated:
posted 03-04-2007 13:37
------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
The conflict with Al-qeada is going to continue until some form of formal talks are held.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree. Look at all of the "resistance organizations" world-wide that have ever evolved into political parties. Negotiation is never the answer to them. Disarmament, and conversion to a moderate message is the only thing that ever does. In the case, Al Qaeda in not moderate by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, what separates Al Qaeda from other bonafide organizations is its insistance upon using violence to achieve its goals. Even if every "white-skinned devil" left Islamic lands, they would then find others to exterminate at their pleasure... Just like they did with the Taliban; remember? They were killing their own people, not Americans.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
This is not a winnable war, by either side.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, however, I disagree. Because this organization is borne out of violence, steeps in it and proliferates it - there is really only 1 way to respond to it. Sit 'em down and talk to them about their issues? Nahh.... Kill them everywhere you find them and eliminate the reasons why they would gain followers.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
Thus, at some point, someone is going to bite the bullet and offer to talk about what these guys want.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm certain that this is already going on through intermediaries... Not going so well, so far.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
If they don't, this conflict will continue and major terrorist campaigns will be shifted to the US mainland.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again - entitled to your opinion. I believe that things are a bit different though. I won't bother explaining why - as it is only my opinion.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
hmmm.... Right then...
1. Show us the evidence for this nuclear weapons program.
2. Show this specific breaches of International law and I don't mean some ad-hoc resolutions by countries that enrich uranium themselves. Double standards don't count.
3. Again, the same for the weapons program. Double standards don't apply.
4. Show were the non-agressive development of a nuclear weapon, by a state, is illegal.
This should be interesting...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, this would be interesting, however, you are being far more literal than my original answer. Also, you place an arbitrary restraint on my answer. Unlike you, I do not agree that resolutions are ad-hoc or double-standards because they are applied by nuclear weapons states (NWS). Everyone has to adhere to the same inspections and guidelines in order to reap the benefits of the IAEA's assitance. If they don't like it - don't ask for it!
Anyway, in my reply, I will avoid referencing any U.N. sanctions (and their violation thereof) if it makes you feel better. I will also not reference other blogs or fourms - that makes me feel better. Keep in mind, the laws that are violated may not be the laws that you would think... You may not know this, but the IRS brought down the Mafia in the U.S., not the FBI.
First, Iran is in violation of the NNPT that it voluntarily signed up for. There were a few countries that chose not to enlist, but Iran was not one of them. In fact, there was even a country that withdrew from it once they realized they were going to be in big trouble for violating it (N. Korea).
What the NNPT (NPT) says in short:
"...non-proliferation, disarmament, and the right to peacefully use nuclear technology."
Here's the rub, my friend: The "inalienable right" to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes brings with it the responsibility of inspections. These inspections are carried out by the IAEA. The sticky part is that, with (successful) inspections, there are "carrots" given to the nations that are seeking to advance their knowledge of 'peaceful nuclear power', but are not trying to go the extra yards toward weapons. They are given aid in the form of technological assitance, fissile material and access to international markets for equipment to develop their programs.
Keep in mind, this is a voluntary process - they can withdraw at any time... Just like N. Korea did. But you have to ask yourself, "Why would someone drop out?" or "Why wouldn't someone drop out if they were caught?" There are sinister reasons for both. In the case of N. Korea, it was because A.Q. Khan had already given them everything they needed to complete the cycle (on a rudimentary scale).
With Iran, the answer is as simple. They don't drop out because they haven't managed to get far enough on their own. At this point, since they are stuck, all they have is a 'weapon' of blackmail to use against the world.
The question really becomes, "Who's right?" Is Iran involved in a clandestine process? ALL EVIDENCE POINTS TO YES. Even their "friends", China, Russia and France agree that they are guilty of trying to militarize their program. The reasons are simple - THIS IS A VOLUNTARY PROGRAM, the inspectors are there to make sure that you are not militarizing your program or proliferating - THAT'S ALL! There would be no need to hide anything if you weren't doing anything to hide. It's a simple concept to grasp.
