US Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Tuesday rejected demands by Japan's new government to review a deal between the two countries about a controversial US airbase and the presence of American troops.
Gates made the comments on his plane en route to Tokyo, before he arrived as the first top US official to visit Japan since the new centre-left government took power here just over a month ago.
New premier Yukio Hatoyama pledged during campaigning to look again at the 2006 agreement struck by his conservative predecessor and the former Washington administration of George W. Bush.
That agreement was about the presence of 47,000 American troops in Japan and the planned relocation by 2014 of a major US airbase from an urban area to a coastal part of southern Okinawa island.
But Gates ruled out reopening talks on the deal, after Hatoyama earlier suggested the base may be moved off the island.
"We think we need to progress with the agreement that was negotiated," Gates said hours before he was due to meet Japan's Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada.
Gates said that although Obama's administration understood the new government's "desire to review certain policies," the agreement had been years in the making and other options for Okinawa had already been exhausted.
"We've looked at, over the years, at all these alternatives and they are either politically untenable or operationally unworkable," he said.
Gates' two-day visit is the first by a member of President Barack Obama's cabinet since Japan's new government took power to end decades of conservative rule and vowing less subservient relations with the United States.
Hatoyama's government, which in opposition criticised Japan abetting "American wars," has also announced it would end in January an Indian Ocean naval refuelling mission in support of the Afghanistan war effort.
The US military presence on Okinawa has long angered residents because of aircraft noise and the risk of accidents, while crimes committed by US service personnel have caused friction with the local community.
The US defense secretary was due to visit Seoul on Wednesday and Thursday before heading to Slovakia for a NATO meeting of defense ministers on Friday.
He said he expected to discuss in Japan and South Korea economic and other possible assistance in support of the NATO-led mission in Afghanistan.
Hatoyama's government has said it is considering new civilian aid as a substitute for the naval mission it plans to end next January that has supported NATO-led forces in Afghanistan since 2001.
Japan's Defence Minister Toshimi Kitazawa said Tuesday he would also study sending military personnel to help aid efforts in war-torn Afghanistan.
"If you look at the opinions of the international community, including Europe, I have come to worry whether civilian help alone is sufficient as an alternative," said Kitazawa, who was due to meet Gates on Wednesday.
"In what way can the Self Defense Forces participate in the efforts? The government has not been able to engage in substantial debate, but I personally wish to study the matter by soliciting ideas from many people."
Japan's armed forces are barred under the country's pacifist post-war constitution from offensive combat operations, but they have taken part in overseas humanitarian and military support missions.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
10/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
CHINESE MILITARY FORUM > JAPAN MAY NOT LET US USE OKINAWA AIRFIELDS [Nippon expectin' flexibility = compromise wid SecDef Gates in Base talks].
#2
Now there's a thorny question for the One's administration.
If Japan is still an ally, then their "presumptions" can be dealt with the appropriate harshness.
However, if Japan is no longer an ally, then their ass must be kissed.
#4
You don't want to get into "our mountain of corpses is taller than yours" pissing contests with the Japanese over Okinawa, Glenmore. Theirs is taller and has more civilians in it, regardless of the other aspects of the matter.
I don't know much about modern-day Okinawa besides its status as Japan's Hawaii - IE, an island-shaped South Seas-themed tourist trap. What is it that makes it such a leftist peacenik wonderland? Is it the sunny weather that attracts all the goddamn hippies?
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
10/21/2009 8:19 Comments ||
Top||
#5
You could also tell the Japanese Government we'll discuss it after the Russians return the northern islands back to their jurisdiction just like we have already returned Okinawa. Which would be, like, never. [Ask the German Prussians and Silesians about that one too].
On the other hand, I think we should be out of there anyway, along with South Korea. They're big enough boys now to take care of their own security. Fall back on Guam for local presence and forward staging.
#7
Our military bases and naval rights in Japan are the result of bilateral treaties of mutual friendship and military cooperation with the Japanese. If they don't wish to be friendly and don't want to cooperate, we're out of there.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/21/2009 9:49 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Okinawa's like 1200 miles closer to the Taiwanese Straits and a bunch of other Asian theatres of probable future strategic relevance than Guam. Guam is *not* a good replacement for the Okinawan bases.
