Antichrist Will Unite Shiites And Sunnis Against Maliki (Rev 13)

Will Iraqi PM’s opponents play post-sectarian politics? Many politicians who have majority of parliamentary seats express desire to keep Maliki out of power, but need to overcome differences.

Antichrist Unites Shiites and Sunni

Middle East Online
By Mustafa Habib – BAGHDAD

Third time? A few days ago, the President of the semi-autonomous region of Iraqi Kurdistan and a considerable political force within Iraq, Massoud Barzani, announced that his party would not participate in another government led by the current Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki.

The Iraqi Kurds are not the only ones to have made this kind of announcement. The Sadrist movement, led by cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and represented in Parliament by the Ahrar bloc, has also said they don’t want to see their former ally, al-Maliki, given a third term as Prime Minister.

Another of al-Maliki’s most important former allies, the Muwatin, or Citizen, coalition which represents the interests of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, led by another cleric Ammar al-Hakim, has expressed similar sentiments.

Both of the latter are mostly composed of Shiite Muslims, the same sect as al-Maliki. Meanwhile al-Maliki’s long time opponents – mostly Sunni Muslim blocs and parties as well as some secular blocs – have also said they won’t contemplate a third term for al-Maliki.

Al-Maliki’s bloc has won around 94 seats and it’s highly likely this share will increase to over 100 – anything from 102 to 110, analysts suggest – as the big bloc attracts smaller parties to its ranks to try and form a coalition big enough to be allowed to form the next government.

Meanwhile all of those who oppose a third term for al-Maliki number more than enough to form a government – they have around 180 seats out of Iraq’s 328 seat Parliament. And some have suggested, perhaps rather optimistically, that these groups could form a kind of grand coalition because they all have the same focus: keeping al-Maliki out. Such a coalition could be described as grand because it would cross most of Iraq’s ethnic and sectarian boundaries, uniting all those who usually jostle for political power for their own sector of Iraqi society; it would herald a true post-sectarian age for Iraqi politics.

Iran Is Correct: The Great Babylon Will Be Destroyed

Global US Empire Coming To An End

The Fall of Babylon the Great

By Yifa Yaakov and Adiv Sterman May 29, 2014, 3:16 pm

Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) commander Hossein Salami said leaders throughout the Muslim world were no longer “stretching a red carpet” for American officials, indicating that Washington’s influence in these areas was growing weaker, according to the semi-official Fars news agency.

Meanwhile, said Salami, Iran’s influence was on the rise — as were its abilities to deter its enemies.

“Any enemy plot will entail an unexpected ending for him and this is due to the Iranian nation’s reliance on religious and Islamic beliefs,” the commander said.

“The [Islamic] revolution has changed the balance of power to such an extent that no security and political equation in the Muslim world is possible without winning Iran’s satisfaction.”

Specifically, Salami was referring to a recent surprise visit by US President Barack Obama to the Bagram Air Field in Afghanistan to celebrate Memorial Day weekend with US troops there. During his visit, Obama stated that America’s longest war would come to a close at the end of the year.

Salami interpreted the visit differently, saying that the US president had to travel to Afghanistan unannounced because Afghan President Hamid Karzai had turned down his offer to visit the country.

“That’s why Obama secretly and without the prior information of Karzai appeared in Bagram,” Salami said.

Last week, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said the US was angered by Iran’s opposition to “Western hegemony,” and to the “colonization” of Middle Eastern countries.

The US “becomes confused when a certain people in an important country with a very rich history and unique characteristics stands up to this ugly phenomenon of dominating [countries],” Khamenei said during a ceremony at an Iranian military facility, according to a translation provided by the Middle Eastern Media Research Institute.

“This is what angers the US, this is what unites the arrogant countries against Iran.”

The Iranian leader asserted that nations across the globe supported his regime’s efforts to block American aspirations, adding that attempts to curb the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program were merely an excuse for the West to bully his country.

“Today the pretext [for Western pressure] is the nuclear issue, another day it is human rights, and some other time, it will be something else,” Khamenei said.

“They want to dissuade the Iranian regime from opposing the world’s aggressive and bribe-taking bullies and oppressors.”

The ayatollah assured his audience that the regime would not be deterred by Western threats, and would continue to extend the reach of its influence throughout the globe.