The fact that, in 2003 the IAEA found trace amounts of Highly enriched Uranium, Plutonium and Tritium during their routine inspections was bad, but the fact that appreciable amounts of materials (enriched) and waste products could not be accounted for was Very Bad. However, this did not trigger the world's outcry, the IAEA simply reported their findings, and the investigative services of the NWS were notified. The IAEA went back in to do a more thorough inspection, but did not cease assisting the Iranians with their "peaceful nuclear program". Evidence of A.Q. Khan's interaction with the Iranian military was uncovered in Pakistan. Almost simultaneously, the IAEA stumbled across information indicating that there were actually INCREASES in the Iranian program(s), and that they had been culling more and more yellowcake. This was completely contrary to the reports they were supplying to the IAEA,showing, they had been consistent in their non-refined, unenriched yellowcake mining. From here, the inspectors noted that the byproduct totals of uranium hexofloride (UF6), uranium oxide (Uo2), and metallic uranium being manufactured at Isfahan were not adding up to the total amount of cake being removed from Saghand. That's when they discovered site II. In other words, the Iranians had been running multiple programs outside the auspices of the IAEA's oversight, and this constitutes fraud on every level. This is a violation of international law - and you know it.
Further developments would only serve to make the Iranians look more like liars: The head of their nuclear research center is military, the 'hot-spot' according to the satellites is buried underneath a military base, their entire program is headed by the military... Why does this look so suspicious? Because it mimicks the weapons programs OF EVERY NWS.
A.Q. Khan is the lynchpin here. He is the exact reason why all other NWS made sure that no single person was privy to the knowledge of their entire program. Khan actually created the program in Pakistan and carried it in its entirety to several other countries (by his own admission). Iran is one of them. You have to ask yourself - "Why would a country who has purchased a NWP, adhere to the tenants of the NNPT? Because they aren't smart enough to fill in the blanks without help - help they were getting through the "peaceful nuclear power program".
You must keep in mind though, I am the guy who has been preaching nation's rights to study atomic energy, and I am the guy who has said all along that we need to discusss this with them from an academic/scientific point of view. I have no wish to attack them, however, if they develop nuclear weapons, the whole world is going to collapse upon them because of their fundamentally "anti-western" and "anti-semtic" rhetoric.
So, you may interpret this as literally as you like, the facts of the matter are entirely legal. Any (and all) countries have the right to defend themselves, but not by any means necessary - and the only provision that allows a country to violate the NNPT has not been invoked by Iran, therefore, their movement to a militarize program appears (to MANY COUNTRIES) to be a provocation. I would say that the world is moving before it becomes a military issue, which is better than the way they handled India, Pakistan and N. Korea.
Information and resources for understanding the facts of this matter can be found at the following locations:
http://www.iaea.org/
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Treaties/npt.html
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Conventions/index.html
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Treaties/index.html
http://www.un.org/law/lindex.htm
[ 03-04-2007, 11:42 AM: Message edited by: Merl ]
--------------------
Doing a little research will not kill you - I have it on good advice that there has never been a recorded death due to reading and comprehending------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 172 | From: Gone for good | Registered: Jan 2007 | Logged: 70.44.114.58 |
Mark J McCarron
Member
Member # 287
Rate Member posted 03-05-2007 08:31
------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree. Look at all of the "resistance organizations" world-wide that have ever evolved into political parties. Negotiation is never the answer to them. Disarmament, and conversion to a moderate message is the only thing that ever does. In the case, Al Qaeda in not moderate by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, what separates Al Qaeda from other bonafide organizations is its insistance upon using violence to achieve its goals. Even if every "white-skinned devil" left Islamic lands, they would then find others to exterminate at their pleasure... Just like they did with the Taliban; remember? They were killing their own people, not Americans.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This organisation is quite different. It has a global reach and the attacks will just keep coming.
If the US does not attempt to negotiate, it will be complicit in any attack carried out on US soil.
Remember that.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, however, I disagree. Because this organization is borne out of violence, steeps in it and proliferates it - there is really only 1 way to respond to it. Sit 'em down and talk to them about their issues? Nahh.... Kill them everywhere you find them and eliminate the reasons why they would gain followers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Except by killing them, you provide a reason for them to gain followers...