China's a pretty important strategic dilemma. They're square in the Imperial Germany sour spot of:
- rising economic power
- catastrophic demographic profile
- revanchist know-nothing popular sentiment
I wouldn't be surprised if we give them Taiwan before 2012. Just flat out - on a platter, here's your dinner and go back to the kiddie's table and be a nice boy, junior. All the song and dance for the ChiCom 60th anniversary is surely signaling *something*.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
10/21/2009 12:10 Comments ||
Top||
#9
I agree Okinawa is much better positioned. But we can't use it if the Japanese don't want us there. We're friends, not (anymore) occupiers.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/21/2009 12:48 Comments ||
Top||
#10
B-52 missions out of Anderson AFB on Guam to points in SE Asia were 13 - 15 hours depending on where you went. To go anywhere strategically relevant today would take much longer and require multiple aerial refuelings. That would be ugly if you couldn't launch tankers out of Kadena.
#11
They seem to have completely blanked their minds as to WHY that base is there, They already started and lost one world war, we WILL watch them, closely.
And their mouthy politicians will NOT do squat about it. Politicians got them in this mess in the first place.
(Yes I know they were called Royalty, if you think Royalty isn't political you need history lessons.)
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/21/2009 13:09 Comments ||
Top||
#12
I wouldn't be surprised if we give them Taiwan before 2012.
The senior Chinese have figured out already they can essentially buy Taiwan. Why fight for it?
And with the present administration along with the the ancient regime at State, they won't do anything. They'll vote present. So why posture for nothing. It wastes resources and makes you look foolish.
#13
**BREAKING ** GUAM PDN > JAPAN: US TROOPS MUST GO [prefer any + all USMC, etc. leave OKinawa]; + GUAM K57 RADIO > GATES: NO FUTENMA RELOCATION, NO RELOCATION OF TROOPS TO GUAM. Includes NO FOLLOW-ON US-LED CONSOLADAT OF US FORCES IN JAPAN-OKIN, + NO RETURN OF LAND TO OKINAWA.
#14
Lest we fergit, CHINA > wants to include historic autonomous pro-CHIN Vassal kindgom RYUKYU KONGDOM = OKINAWA as part of its desired OFFSHORE CHIN EEZ/SPECIAL EZ ["continental shelf" diplomacy]. It does want to see a strong REARMED = MILITARIZED NUKULAAR JAPAN AS A REGIONAL + GEOPOL COMPETITOR TO THE FTURE CHIN SUPERPOWER ["weak Japan"].
* NET > CHIN MIL FORUMS > Now thru Year 2020, possib even 2025, is the DECISIVE PERIODS FOR CHINA TO PREVENT THE RISE OF A STRONG NUCLEAR ANTI-CHIN JAPAN, or in altern to DOMINATE/CONTROL SAME.
SAME > CHIN NETTERS-ARTICS > to defeat or stop the USN, espec its Aircraft Carriers + Subs in war, CHIN MUST BE ABLE TO THREATEN IFF NOT TAKE OVER GUAM-CNMI + MICRONESIA, EVEN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS + PARTS OF ALCAN-NORAM IFF NEED BE.
The above is EXCLUSIVE of RADICAL ISLAM'S ENTRY INTO PACOAS [ e.g. Uighurs in PALAU = SYMBOLIC GATEWAY] as per its REGIONAL-UNIVERSAL JIHAD [fight one andor both the US + CHINA, etal.].
#16
Our military bases and naval rights in Japan are the result of bilateral treaties of mutual friendship and military cooperation with the Japanese. If they don't wish to be friendly and don't want to cooperate, we're out of there.
It's not quite that simple IMO. For one thing, we've invested heavily in facilities there. And the legal agreements were put in place to allow long term planning, both with regard to materiel and also with regard to where else we have forces.
Would you like to see, say, agreements signed with Israel, in which they invested money and agreed to forego alternative defense methods, abrogated unilaterally by the current White House? Sudden denial of technologies they contributed to, or that we promised in exchange for them not investing in equivalents of their own?
I agree we're not occupiers there. But the precedent of quietly going home at this point has significant implications that should not IMO be accepted without objection.