“The [US] got angry, so let them,” he said “Let them die in their anger.”

Thank You Dr. Khan

Dr AQ Khan unfurls saga of atomic bomb

Khan: Father of the Islamic Nuclear Bomb

Pakistani scientists were ready for nuclear explosions in 1984

 Zubair Qureshi

Thursday, May 29, 2014 – Islamabad—Pakistani nuclear scientists were ready to conduct nuclear tests even back in 1984. What they waited for was a go ahead signal by the then government led by Gen Zia-ul-Haq President and Chief of the Army Staff. However, the historic moment came fourteen years later in 1998 when Pakistan was compelled to conduct nuclear tests on May 28 as a prompt reply to India’s 11 May tests.

This was revealed by the Father of Pakistan’s Nuclear Programme Dr AQ Khan at a ceremony titled “Atom Bomb ki Kahani——Dr AQ Khan ki Zubani” marking Youm-e-Takbeer at Aiwan-e-Quaid here on Wednesday. Nazriya Pakistan Council (NPC) had arranged the function.

NPC Chairman and Editor-in-Chief of Pakistan Observer Zahid Malik presided over the function.

Dr AQ Khan who had the distinguished honour to lead the Pakistan nuclear Programme from its inception to the successful conduct of nuclear tests, shared with the audience some fond memories of the days when he had to start from scratch.

Dr AQ Khan said he was in Europe in 1971 working on a project that was monitored jointly by the nuclear scientists of Holland, Germany and the UK and being a nuclear project it had been declared a top secret. He was in Europe when he learned the disturbing news of separation of East Pakistan from the Western wing. This was a deep shock for the patriotic Dr AQ Khan. A few years later, India tested first nuclear explosion in March 1974. Dr Khan who was already disturbed about the future of his country that had been deprived of its eastern part due to the conspiracies of a clever and hostile neighbour, at once decided to come into action. The enemy had gone nuclear and Pakistan’s redemption too lay in acquiring nuclear capability.

Dr AQ Khan went on to tell the jam-packed hall of the Aiwan-e-Quaid the story of atomic bomb. In December 1974, a meeting was arranged between the young AQ Khan and the then Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Dr Khan gave him a number of proposals and having done so, he returned to Holland. Again in December 1975, he returned to his homeland and after spending a month or so in Pakistan when he was preparing to return, ZAB asked him to stay in Pakistan and work on its nuclear programme. According to Dr Khan, it was indeed a test for him as quitting a lucrative job, a peaceful and prosperous life was not easy. However, his wife turned out to be a source of strength for him and asked him to stay in Pakistan if his country needed him. Dr AQ Khan paid tributes to ZA Bhutto who initiated the nuclear programme of the country. However, it was not Bhutto alone as all the successive rulers approved the programme and gave their full support, said Dr AQ Khan.

Dr Khan was allotted a land in Kahuta to set up laboratories there. Then he searched for competent patriotic Pakistani scientists from across the world and in this way a team of dedicated scientists came into being.

“I can still remember we worked for 20 hours a day for weeks and months,” shared Dr Khan with the audience. Gen Zia once on a visit to Kahuta laboratories was so much impressed that in the visitors’ book he wrote “These laboratories should be titled as Khan Research Laboratories instead of Kahuta Research Laboratories,” said Dr AQ Khan while turning another page of history.

However, Dr Khan regretted that the present government that claims the credit for the nuclear tests has not for once remembered scientists who realized the dream of making Pakistan a nuclear power. “I don’t need any credit as people’s love is more than any worldly wealth, name or fame,” he said. Dr Khan was given standing ovation for these remarks and youth especially students of various schools of Haripur and Hazara who had come all the way to attend the function vigorously cheered the ageing father of Pakistan’s nuclear programme. He shrugged the rumours about security and safety of Pakistan’s nuclear programme. “Our nuclear programme is in safe hands,” he said. Dr Khan said if one wanted to know the complete story of Pakistan’s atom bomb and evolution of Pakistan’s nuclear programme, one should read Zahid Malik’s book “Dr AQ Khan and Islamic Bomb”. Zahid Malik has given details of our nuclear history and “has suffered for doing so,” Dr Khan lightly shared with the audience.