You have very little understanding of what you are dealing with.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm certain that this is already going on through intermediaries... Not going so well, so far.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get rid of the middle men. Let's see what al-qeada's political wing looks like.
Let's hear their demands and see the mandate that supports them.
Without that mandate they are nothing.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again - entitled to your opinion. I believe that things are a bit different though. I won't bother explaining why - as it is only my opinion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, I have watched terrorism throughout my entire life and I know this campaign's next stage is a bombing campaign within the US.
Its simply a natural progression to deal with the "far enemy".
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, this would be interesting, however, you are being far more literal than my original answer. Also, you place an arbitrary restraint on my answer. Unlike you, I do not agree that resolutions are ad-hoc or double-standards because they are applied by nuclear weapons states (NWS). Everyone has to adhere to the same inspections and guidelines in order to reap the benefits of the IAEA's assitance. If they don't like it - don't ask for it!
Anyway, in my reply, I will avoid referencing any U.N. sanctions (and their violation thereof) if it makes you feel better. I will also not reference other blogs or fourms - that makes me feel better. Keep in mind, the laws that are violated may not be the laws that you would think... You may not know this, but the IRS brought down the Mafia in the U.S., not the FBI.
First, Iran is in violation of the NNPT that it voluntarily signed up for. There were a few countries that chose not to enlist, but Iran was not one of them. In fact, there was even a country that withdrew from it once they realized they were going to be in big trouble for violating it (N. Korea).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This point is speculative...no evidence.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact that, in 2003 the IAEA found trace amounts of Highly enriched Uranium, Plutonium and Tritium during their routine inspections was bad, but the fact that appreciable amounts of materials (enriched) and waste products could not be accounted for was Very Bad.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are numerous reasons for finding this material...again speculative...
I have read all your points, there is no hard core evidence here. This is all speculative. It can point to any conclusion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 2104 | From: Derry, Northern Ireland | Registered: Dec 2000 | Logged: 220.235.48.193 |
Merl
Member
Member # 4913
Member Rated:
posted 03-05-2007 17:20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
This organisation is quite different. It has a global reach and the attacks will just keep coming.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and no. It turns out that, in reality, their "Global reach" is far more limited after the war on terrorism than we thought. Take, for example, the "liquid explosives event". The 'globalness' of the affair was some guy who was in Pakistan, whereas most of the activities were going on in Britain. They were caught because they had been infiltrated. Prior to 9/11, no one really knew the size and scope - nor did they care much (I believe), so they were allowed to proliferate. Still to this day, most of the "Head Honchos" of the AL Qaeda network that have been captured remark that they were totally surprised to have been able to pull the whole thing off. In fact - they weren't; much of the destruction that day never happened due to internal problems. The scale was planned to be much higher, but attrition, logistics, and committment problems limited the overall scope.
Ultimately, what we are dealing with now is violence "inspired by Al Qaeda" not actual Al Qaeda attacks; they tend to be much more secretive and plotting.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
If the US does not attempt to negotiate, it will be complicit in any attack carried out on US soil.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree. First, I don't believe that many Americans will blame the administration for NOT negotiating with Al Qaeda if there is an attack. We have a strict policy of not negotiating with terrorist organizations, as do most other western nations. Secondly, Al Qaeda does not want to negotiate, nor do they have an official organization to negotiate with. It would be like negotiating with the Indian race... Who is the boss of all Hindu people? There isn't one.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
Remember that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is nothing to consider with that argument, much less remember.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
Except by killing them, you provide a reason for them to gain followers...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
What you fail to acknowledge is that, in most cases, we are dealing with angry folks who are simply looking for a cause to die for. As has been pounded into me by my Muslim friends - time and time again, most of the 9/11 terrorists were not in good standing within their families, tribes, communities or religious associations. Each one of them had a history of being accused as "Western Sympathizers" (or something similar), and many were involved in this to save face for their families. Also, more than half weren't even aware that 9/11 was going to be a suicide event; they thought that it was going to be a hijacking.
