Professor Francis Boyle, the person who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 enacted by the US Congress, said that in 2001-2004, the US Federal Government spent $14.5 billion for civilian bio-warfare-related work. What other purpose does this serve but to kill people?
The US and it's cronies initially said Iraq possessed WMD and biological weapons (supplied to to it by the US). They then carried out a illegal invasion of the country based on fabricated evidence. Now they same lies are being used to conjure up enough support from the cronies to attack Iran.
How can and why should the world allow the US to initiate another illegal war on Iran based on so called evidence of WMD which suits a holywood movie?
You're funny. You know there is other work that can be done in that field, which isn't about creating weapons.
Thank you, yes I'm funny - If you read the thread it says weapons related work . But I guess that's to much to comprehend when one is fed on a diet of how great the US is even when it bullies other countries, uses nuclear weapons on Hiroshima killing innocent people.
Well, I think the government is damned if they do and damned if they don't. People will get mad if the U.S. sat back and didn't do anything preventive after something tragic had happened and then people will be all pissy that they went in and didn't find anything. Either way, everyone will think that it's some sort of conspiracy of some sort and bitch about it. But, my country... the U.S of A. means a lot more to me than Iran so I would rather them be safer than sorry in the case they do have a nuclear weapon. But that's just me.
Assalamu Alaikum, Zubair Ahmed.
The many, many long-festering issues can never be addressed in this space. However, the news is filled with tensions and accusations involving Iran and its nuclear program, so I will confine my comments to this one subject.
Iran received good news at the United Nations when the Russian ambassador criticized the report released by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Nov 8th that revealed details about Iran’s “secret weapons work.” (1) Iran has been loosing support in the world because it refuses to join the other nuclear powers in accords that will protect the world from a nuclear disaster. Look at the long history that has isolated Iran even among other Islamic nations.
UN Resolution 1747, adopted on March 24th, 2007, states “Recalling the latest report by the IAEA Director General (GOV/2007/8) of 22 February 2007 and deploring that, as indicated therein, Iran has failed to comply with resolution 1696 (2006) and resolution 1737 (2006).” (2) Iran’s refusal to work in harmony with other nations is a matter of public record worldwide. Many of Iran’s neighbors live in fear of an Iran that has unbridled nuclear capability. In an official report to the UN in Nov. 2010, the United Arab Emirates “outlined a co-ordinated effort by multiple ministries and agencies to comply with Security Council sanctions… The UN imposed a fourth round of trade curbs against Tehran on June 9 designed to halt Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programmes by targeting Iranian cargo, financial transactions and firms run by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines.” (3)
Therefore, it appears that those hoping to curb Iran’s development of nuclear weapons have no need for lies. Iran has by its own actions chosen not to co-operate with the other nuclear powers to maintain world stability. After years of sanctions, has Iran shown willingness in 2011 to end its isolation among nations? In the Nov. 8th report to the UN, for the first time, the IAEA said Iran was suspected of clandestine work that is "specific to nuclear weapons.” Iran shares a large measure of responsibility for its own troubles with the rest of the world.
As I said above, Ahmed, there is not room enough to cover all the issues. I know that you have many good reasons for believing as you do. With great respect for your integrity, I am looking forward to hearing about your opinions about Iran's nuclear weapons programs and the facts that led you to reach your conclusions.
(1) http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/russ … n-15076061
(2) http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/focus/ia … 7-2007.pdf
(3) http://www.thenational.ae/news/worldwid … ainst-iran
Wa Alaikum AsSalam Quilligrapher,
I am thankful to your for responding in such nice manner and for providing so much detail in your post.
I am not an Iranian, nor am I a Shiat Muslim (just to clear any lingering views that I have a biased reason for my views). Nor do I hate the US or the West or anybody else - lets clear that unless someone out there thinks I'm looking to implement the Sharia Law or something like that.