#17
When I saw this article, I realized that the security implications for Japan and the US were huge. Yes, there are problems having the base in Okinawa. There have been problems in the past and there will always be problems in the future.
IMHO, this is a defining moment in US/Japan relations. How Obama handles this one will send messages to other allies with other bases. Japan must realize that closing off Okinawa bases has great implications to its own security. And all the while China is watching the whole thing. And so is Taiwan.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
10/21/2009 21:06 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Lest we fergit II, WMF > US-CHINA CONFLICT = To defeat the USN = US AIRCRAFT CARRIERS + SUBS, CHINA should UNILATER PREEMPTIVELY destroy JAPAN wid its nuclear missles, then turn same towards incoming US Milfors.
In any case, HAWAII being a de fact US STATE WID FORMAL SAY + PRE-DETERMINED SHARE IN US = USDOD BUDGETS, + GUAM being only an UN-INCORPORATED TERRITORY whose local Budget $$$ must be anually submitted, debated, and approved by the US Congress, + whose Leadership can't decide on what kind of LR Relations = final Political Status it wants wid the USA, HAWAII THE ALREADY-A-US-STATE-WHILE-GUAM-IS-NOT [US West Coast States]STANDS TO $$$ BENEFIT IFF THE MARINES STAY OR LEAVE JAPAN.
This scenario also inclusve if CHIN taking over GUAM + HAWAII, ETC. STRATEGIC AREAS; or inducing the NUCLEAR DESTRUCTION OF SAME AS PERTINENT.
E.g. CHINESE MIL FORUM THREAD [DER SPIEGEL Artic] > IIRC CHINA'S PLA SECOND ARTILLERY HAS 400-KILOTON DF-31/31A's LRBMS AIMED JUST AT GUAM PER SE, + exclusive of HAWAII + other major targets.
Just one more reason, among many, why Guam is only hurting itself by waffling + NOT having a formal vote of SELF-DETERMINATION/POL STATUS.
THE LONGER IT KEEPS PUTTING IT OFF, THE MORE IT RISKS LOSING EVERYTHING.
E.g. GUAM PDN Artic this AM > ANTHONY GODWIN [a top Guam realtor] > [paraphrased]MANY IN GUAM'S BUSINESS SECTOR ARE ENDANGERING THEMSELVES $$$ BY "PLACING THEIR BETS" ON THE MARINES BUILDUP/RELOC FROM OKINAWA.
#19
CHIN MIL FORUMS > Now thru Year 2020, possib even 2025, is the DECISIVE PERIODS FOR CHINA TO PREVENT THE RISE OF A STRONG NUCLEAR ANTI-CHIN JAPAN, or in altern to DOMINATE/CONTROL SAME.
Japan does accept military but not financial domination by the U.S. I'm not at all certain they'd accept even the attempt at either by China.
#20
They may not have the means to really resist. Their demographics have totally tanked. The elderly want stability and the young are tired of the old politicians who aligned with the US. They are heavily export driven and resouce poor in the midst of a serious recession that could tip into a full depression.
SEOUL, Oct. 20 (Yonhap) -- North Korean leader Kim Jong-il has visited a salmon farm where he praised researchers for contributing to the nation's economic growth by increasing production of marine products, state media said Tuesday.
No doubt he taught the salmon to spawn ...
The report of Kim's trip to the Salmon Breeding Institute came three days after he appeared at a Russian ensemble performance on Saturday.
"To actively conserve and propagate marine resources is a noble patriotic work for developing the national economy and improving the people's standard of living by increasing the production of marine products," Kim told the workers, according to the Korean Central News Agency.
Kim also ordered construction of more salmon farms, the report said. "Our country has favorable conditions for salmon breeding as it has many rivers and lakes and is surrounded by seas," he said.
You have favorable conditions for farming too, but it doesn't seem to help ...
The report did not give the location of the "ultra-modern" salmon institute or when Kim made the visit.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Whatcha gonna feed the salmon?
Posted by: ed ||
10/21/2009 1:03 Comments ||
Top||
U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates on Tuesday said he was sure that the deadline for the transfer of full operational control of Korean troops from Washington to Seoul in April 2012 will be met. Speaking on an airplane en route to Tokyo, Gates said he was glad to see progress.
