The Wind Will Carry Us: 31st March 2006 - Iran's Nuclear Meltdown?

[When words fail: Update on last month's Iranian MacGuffin]

Memento:

"Hi Mom! ...[Stop]... Weather's great ...[Stop]... Be home soon! ...[Stop]..."


All top Israeli officials have pronounced the end of March, 2006, as the deadline for launching a military assault on Iran....
===>James Petras, Israel's War Deadline: Iran in the Crosshairs, Global Research, December 2005 .

[Of course, Israeli officials have been aggressively ranting on like this for years - in 2003, for instance: Der Speigel - Israel preparing strike to take out Iranian nuclear sites. Though, since the recent deployment of modified Harpoon cruise missiles, Israel's own nuclear program is now complete, providing it with the capability of launching nuclear missiles from the land, air and sea, though about which, as usual, Israeli military spokespersonrages are indignantly silent, in line with the country's ironic policy of refusing to say if it even has nuclear weapons. But we can't all be Chomskyites any more ...]
----------------------------

The Neo-Con Terror-Provocation Factory: The Pee-Twos

"Of course, they have senior Al Qaeda in Iran, that's a fact. Iran is one of the countries that is, in our view, assessed as developing a nuclear capability, and that's unfortunate." ===Rumsey

Bill Kristol beat the drum on Fox News: "Indeed, bin Laden's son is probably in Iran. And that looks like the place where they are reconstituting Al Qaeda. Plus, Iran has been a larger sponsor of terror, including perhaps the terror, indirectly at least, that hit Jerusalem today. Are you willing to get serious about Iran?"

----------------------



Using non conventional weapons is in contradiction with the fundaments of our religion and in military dimension, such arms would produce adverse effects for the nation, the acting commander in chief of the ruling ayatollah’s Praetorian Guard General Mohammad Baqer Zolqadr told journalists on the occasion of the so-called “Qods (Jerusalem) Day”, that falls on the last Friday of the fasting month of Ramadan and marks the Islamic Republic’s solidarity with the people of Palestine.



... Iran has not forgotten that it was the United States and Britain that utilized king and cleric to bring about the regime change fifty years ago that destroyed Iran's fledgling democracy.===>All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Terror in the Middle East, Stephen Kinzer, and Chapter 1: Good Evening Mr Roosevelt



From Project Censored: Moscow Times columnist and CounterPunch contributor Chris Floyd developed this story off a small item in the LA Times in October 2002 about secret armies the Pentagon has been developing around the world. “The Pro-active, Preemptive Operations Group (or ‘Pee-Twos’) will carry out secret missions designed to ‘stimulate reactions’ among terrorist groups, provoking them into committing violent acts which would then expose them to ‘counterattack’ by US forces,” Floyd wrote.

“The Pee-Twos will thus come in handy whenever the Regime hankers to add a little oil-laden real estate or a new military base to the Empire’s burgeoning portfolio. Just find a nest of violent malcontents, stir ‘em with a stick and presto: instant justification for whatever level of intervention-conquest-raping that you might desire.”


*****And as we now know, the terrorist Pee-Twos orchestrated the recent Jyllands-Posten cartoon controversy: [Kurt Nimmo] - Flemming Rose and the Straussian Art of Provocation - As Christopher Bollyn writes for the American Free Press, the neocon operative behind the cartoon scheme is Flemming Rose, cultural editor of Jyllands-Posten, who “has clear ties to the Zionist Neo-Cons.” Rose “traveled to Philadelphia in October 2004 to visit Daniel Pipes, the Neo-Con ideologue who says the only path to Middle East peace will come through a total Israeli military victory. Rose then penned a positive article about Pipes, who compares ‘militant Islam’ with fascism and communism,” Bollyn reveals ... “Agents of certain persuasion” are behind the egregious affront to Islam in order to provoke Muslims, Professor Mikael Rothstein of the University of Copenhagen told the BBC. The key “agent” is Flemming Rose, the cultural editor of JP, who commissioned cartoonists to produce the blasphemous images and then published them in Denmark’s leading morning paper last September….
------------------------------

US Nuclear Weapons "Downgraded" By Pentagon To Conventional Weapons Status





Four months ago, Greenpeace released a confidential draft of an internal Pentagon document "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations", which reveals how the US government's aggressive new policies for nuclear weapons are being turned into military practice. The new doctrine shows military planners anticipating that US nuclear weapons might be used pre-emptively, and in much less intense crises than envisioned previously, including in a conventional conflict.

The document reveals:

Plans for the pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons against non nuclear countries and against countries which the US judged might be intending to use chemical or biological weapons against its forces or allies.

That the Bush administration's public claims to be reducing the role of nuclear weapons are false.

