[Fredkc]

Ok, a few thoughts...

"The risks of an Iranian bomb are manifold", Clinton said. "It will produce an arms race," in the Persian Gulf, and Israel will feel its very existence threatened, Clinton said in response to a question from an audience member during a speech at a French military academy. "All of that is incredibly dangerous."

So the usual foolishness prevails, and the lie begins immediately, removing the possibility of looking at the issue from the other side. This immediately tells Iran that genuine negotiations are impossible. This is about "negotiating surrender" before any other consideration.

What makes Iran "unqualified" to defend itself, in kind? And why is that question never entertained? After all, Israel has nuclear weapons, already. The notion of an Israeli first strike has not been "removed" or dealt with, either.

Notice that: "The United States has cautioned Israel publicly against a pre-emptive strike on Iran's known nuclear facilities, arguing that such an attack would invite an arms race and retaliation."

Well, there is an interesting turn. Israel having nukes doesn't constitute an "arms race", but Iran having them does. And what is Iran to make of the fact that the US feels a need to "caution" its ally against a "pre-emptive strikes", several times each year? If "Israel will feel its very existence threatened" what should Iran feel now?

Place yourself in Iran's position. A neighbor who appears to be ready and willing to engage in a first stike, being backed by another nuclear power. Given that situation, Almost any prudent government would be working on parity by developing a nuclear arsenal.

What no one is talking to Iran about, is what they really fear, and the real result no one wants. Iran "losing a bomb", or nuclear material to an Islamic "client" organization. Not discussing their nuclear arsenal plans means not talking to them about this, as well. This is a mistake, because it means no inspection, with a possibility of, or insistence upon gathering "isotope samples". Material which would make it very difficult for Iran to "lose one" with impunity.

The process they're using is designed to attempt to reign in Iran's ambitions in the Mid-East while doing nothing about Israel's. It's obvious, and Iran has no interest, in it. Rightly so.

Continuing along these lines is going to result in Iran doing exactly what everyone wants to prevent. Additional arming of Iran's friends along Israel's border, and even the possibility of this including nuclear material, at some point.

At this point, I don't think there will be any kind of successful process, unless the desired inspections, etc are conducted in both Israel, and Iran.
____________________________________________

Next bit of foolishness:

China has traditionally resisted U.N. Security Council sanctions, saying they are counterproductive and harm efforts to persuade Iran to prove its claim that the nuclear program is peaceful.

1. Something else the US attitude completely ignores:
Under the Non-Proliferation Treaty Iran has signed, developing nuclear facilities for peaceful purposes, including nuclear generators, etc is completely legal!

Here again, by pretending this is not true, or just not true for Iran, the US makes itself appear a tool of Israel. Again, it winds up making sure what it doesn't want, becomes possible, and encourages Iran to build bombs. We're encouraging them here because we make plain that, even if Iran IS complying fully, the US will continue to pretend they aren't, and continue sanctions, threats, or worse.

2. They also risk another possible failure:
Iran is not some US banana republic of a client. It is a sovereign country, with powerful allies (as we keep not learning, over and over).

It's quite possible that Iran will reach a point where they will simply withdraw from the treaty. There goes any obligation to engage in any form of negotiations, inspections, or anything else!

Now all of our "siding with Israel" winds up hanging on our nose, like a booger, because Israel has refused to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty, even though everyone knows they've had them since the 1960's.

Now Iran is under no obligation to "return" to a treaty their enemy refuses to consider!

Big time, NOT smart!
____________________________________________

Clinton met Thursday in London with Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi to make the case to move ahead with sanctions at the United Nations. U.S. officials said Yang's response was noncommittal.

In Paris, Clinton said her message to the Chinese had been this: "We understand that right now it seems counterproductive to you to sanction a country from which you get so much of the natural resources your growing economy needs. But think about the longer-term implications."

Let's begin with a couple of important things.

The first one is never mentioned in the press, and never voiced by our government.

Our government has forsaken any leverage available on "moral grounds" with any other nation on the planet. America used to be able to approach almost any nation standing on high ground from the beginning because of our stated "National Goals" (you know all that stuff about "Truth, Justice, and the American Way" ?) and urge/demand the other guy "Do what's right".

We, as a nation, a government, threw that away back in 2002. We as a people knowingly approved of this in 2006, 2008 and continue to do this to this very day.

It was in 2002 that our government began using kidnap and torture of people anywhere on the earth, as a formal foreign policy practice. We, as a people re-elected that in 2006, and again in 2008. In fact, as of just a few months ago 54% of Americans polled approved of torturing people.

So regardless what we say our intentions are, we aren't bringing anyone "Freedom or Democracy". What we are bringing is our Army, and we'll flatten any country that resists it. In short, our "foreign interests" are no more noble, or benign than any other country's. That includes China.

China knows it, and uses that to it's advantage very well. While we decry what is going on in many African nations, re. human rights, etc. China doesn't get "squirmy" over what these nations do to their own people, they do the same. No, China is there making business deals! Closing out our ability to do same. They have no such noble ideas, they just don't kid themselves, or anyone else about them.

They are doing this now with Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and even Iraq. China is the one willing to "keep it strictly business". So given this "even ground" China is not likely to consider any US resolution, or anything else that isn't in their favor.

The second one isn't any better. The US has basically bankrupted itself; but one of the chief architects of the means has been China.

China has been "replacing" the US in the areas of manufacturing, construction, banking, and slowly technology in the last 30 years. Next, China began replacing us as the "technology giver" to the world.

China has cut deals with Canada, all over South America, Africa, and the Mid-East. Technology for food, and raw materials. It may sound like something out of Sun Tzu's Art Of War, but it's actually right out of a modern book on the same subject Unrestricted War.

The question is: How do you defeat an enemy you cannot afford to go to war with?
Answer: You make them irrelevant.

This is exactly what they have done, and the country that helped the most is the US, itself.

So now,

• Morally bankrupt,
• Financially bankrupt, even dependent on China to float our loans,
• Over-extended militarily, and
• Facing a possible revolt of our own,

We go to China and say, "But think about the longer-term implications."

For 30+ years, they HAVE! By now they must think we truly are as stupid as we have acted.

We have cornered ourselves into a position of such weakness that we are approaching the point where our only option left to us, when genuinely pushed is to threaten, or conduct nuclear warfare. In this weakened state, the rest of the world will not allow us to do that no matter what threat we claim, even though it actually exists. In the eyes of the world, Whose the "nuisance" now?

A sad position for the US, and a bad position for just about everyone, except China, and Russia.

We can do better, and we'd damn well better do it soon.

Fred's thoughts, free for the taking, and worth every penny.