He said when he met President Lee Myung-bak in Washington a few months ago, he found all other processes going smoothly, including the relocation of U.S. bases to Camp Humphreys in Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province. Gates said he would review progress in the transfer at the annual Korea-U.S. Security Consultative Meeting in Seoul on Thursday.
His expression of confidence was the strongest yet from officials in the Barack Obama administration. The message seems clear: he does not want the matter brought up again.
Turning to U.S demands for support for its war in Afghanistan, Gates said that he is ready to talk with Korea at the upcoming SCM about what Afghanistan needs, and that it is totally up to Korea to decide what kind of support it will give.
Perhaps the word they wanted was request instead of demands. But the South Koreans seem to treasure the chips they keep on their shoulders.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
South Korea is reportedly planning to provide North Korea with some US$1 million worth of aid through non-governmental organizations.
$1 million might cover the cognac bill ...
According to government sources, the South Korean administration will make an official decision regarding the aid by the end of this week.
The sources emphasized that aid delivered through the inter-Korean cooperation fund should be viewed separately from direct humanitarian assistance that Pyongyang requested during inter-Korean Red Cross talks last week.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The venerable Kimmie Whores and Liquor NGO?
Posted by: ed ||
10/21/2009 1:06 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Because it worked so well for Israel vis a vis Paleos?
Amid tight security and a large turnout of protesters, Dutch right-wing lawmaker Geert Wilders told an assembly of Temple University students that Europe and America must fight an ongoing "stealth jihad" that threatens democracy and free speech. "Where Islam sets roots, freedom dies," Geert Wilders told the students during his 30-minute address organized by a new student group called Temple University Purpose and funded by the California-based David Horowitz Freedom Center.
His remarks were met by a mixture of applause and boos, and occasionally gasps particularly when he stated that "our Western culture is far better than the Islamic culture and we should defend it."
He decried as a "disgrace" a resolution co-sponsored by the U.S. and Egypt, and backed by the U.N. Human Rights Council earlier this month, deploring attacks on religions while insisting that freedom of expression remains a basic right. Wilders also criticized President Barack Obama for his efforts to extend a hand to the Islamic world, saying that such appeasement marks "the beginning of the end." If the spread of Islam continues unabated in the Western world, "you might at the end of the day lose your Constitution," he told the assembly. "Wake up, defend your freedom."
He also touched on common themes in his speeches, including calling for an end to Muslim immigration and referring to the Muslim holy book, the Quran, "an evil book" that promotes violence and intolerance.
A question-and-answer session was cut short after the tone of the event began to turn nasty, with some in the crowd of several hundred students began shouting jeers. Wilders' security detail quickly ushered him from the room. "In order to improve our understanding of others, we need to learn," said Alvaro Watson of Purpose, the student group. "We can't fight for something if we only know one side."
Before his remarks at Temple, a public university serving about 34,000 students, Wilders showed his 15-minute anti-Islam film, "Fitna," which juxtaposes passages from the suras, or chapters, of the Quran with images of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, beheadings, shootings and speeches from clerics advocating violence against non-Muslims.
"I think it's completely wrong that someone who promotes racism and intolerance should be given a platform at this university," said Temple student Josh Rosenthal. "It's hate speech disguised as free speech." Another student, Joseph Rodrigues, said that being able to voice unpopular opinions is a freedom not to be taken lightly. "I might not like what he said, but I think it's important that he be allowed to say it," he said.
Temple officials issued a statement saying the university "is a community of scholars in which freedom of inquiry and freedom of expression are valued."
"We respect the right of our student organizations to invite people who express a wide variety of views and ideas," the school said in a statement.
British officials once banned Wilders from visiting for fear it would spark violence. He successfully sued the government and visited Friday.
Wilders is scheduled to speak at Columbia University in New York on Wednesday.
#2
"I think it's completely wrong that someone who promotes racism and intolerance should be given a platform at this university," said Temple student Josh Rosenthal.
#3
What a security nightmare. I will be amazed if Wilders gets through this without at least one assassination attempt.