That nuclear weapons might be used in less intense crises than previously considered including in a conventional conflict.

That the distinction between conventional forces and nuclear weapons is being discarded and nuclear weapons being integrated into conventional weapons planning and missile defences.


The W 89 , 200 KT




Complete List of All U.S. Nuclear Weapons




Nuclear History at the National Security Archive





That the main purpose of missile defences is to defend military forces not civilians.


"Nice chap. Very cuddly"

The W 54 , a 250 T
originally called "Wee Gnat"; adaptation of Mk-54

Related documents:
Comment matrix on Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations and
Understanding the Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations


IranWatch: List of US Right Wing think-tanks and their websites promoting nuclear assault on Iran.

According to a 2003 Senate decision, the new generation of tactical nuclear weapons or "low yield" "mini-nukes", with an explosive capacity of up to 6 times a Hiroshima bomb, are now considered "safe for civilians" because the explosion is underground.


Through a propaganda campaign which has enlisted the support of "authoritative" nuclear scientists, the mini-nukes are being presented as an instrument of peace rather than war. The low-yield nukes have now been cleared for "battlefield use", they are slated to be used in the next stage of America's "war on Terrorism" alongside conventional weapons:

Administration officials argue that low-yield nuclear weapons are needed as a credible deterrent against rogue states [Iran, North Korea]. Their logic is that existing nuclear weapons are too destructive to be used except in a full-scale nuclear war. Potential enemies realize this, thus they do not consider the threat of nuclear retaliation to be credible. However, low-yield nuclear weapons are less destructive, thus might conceivably be used. That would make them more effective as a deterrent. ( Opponents Surprised By Elimination of Nuke Research Funds Defense News November 29, 2004)

In an utterly twisted logic, nuclear weapons are presented as a means to building peace and preventing "collateral damage". The Pentagon has intimated, in this regard, that the ‘mini-nukes’ (with a yield of less than 5000 tons) are harmless to civilians because the explosions ‘take place under ground’. Each of these ‘mini-nukes’, nonetheless, constitutes – in terms of explosion and potential radioactive fallout – a significant fraction of the atom bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945. Estimates of yield for Nagasaki and Hiroshima indicate that they were respectively of 21000 and 15000 tons ===>Michel Chossudovsky
-----------------------------------

Mutually Assured Destitution




In contrast with the current Bush foreign-policy fundamentalist doctrine of absolute preemption ( the "imperial grand strategy" of US global hegemony), the MAD logic of "mutually assured destruction" elaborated at the height of the Cold War cannot but appear, from our retrospective view today, "relatively" rational. Bernard Brodie, writing in the 1970s, summarised how this MAD logic effectively worked: "It is a strange paradox of our time that one of the crucial factors which make the nuclear dissuasion effectively function, and function so well, is the underlying fear that, in a really serious crisis, it can fail. In such circumstances, one does not play with fate. If we were absolutely certain that the nuclear dissuasion is one hundred per cent efficient in its role of protecting us against a nuclear assault, then its dissuasive value against a conventional war would have dropped to close to zero."

Though the MAD doctrine came perillously close to being dangerously unravelled when seriously tested during the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962 (resolved when the Kennedy Administration finally came to its senses and secretly agreed with Kruschev to remove their nuclear warheads from positions along Turkey's border with the Soviet Union), the MAD nevertheless "worked" not because it was perfect, but on account of its very imperfection. What made the strategy seemingly efficient was the very fact that we could never be certain that it would work perfectly, Unless it actually did. It was this scenario that was explored in Kubrick's 1964 Dr Strangelove, with uneasily hilarious effects: what if a situation spirals out of control for a variety of easily imaginable reasons, from the "catch them with their pants down" aggressivity of a rogue general sending off his B-52s for a "preemptive" strike against the sleepy, trouserless Soviets, to simple technological failures [the CRM machine failure] or mis/non communications [the OPE code-breaking and the failure to inform about the Doomsday device]? But it was precisely, and paradoxically, because of this permanent catastrophic threat that both sides never wanted to come even too close to the prospect of MAD, so they both avoided even direct conventional war [though they didn't avoid more limited proxy wars like Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Afghanistan, etc].