I am simply looking at the information (I don't call it facts - as I do not think that given the political system in play around the world will ever get the real facts). To cut the long story short this is the reason why I am totally against t current policies towards Iran:
(1) Iran is a signatory to IAEA and so far as we know has always kept its side of the bargain to some level (give and take the odd politically motivated escalations from the IAEA reports)
(2) Iran gets pushed around even though it continues to deny (and no evidence other than the current IAEA report) that it is producing a N-weapon. Where as Israel which everyone knows has Nuclear-W's is not a IAEA signatory nor is it declaring its program - no one says anything about that, nor do they place any sanctions on that country - is that because it is the lap dog of the US and UK. Or is it because it's one law for Muslim countries and another for non-Muslims.
(3) Why is it that US supports dictators all over the world especially in certain Middle Eastern countries and yet is so concerned about Irans Human rights.
I can go on with this - I know you have sited some reference sites. I would also like you to look at:
(2) RT TV
(3) GeorgeGalloway website
All the best
Assalamu Alaikum, Zubair Ahmed.
Thank you for your kind words both here and on my profile. I appreciate your remarks and the references in your post. Your thoughts in this thread are of great personal value to me.
While I understand your view that Iran “has always kept its side of the bargain” with the IAEA, I wonder why so many of the member states in the UN, going back as far as 2006, have thought otherwise. I wonder about the information you believe has been withheld from the UN. I am new to this subject and ask that you have patience with my ignorance. I am confused by your statement that Israel is not an IAEA signatory and not held to the same standards as Iran when the IAEA web site (http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/Member … html#notes) indicates both countries are ratifying member states since 1957-58. Is this not accurate?
I suspect you and I will agree that every nation’s foreign policy is designed to increase its own international influence and power. Frequently, officials will pursue leverage at the expense of harmony. All nations do it. Goodness carries little importance in a struggle for survival. The Italian diplomat, historian, and political theorist Niccolò Machiavelli observed in Il Principe (1513/1532): “It is essential therefore for a prince to have learnt how to be other than good and to use, or not to use, his goodness as necessity requires.”
Thank you, Ahmed, for your views on these matters. I have found that much wisdom is gained from just looking at the world from another perspective.
Do you actually know what this work covered, or are we just making assumptions? Protection and defense work is "weapons related". As far as I know the spending has been largely on how to detect and protect people against biowarefare. Like anthrax etc which has killed people in the US, and H1N1 which still could.
When will our governments ask our opinion on their policies, on the directions of the budgets? When will we have our say?
It's called an election. If your representative supported something you don't like, vote them out. But do it on facts, not rumors.
As you can see 'vote' that really does work - which is why you have hundreds if not thousands taking part in the occupy wall street and similar movements, took part in many anti-war demo's with millions marching - not an iota of difference did that make.
Please provide me with the facts as to why you think I have based this thread on rumors - I am more than happy to accept it as your viewpoint on the information you have in front of you. Just like before the Iraq invasion we were told that 20mm tube of chemical compound that Sadam had would destroy thousands of lives, yet after the war and removing Sadam and destroying the whole country we still await the US and Allies to find that factory which holds this WMD.
by Ralph Schwartz 2 years ago
Target stock dropped $1.5 billion in the 9 days since they went unisex - will this be their end?The boycott over Target's decision to make restrooms and changing rooms open to anyone has caused a national uproar, with over 1 million people signing a petition to boycott the stores. Now today...
by Jack Lee 8 months ago
What a bold move...Reaganesque in my opinion.Long overdue. We need to apply sanctions to Iran to force them to comply.The Obama legacy is being torn down piece by piece.
by Ralph Deeds 7 years ago
How serious and immediate is a nuclear threat from Iran? What should we do about it? Some of the same hawks who helped talk us into invading Iraq are coming out of the woodwork and saying that a nuclear Iran is intolerable and something must be done to prevent it from happening. A timely and...
by PhenomWriter 7 years ago
Please tell me it will not be, because that idea frightens me...
by AngelTrader 7 years ago
It is all falling neatly into place for the US to attack Iran on behalf of Saudi Arabia. The US views the plot as state-sponsored terrorism. Secretary of state Hillary Clinton described it as a "violation of international norms" and said she would discuss with allies in Europe and...
by paarsurrey 8 years ago
Terrorists are in minority in Muslims. Majority of Muslims are peaceful. Those who think that all 1.5 billion Muslims be killed should, therefore, revise their sentimental approach.Thanks
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|