Gen Retired Hameed Gul said Dr AQ Khan is a courageous man and keeps the country in his highest esteem. He regretted that the government did not acknowledge Dr Khan’s services. “They fear lest the nation should follow Dr Khan Sb,” said Gul. Pakistan’s nuclear programme is for peace, he said but for those who are against Pakistan’s security and integrity it serves as a warning. The entire Islamic world is proud of Pakistan’s nuclear programme, he said.

Senator Razina Alam Khan paid tribute to Dr AQ Khan in verse. She had composed the poem on May 28, 1998. The poem was well received and appreciated by all including Dr Khan. Senior Vice President NPC Mian Muhammad Javed said the government should utilize the talent of Dr AQ Khan. Such personalities are our asset and we should take maximum advantage of their foresight, creative genius and scientific innovative ideas. He said the entire nation and the successive rulers had consensus on Pakistan’s nuclear programme. It is for peace and prosperity of the country.

At the end, students had group photo with Dr AQ Khan while President NPC Haripur Chapter and President Private Education Network Khyber Pakhtunkhwa presented flowers to Dr AQ Khan.

America’s Nuclear Nightmare: … And Finally Iran

America’s Nuclear Nightmares: Russia, China, and Soon Iran?

Just Another Nuclear Bomb

“American allies fear the Obama Administration will similarly let Iran go nuclear due to a lack of certainty. Not once has the American intelligence community accurately predicted when hostile states have gone nuclear…”

Gabriel Scheinmann

May 29, 2014

Fifty years ago, the CIA produced a Special National Intelligence Estimate (SNIE) on China’s nuclear weapons program for President Lyndon Johnson. Overhead photography taken three weeks earlier revealed that a Chinese installation in Lop Nor was definitively a nuclear test site and would come online in two months. However, the CIA estimated, China would not have the necessary amount of fissionable material, which the United States assumed would come from a small plutonium reactor at Baotou, until mid-1965.

Seeking to make sense of the conflicting timelines, the CIA began to speculate: perhaps the Soviets had transferred additional fissionable material, perhaps the CIA was unaware of other enrichment sites, or, perhaps, as is often the case in large undertakings, progress among the different elements of China’s nuclear program had merely become uneven. In conclusion, the SNIE reads, the available facts “do not permit a very confident estimate of the chances of a Chinese Communist nuclear detonation in the next few months. Clearly the possibility of such a detonation before the end of the year cannot be ruled out—the test may occur during this period. On balance, however, we believe that it will not occur until sometime after the end of 1964.” Seven weeks later, China tested its first nuclear bomb on October 16, 1964, a highly enriched uranium implosion device.

Fifty year later, it is this assessment that could land on President Obama’s desk with regards to Iran’s nuclear program and it is this assessment that strikes fear in America’s Middle Eastern allies. Israelis and Arabs alike worry that by the time America is certain that Iran is within reach of possessing a nuclear weapon, Washington’s ability or willingness to stop it will be out of reach. Despite clear evidence of a Chinese test site in its final stages, the CIA did not believe Beijing had enough weapons-grade plutonium and, therefore, still assessed that any test was close to a year away. The SNIE, in the words of former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, had too many “known unknowns” in its nuclear picture and the Johnson Administration did what it thought was reasonable and responsible: nothing.

American allies fear the Obama Administration will similarly let Iran go nuclear due to a lack of certainty. Not once has the American intelligence community accurately predicted when hostile states have gone nuclear and not once has an American president used military force to stop them from doing so. Six weeks before the Soviets tested their first bomb in August 1949, U.S. intelligence confidently assessed that a Russian test was at least two years away. Twenty-five years later, a postmortem CIA report on its failure to predict India’s “Smiling Buddha” test blamed itself for denying the president the opportunity to try and prevent Indian proliferation. Most recently, the Bush Administration was blindsided by Israeli intelligence showing the existence of a Syrian plutonium reactor. Even then, the United States demurred, ultimately prompting Israel to take actions into its own hands.

Intelligence gathering about purposefully secretive nuclear programs of American enemies is a Sisyphean endeavor. In fact, the major Iranian nuclear facilities of Natanz, Arak, and Fordow were discovered only belatedly by Western intelligence. Blaming the intelligence community and its faulty predictions for instances of nuclear detonation is like blaming the bookie for the race results. While the CIA and others can seek to bound the “known unknowns”, it is the president’s responsibility to decide whether and how to act.