Indeed, the perfect MAD strategy (if the US nuked the Soviets, the latter would automatically respond, and the world would thus be destroyed) had a fatal flaw: what if the attacking side counts on the fact that, even after its first strike, the opponent continues to act as a rational agent? His choice is now: with his country mostly destroyed, he can either strike back, thus causing total catastrophe, the end of humanity, or NOT STRIKE BACK, thus enabling the survival of humanity and thereby at least the possibility of a later revival of his own country? A rational agent would always chose the second option. This scenario was overlooked/superceeded in Dr Strangelove, where we learned that the Soviets had actually perfected an automatic"perfect" MAD strategy by developing a Doomsday device ("But vie didn't you tell us!?"). Because if the strategy were perfect (if, in Dr Strangelove, for instance, the Americans - and the rogue generals - had been informed of the Doomsday device prior to its going "live"), it would, on the contrary, reinforce the attitude "Let's fight a full conventional war, since we both know that no side would ever possibly risk the suicidal step towards a nuclear strike!" So the actual logical scenario of MAD is not "If we follow the MAD strategy, the nuclear catastrophe will not take place," but instead: "If we follow the MAD strategy, the nuclear catastrophe will not take place, UNLESS some unforeseen event occurs," as we witnessed occurring in Dr Strangelove. This is why the US has never initiated a "conventional"war with a nuclear power [or any country with WMDs), this is why it won't attack a nuclear-armed North Korea, but did attack a defenceless Afghanistan and a disarmed Iraq, and fought numerous proxy wars during the Cold War.

Helpful hints on how to survive an atomic attack.

From How to Survive an Atomic Bomb, by Richard Gerstell, Ph.D., Consultant to the Civil Defense Board (Bantam Books, NYC, 1952).


And remember, "Send your young children to the fallout room, then go quickly and turn off the gas and electricity at the mains. Close down stoves, damp down fires, shut windows and draw curtains." ===>Action After Warnings


Compared to the imperfect MAD strategy, the problem with "The National Security Strategy" issued by the White House on September 20, 2002, which explicitly sets forth the "Bush doctrine" of "preemption", is that, with its implementation, still ongoing, the LOOP IS CLOSED: there is no longer any room even for the "realistic" opening up of the unforeseen future event which had sustained the viability of the MAD doctrine. Instead, the "Bush doctrine" relies on the violent assertion of the paranoiac logic of total control, of absolute hegemony over the FUTURE threat of possible attack by some unspecified power and preemptive strikes against it. The ineptness of such an approach for today's universe in which knowledge circulates freely is patent. The loop between the present and the future is thus closed: the prospect of breath-taking, spectacular terrorist acts is repeatedly evoked inorder to justify incessant preemptive strikes NOW. The resulting condition in which we live now, in the constructed "war on terror," is therefore the one of the endlessly suspended "terrorist threat": the catastrophe (the new terrorist attack) is taken for granted, taken as a foregone conclusion, as inevitable, yet it is endlessly postponed.

Whatever will actually happen, even if it will be a much more horrible attack than that of 9/11, will not yet be "that", that final catastrophic attack: Iran nuking the US with its imaginary nuclear bombs?

US Government Announcement

E = MC2

It's Official!!

US Strategic Air Command: Peace is our Profession
Nuclear Bomb Chart for "SAC-trained killers"

But what is actually crucial to understand here is how the true catastrophe is ALREADY this life under the shadow of the permanently broadcast threat of an always imminent catastrophe. As Zizek maintains, "This is ideology at its purest. Today's "American,awaken!" is a distant call of Hitler's "Deutschland, erwache!", which, as Adorno wrote long ago, meant its exact opposite ... In short, far from awakening us, September 11 served to put us to sleep again, to continue our dream [of the US hegemonic ideology] after the nightmare of the last [post-Vietnam trauma] decades."







More Helpful Hints on how to survive an atomic attack

from cute Professor Richard Gerstell, Ph.D.










Hiroshima survivor with ball of rice



















Any wonder, then, that so many neo-conservatives are now so dangerously nostalgic, in this reactionary era of phantasmatic Po-mo nostalgia, about the era of Dr Strangelove and the Cuban Missile Crisis, ingrained and self-colonised to the point that they now plan on replicating it vis-a-vis a nuclear-defenceless Iran?


----------------------------------------

The Other Strategic Pretext: Political Economy

The Iranian government has finally developed the ultimate "nuclear" weapon that can swiftly destroy the financial system underpinning the American Empire. That weapon is the Iranian Oil Bourse slated to open in March 2006. It will be based on a euro-oil-trading mechanism that naturally implies payment for oil in Euro. In economic terms, this represents a much greater threat to the hegemony of the dollar than Saddam's, because it will allow anyone willing either to buy or to sell oil for Euro to transact on the exchange, thus circumventing the U.S. dollar altogether. If so, then it is likely that almost everyone will eagerly adopt this euro oil system ... At any rate, no matter what the British decide, should the Iranian Oil Bourse accelerate, the interests that matter-those of Europeans, Chinese, Japanese, Russians, and Arabs-will eagerly adopt the Euro, thus sealing the fate of the dollar. Americans cannot allow this to happen, and if necessary, will use a vast array of strategies to halt or hobble the operation's exchange
===>The proposed Iranian Oil Bourse will accelerate the fall of the American Empire.