The bombings and whatnot going on in Israel, Afghanistan and Iraq are all similar in that there are angry, hungry, poor and the otherwise disenfranchised committing them. Again, these are people who, for the most part, feel as though they have nothing better to live for, are looking to help their families, or truly believe the martyrdom rhetoric. It could go any way, but those are the "Big Three".
Ultimately, if we manage to correct the problems behind the feelings of disenfranchisement, hungery, and poverty - I think the numbers of 'willing participants' will drop immediately. From there, only the fundamental whackos will be at the heart of the problem, and only their families will mourn their mental illness and subsequent death.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
You have very little understanding of what you are dealing with.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I'm afraid that I have a very good understanding of the dynamics at work. Maybe we should discuss that in real terms instead of anecdotal, media-biased soundbites ripped from the daily headlines. It is NPR, BBC, NBC, etc., etc. who have no grasp on the situation - nor do they want one. They're trying to sell ad space, not inform the public.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
Get rid of the middle men. Let's see what al-qeada's political wing looks like.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
They don't have one - that's why intermediaries are used. They are very much like a pyramid where everything trickles down from above. It's an even worse situation now with 90% of the leadership catured or killed, 80% of the lieutenants captured or killed, and nothing but angry foot soldiers "inspiring" violence across the region.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
Let's hear their demands and see the mandate that supports them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think you'll like their demands. From the most literal interpretation of their requests, they would like you to die; immediately. Next, they would like for you to convert to Islam. Moving beyond that, they would like you to first, remove yourself from any land where you were not born, second, from land that they have claimed, and finally - from any area of the world where you can affect them. This also pertains to any form of finance, trade, medical assistance or broadcasting. Essentially, the truly radical want to exterminate everything that isn't them. It is worth noting, however, that they hardly police themselves - so, if you join up, you can go right back to what you were doing before.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
Well, I have watched terrorism throughout my entire life and I know this campaign's next stage is a bombing campaign within the US.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As have I, and it's real easy to predict the inevitable. In fact, 9/11 was the beginning of that event. Much of the other "attacks" on that day were supposed to be of more 'mainstream' terrorist tactics; bombings. The problem for them so far is the difficulty in getting the truly fundamental nutbags across the border, keep them here long enough to be "un-suspicious" and train them for the plan without them falling out of love with their radical ways. This country is intoxicating to most men who are not used to having 24 hour grocery stores, liquor by the gallon in the corner store and clubs where women get naked for money open 24 hours a day.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
Its simply a natural progression to deal with the "far enemy".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only if they have the infrastructure. Without logistical support and the cover of a friednly community (or an ambivelent one), "far away" attacks before exponential complicated. Money is always an issue, and the intel agencies are doing a jamb-up job of watching the money trail; they learned a thing or two about it, post 9/11.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
This point is speculative...no evidence.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excuse me? Speculative with no evidence? Please Mark, go back and read - there is no dispute that Iran has violated the NNPT - they even admit it. There is also no disputing that they have processing and enrichment programs that are undeclared - constituting fraud. FRAUD is an international crime. Receiving assistance with your "peaceful nuclear technology program" in exchange for free and unimpeded inspections, only to be violating every single tenant of the agreement constitutes fraud in every country of the world - including Niger, Somalia, Venezuela, Arkansas, Russia, and the list goes on... There's no speculation there - you just do not want to be mistaken.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
There are numerous reasons for finding this material...again speculative...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes there are many, let's list a few of the MORE LIKELY SCENARIOS given the other information and evidence present at the investigations:
* A research reactor had run its cycle through LEU and created SEU whereby a light water reactor used the fuel to run another cycle leaving a slightly enhanced version of SEU or RU. This RU was then employed in about 15 more cycles whereby it was successively reduced until we have an amount of HEU measuring in the picograms per milliliter range. This would have only taken 45 years to accomplish
* A research reactor has completed a cycle using 25% or greater enriched uranium hexaflouride, resulting in an enrichment of close to 35% - more than entering it into the HEU range. This could have been done only if HEU gas diffusion or centrifuge diffusion had been previously employed.