When President Obama receives an intelligence estimate similar to the one President Johnson received a half-century ago, what will he do? Just like his predecessors, he could conclude that, based on the best available intelligence, Iran was not yet able to produce a nuclear bomb and that the United States could not, in good conscience, use all necessary means to preempt such a development. Instead, he could ask for more time in the hopes that the United States would acquire more certainty in its assessment of Iranian nuclear progress. Possessing unique military capabilities and blessed by the security of physical distance, such caution is likely not fatal. Were it caught unaware yet again, the United States would still possess the time and means to destroy Iran’s nuclear program even postbreakout.

Neither is true for Iran’s neighbors. Without bombers and in immediate range of Iranian missiles, regional states do not have the luxury of waiting for perfect, real-time intelligence—unless they are convinced America will stop an Iranian breakout under all circumstances. Therein lies the rub that explains why America’s allies are so distressed: while Washington can wait until it is undeniably convinced of an imminent Iranian breakout, Jerusalem and Riyadh cannot and do not trust that an Iranian nuclear weapon is indeed President Obama’s redline. Given America’s track record, who can blame them?

Gabriel Scheinmann is the Director of Policy at the Jewish Policy Center. Follow him on Twitter @GabeScheinmann.

The US No Longer Able To React Effectively

Is the U.S. Willing to React Effectively?

The Modern Jihad: Nuclear Terrorism

by Peter Huessy
May 28, 2014 at 4:00 am

The clandestine production of nuclear weapons by rogue states promises to create what Yale Professor Paul Bracken terms an “exceedingly volatile poly-nuclear Middle East.”[1]

Against the backdrop of negotiations between the United States, Russia, China, France, Great Britain and Germany, (known as the P5+1), on the one hand and Iran on the other, his warning is particularly important.

In 1961, a leading defense analyst, Fred Ikle, wrote, “In entering into an arms-control agreement, we must know not only that we are technically capable of detecting a violation but also that we or the rest of the world will be… in a position to react effectively if a violation is discovered.”

At least five states have sought to build nuclear bombs clandestinely: Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya and North Korea. All are or were signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT], which prohibits all except the permanent five members of the UN Security Council from acquiring nuclear weapons.

During the past few decades they were given clean bills of health by the International Atomic Energy Administration, [IAEA], the UN organization monitoring nuclear energy programs to prevent them from being secretly transformed into parallel nuclear weapons programs.

The reason Iraq and Syria did not succeed in becoming nuclear weapons states was due to Israeli air strikes on their nuclear reactors in 1981 and 2007.

Iraq failed again in its quest for nuclear weapons because — in the immediate aftermath of the 1991 Desert Storm campaign, which ousted Iraq’s Saddam Hussein from the occupation of Kuwait — the U.S. discovered and destroyed Baghdad’s nuclear program.

As for Libya’s nuclear program– more advanced than the UN’s IAEA had assumed — the heart of it was interdicted at sea by the U.S. and Great Britain when they seized thousands of nuclear centrifuge parts destined for Libya. The centrifuge parts had been manufactured in Malaysia by the Pakistani nuclear smuggling network led by A.Q. Khan, the father of Islamabad’s nuclear weapons program.[2]

But North Korea?

In 1994 the Agreed Framework agreement between North Korea and the United States called for Japan and South Korea to fund the construction of two nuclear power plants in North Korea, in return for Pyongyang remaining in the NPT and making transparent its nuclear program. The agreement included North Korea’s ending any pursuit of nuclear weapons.[3]

What if Israel had not destroyed Iraq’s nuclear reactor in 1981? Saddam Hussein might very well have had a nuclear weapons capability when, in 1990, he invaded Kuwait. Might Saddam, armed with such weaponry, have continued south to seize the oil fields in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia? And would a U.S.-led coalition then even have tried try to dislodge Iraq from Kuwait or even Saudi Arabia?

Today, we either naïvely or venally assume Iran is open to a simple trade. That is, the U.S. and its allies eliminate economic sanctions in return for Iran being transparent about its nuclear program.
This assumption misses why we have a problem in the first place.

Iran has been sanctioned because it is a terrorist-sponsoring state seeking nuclear weapons, not the other way around.

Iran is seeking nuclear weapons for what reason?