The man has serious stones. Something a lot of "journalists", publishers and others need. The ability of Islam to shut up its opponents through threats of violence is one of its biggest strengths. But in the final analysis, it is the last gasp of barbarism against civilization.
#5
The upside to the anger his remarks create is if he can rattle people thats proof in the pudding he can control them. Hey Geert, become a U.S. citizen and run for Governor. I would vote for you.
The US Senate has voted to continue to allow Guantanamo inmates to be tried on US soil, removing a hurdle as the Obama administration seeks to close the camp.
The measure, which was passed by the House last week, permits Guantanamo detainees to be brought to the US only in order to face trial in US courts. Those cleared cannot remain in the US. The bill - passed 79-19 by the Senate - largely mirrors existing restrictions.
It will now go to President Barack Obama to be signed into law.
Mr Obama has set a 22 January 2010 deadline for closing the Guantanamo Bay camp in Cuba, where more than 220 inmates are still held. While some will be tried on US soil, others could be sent to abroad or face military tribunals.
The legislation passed by Congress removes one of the many legal, diplomatic and political hurdles in the path of the administration as it seeks to close the camp.
Under its terms, Congress must be provided with a detailed assessment of the security risk involved before a detainee can be brought to the US. The administration must also give notice of any transfer. Those cleared cannot be released onto US soil.
Some Republicans have objected to plans to hold Guantanamo detainees in US prisons, arguing that they do not deserve the protections afforded under US law.
Do the Democrats not understand that the Constitution protects our citizens? As the hoary quote says, the Constitution is not a suicide pact.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Will be interesting when Washington DC suddenly got a few hundred extra swarthy residents running loose.
Posted by: ed ||
10/21/2009 1:08 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Do the Democrats not understand that the Constitution protects our citizens?
Living in a World of principles is a lot easier than living in a World of real people.
#3
And just wait until the defendants lawyers start issuing subpoenas for Bush, Cheney,Rumsfeld, et al, and demanding every classified document the government possesses.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
10/21/2009 7:22 Comments ||
Top||
All it took was a simple statement to resolve a huge controversy over a well-meaning $7.5 billion U.S. aid package to Pakistan and avert what could have become a major issue in U.S.-Pakistan relations at a time when neither country can afford it.
The controversy grew from claims in some Pakistani quarters that the aid package, known as the Kerry-Lugar-Berman bill, was designed to micromanage Pakistan's internal affairs and impinge on its sovereignty. The powerful Pakistani military establishment expressed strong reservations despite assurances by the government of President Asif Ali Zardari that it was a "pro-democracy aid package."
The opposition to the measure grew so intense in Pakistan that the Zardari government, hobbled by a severe economic crisis and bled white by exploding Islamist violence, was forced to send back its Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi to Washington in a hurry to salvage the package.
It was during talks with Qureshi that the measure's principal backers, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., decided to issue a statement to clarify the intent of the measure. A day later, U.S. President Barack Obama signed the bill into law, designated as the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009.
The aid package, the money for which must be appropriated by Congress every year, would triple non-military U.S. aid to Pakistan at the rate of $1.5 billion a year for five years. The intent behind the measure is to help strengthen Pakistan's democratic institutions, promote human rights, make its military answerable to the civilian government and bring economic relief to the suffering masses.
The provisions in the aid package include requiring the U.S. secretary of state to periodically certify the exercise of civilian control of the military to curb any cross-border activities of terror outfits operating from its territory.
The Kerry-Berman statement will be placed in the Congressional Record along with the aid package bill, but the bill itself will remain unchanged, the Voice of America reported.
Qureshi said he hoped that the furor in Pakistan over the aid package would ease after the release of the U.S. lawmakers' statement, which he described as "historic" and promised to tell his people that the aid package is a sign of U.S. friendship.
In issuing the written statement, Kerry told reporters that the bill "demonstrates the American people have a long-term commitment to the people of Pakistan," CNN reported.
"The many requirements of this report are intended as a way for Congress to assess how effectively U.S. funds are being spent, shortfalls in U.S. resources that hinder the use of such funds and steps the government of Pakistan has taken to advance our mutual interests in countering extremism and nuclear proliferation and strengthening democratic institutions," the statement said.