* The Zippe centrifuge, sold to Iran and N. Korea by Pakistan, was employed. It's efficiency of U238 --> U235 conversion is appreciably higher than that of a standard centrifuge, and it's "Hallmark" is to leave traces of Plutonium and HEU behind in plumbing due to heat induced ionization. This is the mostlikely case, given the refinement charcteristics of the isotopes found, and their level of reactivity. There were other "tell-tale" signs of an intentional enrichment cycle, including the presence of plutonium and tritium.
Individually, the presence of greater than 25% U235, the presence of PU239 and Tritium are only anomolies - but to find all of them in the same place can only mean 1 of two things:
1) They have a working research reactor, a heavy-water moderated one, or -
2) They are experimenting with variable yield mechanisms in order to maximize the chain reaction of a "gadget". This can either mean they are hoping to maximize a yield that falls short of the 50kg critical mass limit (using SEU), or they are trying to maximize the yield of a <50 kg device of significantly higher concentrations of U235.
The report shows that, not only were there more than "trace amounts" of U235 and PU238, there was also U234, Deuterium, Tritium, NP237, PU244 and PU239. This can really only be the two possibilities above and anyone with a physics background knows it. NP doesn't grow on trees, and neither does PU240, PU238 & PU 239.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mark J McCarron:
I have read all your points, there is no hard core evidence here. This is all speculative. It can point to any conclusion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only because you don't want to be wrong. Go back and read the evidence found in the Iranian sites and then compare it to what you know of physics. As long as you understand that the isotope PU240 doesn't exist outside of reactors - you'll come to the same conclusion as the rest of the experts: Iran has perpetrated a fraud on the IAEA.
--------------------
Doing a little research will not kill you - I have it on good advice that there has never been a recorded death due to reading and comprehending------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 172 | From: Gone for good | Registered: Jan 2007 | Logged: 12.101.180.238 |
Mark J McCarron
Member
Member # 287
Rate Member posted 03-06-2007 07:32
------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and no. It turns out that, in reality, their "Global reach" is far more limited after the war on terrorism than we thought.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You obviously don't think like a terrorist do you?
When running a terrorist campaign, less is more. From a single attack on US soil, look at the various effects it has had on US liberty.
From intrusive inspections at airports, to the bugging of American citizens, the mighty US constitution became toilet paper over night.
With a total cost of the Iraq war at around $405,998,004,863 (costofwar.com) and rising at around $3000 per second, Al-qeada got extreme value for money.
Al-qeada's global reach does not need to be activated at this point, the goals they have outlined for dealing with the "far enemy" is progressing nicely from their point of view.
In addition, due to the cell structure of this organisation, it is impossible for you to know the full extent of its reach. As a general rule of thumb, take what you know of this organisation's man power, then multiply that by a factor of ten. This will provide a more accurate ballpark figure for estimating the unknown quantity of people awaiting activation.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take, for example, the "liquid explosives event". The 'globalness' of the affair was some guy who was in Pakistan, whereas most of the activities were going on in Britain. They were caught because they had been infiltrated. Prior to 9/11, no one really knew the size and scope - nor did they care much (I believe), so they were allowed to proliferate.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have you ever heard of the term "decoy"?
Such individuals are used to provide the enemy with a false sense of security. The intention is that the enemy will underestimate the training, expertise and numbers involved.
Its like playing poker, never give away your hand.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Still to this day, most of the "Head Honchos" of the AL Qaeda network that have been captured remark that they were totally surprised to have been able to pull the whole thing off. In fact - they weren't; much of the destruction that day never happened due to internal problems. The scale was planned to be much higher, but attrition, logistics, and committment problems limited the overall scope.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny how they all have the same story...especially when the majority would have been outside the loop. Cell structures tend to isolate anyone outside of direct involvement from the details of implementation or the extent of the support network. "Head Honchos", as you like to call them, are always outside the loop, they are too much of a security risk as they represent the weakest point in the chain.
Sounds like you have been fed a BS story...
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimately, what we are dealing with now is violence "inspired by Al Qaeda" not actual Al Qaeda attacks; they tend to be much more secretive and plotting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
My point entirely...
