Amb. Pickering on Iran Talks and Multinational Enrichment
Former Ambassador Thomas Pickering calls for talks without preconditions and advocates a plan for a multinational uranium enrichment consortium in Iran. Iran has proposed a similar plan to the UN Security Council. Why aren't we considering this proposal?
Ambassador Pickering is nearly brilliant. I can't imagine that I wouldn't disagree with him somewhere along the line, but in this series of interviews he came pretty close to the mark on a number of primary points.
In particular, his comment about the "firewall" between Iran's domestic nuclear program and anything resembling nuclear weapons technology NEEDS to be pursued. Because you know, as a signatory to the most recent nuclear non-proliferation treaty, Iran is guaranteed the right to enrich uranium for domestic power purposes. And it's doing so, and it's being demonized on the world stage by the United States for it, on the basis of our baseless supposition that they're trying to build nuclear bombs.
The religious leaders of Iran (who do in fact run the place as I write this) have declared nuclear weapons to be antithetical to Islam (eat your heart out, Christians) and will not allow nuclear weapons to be built in Iran.
So we're left trembling with fear of that impotent blow-hard Ahmadinajad.
Sometimes I think we're too pathetic to play on this stage.
Dusty: No, it won't but at least Pickering offers an option that people should be made aware of. Many Americans believe that war is the only answer. If nothing else, at least it's a small comfort to me that I can discuss more sane alternatives such as Pickering's with people who think war is a necessary evil.
My cousin's 19 year old son just joined the army. Ugh.
Thank you for taking the time to say you've been here.
I am sorry to say that I don't publish anonymous comments unless I know you through your initials, first name or blog name. I don't publish comments that have ANY kind of commercial or 'for sale' links.
"When the Amherst sphinx styled herself a pagan, she meant she didn’t believe in the biblical God. What sort of deity, if any, she did believe in is hard to pinpoint." -- Gary Sloan, "Emily Dickinson: Pagan Sphinx,"
I believe that the images and writing posted here fall under the "fair use" section of the U.S. copyright law http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107, as they are intended for educational purposes and are not in a medium that is of commercial nature.
Ambassador Pickering is nearly brilliant. I can't imagine that I wouldn't disagree with him somewhere along the line, but in this series of interviews he came pretty close to the mark on a number of primary points.
ReplyDeleteIn particular, his comment about the "firewall" between Iran's domestic nuclear program and anything resembling nuclear weapons technology NEEDS to be pursued. Because you know, as a signatory to the most recent nuclear non-proliferation treaty, Iran is guaranteed the right to enrich uranium for domestic power purposes. And it's doing so, and it's being demonized on the world stage by the United States for it, on the basis of our baseless supposition that they're trying to build nuclear bombs.
The religious leaders of Iran (who do in fact run the place as I write this) have declared nuclear weapons to be antithetical to Islam (eat your heart out, Christians) and will not allow nuclear weapons to be built in Iran.
So we're left trembling with fear of that impotent blow-hard Ahmadinajad.
Sometimes I think we're too pathetic to play on this stage.
Talking won't make the Halliburton's of the world rich woman! ;p
ReplyDeleteDusty: No, it won't but at least Pickering offers an option that people should be made aware of. Many Americans believe that war is the only answer. If nothing else, at least it's a small comfort to me that I can discuss more sane alternatives such as Pickering's with people who think war is a necessary evil.
ReplyDeleteMy cousin's 19 year old son just joined the army. Ugh.