"There is no intent to (establish), and nothing in this act in any way suggests that there should be, any U.S. role in micromanaging internal Pakistani affairs, including the promotion of Pakistani military officers or the internal operations of the Pakistani military."
Praising the aid package, a White House statement said the law "is the tangible manifestation of broad support for Pakistan" in the United States and is "based on a shared commitment to improving the living conditions of the people of Pakistan through sustainable economic development, strengthening democracy and the rule of law, and combating the extremism that threatens Pakistan and the United States."
The resolution of the aid package issue, assuming no new one emerges, also helps the United States as it can use all the support it can get from Pakistan in fighting the terror groups holed up in sanctuaries in the tribal regions along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. The Pakistan factor also cannot be ignored in any new strategy that emerges from the Afghan war council meetings within the Obama administration.
Even as the aid package was being signed into law, Pakistan convulsed under a series of brutal and daring militant attacks, mostly on security installations, that killed scores of people. During the weekend, the long-awaited ground assault by the Pakistani military against the Taliban, al-Qaida and other Islamist groups in South Waziristan began, with reports of heavy militant casualties.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
10/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Just as the students (locally called talib) Pakistan sends is a sign of their friendship.
Posted by: ed ||
10/21/2009 1:12 Comments ||
Top||
ON BOARD A US MILITARY AIRCRAFT: US Secretary of State Robert Gates on Tuesday said he was encouraged by the Pakistani offensive against Taliban but that it was too soon to judge the outcome.
Im obviously encouraged by the Pakistani operations, Gates told reporters aboard his aircraft en route to Tokyo.
I think that the terrorist attacks that have been launched inside Pakistan in recent days made clear the need to begin to deal with this problem, he said. And so we obviously are very supportive of what the Pakistanis are doing. But [still] its very early, he said, adding the operation had only been underway a few days.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
ISLAMABAD: The US embassy on Tuesday expressed disappointment at media reports claiming the Sihala law enforcement training facility was being used to train foreigners on Pakistani soil.
The report was factually incorrect and mischievous. The 512 Pakistani police officials who have trained at Sihala could easily set the record straight, the embassy clarified in a statement.
Yeah, ask any Pak police officer if he's seen a turban at the facility ...
It said the US, since 2003, had helped train federal and provincial police officials in a variety of counter-terrorism measures at Sihala. The embassy stated the Pakistan government had proposed using the Sihala training facility, adding there was no monitoring equipment located at the facility.
The administration of the Punjab Police College has repeatedly visited the facility. The current commandant has complete, unrestricted access to the facility and all the personnel trained at the facility are Pakistani law enforcement personnel and no foreigners are trained there, the embassy said.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Actually, there is only a rough cease fire in the 1400 year Sunni-Shiite civil war, after the Shiites ended Sunni power in Baghdad. In any case, the US built one of the largest military airports in the world, 50 miles north of Baghdad. I believe that a majority of both Sunnis and Shiites want it to remain, as a resource to assist Iraqis, should there be civil disorder. The Go-Home rhetoric refers to the visible presence of US troops. It is unlikely that US forces will ever have either much of a ground troop presence. Meanwhile the air bases serve US global security interests. Nothing is going to change.
#4
my son's outpost is lightly manned, irregular supply and minimal facilities in teh province west of Mosul (see here). This is "withdrawal is already a given" propaganda which doesn't account for O's encouragement of Baathists, Syrians, AQI (such as they are), and Iranian stooges
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/21/2009 19:13 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The bottom line is that Iraq is a golden opportunity to be in the middle of the Middle East, which serious strategic analysts will tell you is where the dangerous action is in the world today. Our bases there are like having two or three aircraft carriers in permanent station--just a hell of a lot cheaper.
Talks between Iran and world powers on a uranium enrichment deal are making slower-than-expected progress, the head of the UN's nuclear watchdog has said. Mohamed ElBaradei said "many technical issues" had to be analysed, but insisted they were "moving forward".
Technical should be: Where did you say your other enrichment plants are? We need to confirm our satellite photos.
The negotiations were stalled for most of Tuesday after Iran said it did not want France to be part of the deal, but briefly resumed late in the evening.