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree. First, I don't believe that many Americans will blame the administration for NOT negotiating with Al Qaeda if there is an attack. We have a strict policy of not negotiating with terrorist organizations, as do most other western nations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
That would be during an active assault, such as during a hijacking. All governments negotiate with terrorists and their political counter-parts. They just don't like to admit it to the public.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Secondly, Al Qaeda does not want to negotiate, nor do they have an official organization to negotiate with. It would be like negotiating with the Indian race... Who is the boss of all Hindu people? There isn't one.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, this represents a PR bonus. Where are all the provocative questions?
Such question like:
What are the goals of Al-qeada?
How do they intend to achieve them?
Where is the political structure that will run this Islamic state?
What's the point in killing their own, if they have not prepared, in detail, the specifics of this state?
Sounds kind of stupid launching a war with no idea of how to create or run an Islamic state...
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is nothing to consider with that argument, much less remember.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the contrary, it could be argued that the US is allowing, or even escalating violence, to justify increases to defense budgets to implement PNACs moderisation of the US military.
There is quite a solid case here. The world could turn quite nasty with people asking all sorts of questions in government forums and demanding investigations. A unified stand could cause all sorts of problems and I'm sure the PTB wouldn't want the public to become too educated on the matter.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
What you fail to acknowledge is that, in most cases, we are dealing with angry folks who are simply looking for a cause to die for. As has been pounded into me by my Muslim friends - time and time again, most of the 9/11 terrorists were not in good standing within their families, tribes, communities or religious associations. Each one of them had a history of being accused as "Western Sympathizers" (or something similar), and many were involved in this to save face for their families.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you think that killing these guys will increase or decrease this sort of attitude?
The US is the biggest recruiting poster for al-qeada.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, more than half weren't even aware that 9/11 was going to be a suicide event; they thought that it was going to be a hijacking.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no indication of this on the transcripts of any of the recovered black-boxes. Also, you can't perform an operation like 9/11 by keeping half your team in the dark. The entire operation would become a mutiny.
Where did you get this BS???
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bombings and whatnot going on in Israel, Afghanistan and Iraq are all similar in that there are angry, hungry, poor and the otherwise disenfranchised committing them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
It costs money to obtain explosives, detonators and to run the support networks. While the actual event may be carried out by the people you describe, you're ignoring the big picture that exists in the background.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimately, if we manage to correct the problems behind the feelings of disenfranchisement, hungery, and poverty - I think the numbers of 'willing participants' will drop immediately.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Easier said than done. You're also ignoring the cultural loyalty that drives the need to have revenge and to continue (or further) their cause.
What you are describing will not happen immediately, it will take a generation at least, perhaps two.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From there, only the fundamental whackos will be at the heart of the problem, and only their families will mourn their mental illness and subsequent death.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You really have no comprehension of how deep this truly runs. You are very naive if you believe this.
People will not turn their backs on these guys that easily, it is a progressional thing that develops over a long period of time. For that to happen, justice must be served and a sense of having gained something must be felt by the majority.
I really can't believe that someone that seems to take the time to research his material, could be so delusional when it comes to understanding human nature in conflict.
My advice, get realistic, put yourself in their shoes and you will come to realise...its game on.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
They don't have one - that's why intermediaries are used.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I do realise that. I should have phrased that better. Force them to have a political wing. Their own people will start asking some real far-reaching questions and without it, al-qeada will fragment.
People feel they are being led someone, simply show them it has been up the garden path, as these guys haven't thought their pipedream through.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
They are very much like a pyramid where everything trickles down from above. It's an even worse situation now with 90% of the leadership catured or killed, 80% of the lieutenants captured or killed, and nothing but angry foot soldiers "inspiring" violence across the region.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't think that for one second. In cell structures, leadership is close to useless. It is there more to occupy the enemy than to provide co-ordination, financial or logistical support.
The reals brains behind this operation is still there. Its something the US is obviously not aware of.