Iran's Nuclear Capabilities

Nuclear Facilities
In February 2003, before the top officials of the Ministry of Science, Iranian President Mohammad Khatanmi reportedly announced a program for a complete nuclear fuel cycle, which was to consist of these components:

Mining Uranium in Saghand (200 kilometers, 125 miles from Yazd) from 350 meters (1160 feet) deep.

Preparing Yellow Cake in Ardekan near Yazd (at a site known as Ardekan Nuclear Fuel Unit)

UCF Facility in Isfahan site. At the Uranium Conversion Facility (UCF) in Isfahan, using the yellow cake prepared in the Ardekan, a number of by-products including uranium hexofloride (UF6), metallic uranium, and uranium oxide (Uo2) are produced. These are later used for uranium enrichment.

Natanz Uranium Enrichment Facility. Using the yellow cake and the products of the Isaheur UCF unit, uranium is enriched using the centrifuge equipments, and nuclear fuel pellets are to be eventually produced in Natanz. These pellets could then be used to form the fuel rods.

Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP)

Clandestine branches of Iran's nuclear weapon program
The Iranian Atomic Energy Organization (IAEO) is an official body recognized in Europe and the United States for its civil nuclear activities. But in the background some of its leading aides are accused by the West of doing their utmost to coordinate a covert network aimed at building nuclear weapons.

Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Hassan Rohani, who claims that Iran will not give up its uranium enrichment program.














Iran's Ballistic Missiles Programme

Iran's most modern missile, the Shahab-3, is displayed during a parade ceremony on the 23rd anniversary of the beginning of the Iran-Iraq war in Tehran on Sept. 22, 2003.

-----------------------------------------------

Europe Blows Itself Away in UN Fallout

The nuclear issue, Ali Ansari [ an associate fellow of the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London] believes, is not the major dispute that is causing the stand-off between Iran and the US. It was more about the pro-Israelis and neo-cons in the US being worried and trying to break Iran developing stronger relations with the EU.

"When you speak to European diplomats involved in negotiations with Iranians you can see their overall satisfaction with the developments and this is exactly the issue that worries Israeli lobbies in the US," he said.
Closer EU ties will protect Iran from US attack, says analyst


Yeah. Right. Well, thanks to the international bankruptcy of the beleaguered, US-blackmailed puppy UN, not any more ... and with some help from yer aul pal "I have to protect my ego" Bono:



Do you think that Poop fellow in the Vatacon understands what I have to do, Bono?

Of course, of course, of course, Georgy boy! But Free Trade and Rock Music in Africa, Georgy! Imagine THAT!... And maybe even Iran!! Eh Georgy boy?

***Yauh, your esteemed Pope visited here just a few months ago, Herr ***Bono, and climbed to za very top of za tallest Gothic structure in za ***whole wide web, Cologne Cathedral.

***Chancellor Merkel, babe, Pope Benedict's the Elvis of Popes! Heil Rocks ***To The Tops!! Ooou, chancy babe, you remind me of that gorgeous ***blondy babe Leni Riefenstahl ... Oh yeah, and yeah roith here's my flyer ***for How To Un-Dismantle An Atomic Bomb.


Alrighty, enough of that already.


Islam's rebel women

--------------------------------------

Iran: the next war
Has Tony Blair, our minuscule Caesar, finally crossed his Rubicon? Having subverted the laws of the civilised world and brought carnage to a defenceless people and bloodshed to his own, having lied and lied and used the death of a hundredth British soldier in Iraq to indulge his profane self-pity, is he about to collude in one more crime before he goes? ===> John Pilger

Iran may need force, warns Hurd :
Former Foreign Secretary Lord Hurd has said Britain cannot "realistically" rule out using military force against Iran over its nuclear programme.

Russia confirms missile defence contract with Iran: Amid the escalating crisis around Iran's nuclear programme, Russia said on Thursday that it will still arm Tehran with missiles that can secure nuclear facilities from attacks.

China welcomes Iran-Russia nuclear talks:
China said on Thursday it welcomed talks between Iran and Russia next week on plans to defuse the crisis over Tehran's atomic programme, but refused to say whether it would join the meeting.

Iran poised to retaliate against UN referral:
Ahmadinejad vows his country will continue on the road to victory, labels Bush warmonger who should be put on trial.

Iran dismisses US threat over nukes:
"We are not afraid of attacks by the United States or by other countries on Iran's nuclear installations because we have nothing to hide, we have no installations to produce nuclear weapons," Iranian Vice President Esfandyar Rahim Mashaee said.