Iran is considering a proposal to send uranium abroad for further enrichment. This is seen as a way for Iran to get the fuel it needs, while giving guarantees to the West that it will not be used for nuclear weapons.
Tuesday's talks in Geneva - involving Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany - faltered after the Iranians said they would curb enrichment, something seen by the Western powers as essential, and objected to France's involvement. All sides eventually returned to the negotiating table for about an hour after the US and Iranian representatives met in Mr ElBaradei's office. Few details of the meetings were released.
The director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said the talks would resume at 1000 (0800 GMT) on Wednesday. "I believe we are making progress. It is maybe slower than I expected. But we are moving forward," Mr ElBaradei told reporters.
He said the process was complex, and involved "many technical issues" as well as "confidence-building guarantees".
The Iranian ambassador to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, meanwhile said the consultations had been "constructive".
Pulled another over on El Baradei, did he ...
Earlier, Iran's Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, objected to Paris being part of the enrichment deal because it had reneged on nuclear fuel contracts in the past.
"There is Russia, America... I believe these countries are enough," he said. "France, based on its shortcomings to fulfil its obligations in the past, is not a trustworthy party to provide fuel for Iran."
Pot, kettle -- you know the drill.
Mr Mottaki also reiterated any agreement would not mean the suspension of Tehran's enrichment activities. "Iran will continue its uranium enrichment. It is not linked to buying fuel from abroad," he said. "The meetings with world powers, and their behaviour, shows that Iran's right to have peaceful nuclear technology has been accepted by them."
The proposed scheme hinges on an arrangement in principle that Western negotiators announced after talks in Geneva earlier this month. Under it, Russia and France would treat most of Iran's low-enriched uranium and turn it into fuel rods for a research reactor in Tehran.
Diplomats say a compromise is being considered under which Iran would sign a contract with Russia, which would then sub-contract work to France. Correspondents say the deal would see Iran get the fuel it needs, tacit acknowledgement of its right to enrich uranium, and no new sanctions. The West would meanwhile get a guarantee that Iran's existing stockpile will not be diverted to make nuclear bombs, they add.
I read the other day that somehow Iran introduced a contaminant into the purification process that renders the product unusable for bombs... if I understood what I was reading correctly. Has anyone else seen anything like that?
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
TOPIX/WORLD NEWS > IRAN MAY PRODUCE HIGHER ENRICHED URANIUM IFF NUCLEAR TALKS FAIL.
#4
Molybdenum as I recall - So, they're sending their impure, weapons-*un*usable uranium off to someone who has the equipment to purify it to the point of weapons-usable (~19.75%) and return it to them - If it wasn't so diabolical, I'd be impressed with their chess skills
#5
Grampaw, I read your comment as saying they are sending it off to France for purification? Why would France do anything other than just refine it a bit and leave the Molybdenum in place?
U.S.-Born Imam Anwar Al-Awlaki on the State of Jihad Eight Years After 9/11: The U.S. Cannot Win There is No Rolling Back the Worldwide Jihad; 'If America Failed to Defeat the Mujahedeen When It Gave Its President Unlimited Support How Can It Win With Obama Who Is On a Short Leash?... How Can It Win Today With a Recession If Not a Depression At Hand?'
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
SEOUL, Oct. 20 (Yonhap) -- North Korean leader Kim Jong-il has visited a salmon farm where he praised researchers for contributing to the nation's economic growth by increasing production of marine products, state media said Tuesday.
The US Senate has voted to continue to allow Guantanamo inmates to be tried on US soil, removing a hurdle as the Obama administration seeks to close the camp.
Talks between Iran and world powers on a uranium enrichment deal are making slower-than-expected progress, the head of the UN's nuclear watchdog has said. Mohamed ElBaradei said "many technical issues" had to be analysed, but insisted they were "moving forward".
U.S.-Born Imam Anwar Al-Awlaki on the State of Jihad Eight Years After 9/11: The U.S. Cannot Win There is No Rolling Back the Worldwide Jihad; 'If America Failed to Defeat the Mujahedeen When It Gave Its President Unlimited Support How Can It Win With Obama Who Is On a Short Leash?... How Can It Win Today With a Recession If Not a Depression At Hand?'