If the US had achieved those claims, then attacks and arms supplies would have dropped in proportion. This is not the case, in fact, quite the opposite is true. This indicates that core structure of al-qeada is rock solid and on the increase. It also indicates that attempts at infiltration have been unsuccessful and the US is in the dark for the most part.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think you'll like their demands.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As I mentioned before, that's not the point.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Much of the other "attacks" on that day were supposed to be of more 'mainstream' terrorist tactics; bombings.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sure that's what you feel, but most likey they were decoy units with the express purposes of getting the security services to divert their attention. Similar to the pilot training in Florida, it is a test to identify sources of leaks.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only if they have the infrastructure. Without logistical support and the cover of a friednly community (or an ambivelent one), "far away" attacks before exponential complicated. Money is always an issue, and the intel agencies are doing a jamb-up job of watching the money trail; they learned a thing or two about it, post 9/11.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The infrastructure obviously exist, the info required to carry out 9/11 indicates a well established network with access to the highest levels within the US military and intelligence networks. Since I have never seen anyone been brought to justice, this network is still in place and effectively "sleeping".
Money is not a problem, the US cannot prevent thousands of tonnes of drugs passing through its borders. This is the easy part, they could bring in or even generate as much as they need.
The same goes for explosives and various other materials.
Now let me give you an example of what could be done within one hour of all these materials arriving in the US.
I could pack a container lorry full of C4 and detonate a 0.8 kiloton device in a US city center with relative ease.
What would I need:
1 x Container Lorry
@200 tonnes of C4 + detonation equipment.
1 x Driver + potential backup options.
Numerous decoy units
Its not rocket science to flatten a city.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excuse me? Speculative with no evidence? Please Mark, go back and read - there is no dispute that Iran has violated the NNPT - they even admit it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its a voluntary agreement. What part of this don't you understand?
They're under no obligation to either be a signatory, or uphold it.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is also no disputing that they have processing and enrichment programs that are undeclared - constituting fraud. FRAUD is an international crime.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no evidence to back up this claim. Even if there were, that type of fraud does not warrant any form of attack.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Receiving assistance with your "peaceful nuclear technology program" in exchange for free and unimpeded inspections, only to be violating every single tenant of the agreement constitutes fraud in every country of the world - including Niger, Somalia, Venezuela, Arkansas, Russia, and the list goes on... There's no speculation there - you just do not want to be mistaken.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no evidence...its all based on speculation from investigations.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes there are many, let's list a few of the MORE LIKELY SCENARIOS given the other information and evidence present at the investigations:
* A research reactor had run its cycle through LEU and created SEU whereby a light water reactor used the fuel to run another cycle leaving a slightly enhanced version of SEU or RU. This RU was then employed in about 15 more cycles whereby it was successively reduced until we have an amount of HEU measuring in the picograms per milliliter range. This would have only taken 45 years to accomplish
* A research reactor has completed a cycle using 25% or greater enriched uranium hexaflouride, resulting in an enrichment of close to 35% - more than entering it into the HEU range. This could have been done only if HEU gas diffusion or centrifuge diffusion had been previously employed.
* The Zippe centrifuge, sold to Iran and N. Korea by Pakistan, was employed. It's efficiency of U238 --> U235 conversion is appreciably higher than that of a standard centrifuge, and it's "Hallmark" is to leave traces of Plutonium and HEU behind in plumbing due to heat induced ionization. This is the mostlikely case, given the refinement charcteristics of the isotopes found, and their level of reactivity. There were other "tell-tale" signs of an intentional enrichment cycle, including the presence of plutonium and tritium.
Individually, the presence of greater than 25% U235, the presence of PU239 and Tritium are only anomolies - but to find all of them in the same place can only mean 1 of two things:
1) They have a working research reactor, a heavy-water moderated one, or -
2) They are experimenting with variable yield mechanisms in order to maximize the chain reaction of a "gadget". This can either mean they are hoping to maximize a yield that falls short of the 50kg critical mass limit (using SEU), or they are trying to maximize the yield of a <50 kg device of significantly higher concentrations of U235.
The report shows that, not only were there more than "trace amounts" of U235 and PU238, there was also U234, Deuterium, Tritium, NP237, PU244 and PU239. This can really only be the two possibilities above and anyone with a physics background knows it. NP doesn't grow on trees, and neither does PU240, PU238 & PU 239.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
It could indicate a test phase of a small thermal reactor.
Its also quite obvious that they have begun experiments into nuclear fusion as well. Which can be interpreted both ways.
More solid evidence is required.