Most probably to fulfill its constitutional mandate to a) Destroy Israel; b) Stop America from protecting the Persian Gulf and our allies there; and c) Become the hegemonic power in the region. And, into the bargain, to control some two thirds of the world’s proven reserves of conventional oil and one third of its natural gas.

With Iran, we face either the North Korean 1994 spurious-deal option, which permits it to acquire nuclear weapons capability, or the Israeli 1981 and 2007 Iraq and Syria option of a military strike.
Albright writes that if we choose the “deal” route, we have to ensure that any agreement with Iran totally ends its nuclear weapons capability, unlike the 1994 deal with North Korea.Proliferation expert Professor Matthew Kroenig, of Georgetown University, alternatively argues that we should simply destroy as much of Iran’s nuclear program as possible.

However attractive a diplomatic agreement with Iran might be, its supporters assume three things, all questionable.

First, most assume we will know in a timely way of any significant Iranian breach of a new agreement.

Second, many assume that, once we find out about violations, we will muster the will to take appropriate action to end the violation. To date, however, Iran has declared the Parchin military facility off-limits, in the face of considerable evidence that suspect nuclear warhead design work has taken place there.

Third, much of conventional wisdom says “don’t worry”. For example, Spencer Ackerman of the Guardian and former CIA analyst Paul Pillar both claim that even if Iran acquires a nuclear warhead, it cannot deliver it to the U.S.

They both thus assume we have sufficient time to protect ourselves even if Iran does get a bomb.

This is wrong on two counts.

The consensus of the US intelligence community is that Iran will have an intercontinental ballistic missile [ICBM] by 2015, according to Congressional testimony on February 14, 2014 by Lt Gen Michael Flynn, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Why is this?

Most Americans seem to forget that less than a year ago, North Korea showed that its missiles can now reach the U.S. if launched in a southerly direction — and demonstrated its ability to do precisely that.

Given North Korea’s extensive cooperative missile work with Iran, and that North Korea can now mate its nuclear warheads to its missiles, Iran will most likely soon learn to do likewise.

What can history tell us?

On one side, in 1981 and 2007, Israel warplanes respectively struck an Iraqi and Syrian nuclear reactor.

Great Britain and the United States in 2003 seized a Libya-bound nuclear centrifuge shipment aboard the ship BBC China after it was diverted to an Italian port.

And in 1991 the U.S. liberated Kuwait — also discovering and dismantling Iraq’s nuclear program — while using a coalition of military forces.

On the other side, in 1994 the U.S. made a “deal” with North Korea. Pyongyang cheated immediately, now has a small arsenal of nuclear weapons, and is assisting other countries in acquiring nuclear weapons.

If one is concerned about the future of the U.S. and the free world, the choice seems clear. Will politicians have the courage to make it?

[1] “The Second Nuclear Age: A Conversation with Professor Paul Bracken“, Luncheon Series, The Hudson Institute, May 6, 2014.

[2] See, for further discussion of these cases, the website of The Wisconsin Project on Arms Control, “Libyan Timeline;” “Iraq’s Real Weapons Threat” by Rolf Ekeus, Former Head of UN Inspections Effort in Iraq, The Washington Post June 29, 2003; and Micah Morrison, “New A.Q. Khan Documents Suggest Pakistan Spread Nuclear Weapon Technology“, Fox New, November 18, 2011.

[3] For an excellent chronology of these events, see “North Korean Nuclear Developments: An Updated Chronology” and “CRS Issue Brief for Congress, North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons Program“.

The Great Babylon Will Be Destroyed

A chilling threat to US? Iran leader says Jihad will continue till America is DESTROYED

 

United States The Great Babylon

Dailybhaskar.com   |  May 27, 2014, 09:56AM IST

Tehran: Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said that his country’s struggle will end once it defeats the oppression by US. Khamenei said Iran needed to develop a more combative mindset in order to achieve its higher Islamic role and stand up to ‘oppressors’.

While speaking to members of parliament in Tehran, Khamenei said Iran must be armed and ‘have the capability to defend itself’ in a ‘world full of thieves’.

According to Daily Mail, “Khamenei’s comments came as negotiations with the international community over Iran’s nuclear programme ran into a stalemate, with Tehran saying world powers were ‘demanding too much’. Battle and jihad are endless because evil and its front continue to exist,’ Khamenei told MPs, according to a translation by US news site The Daily Caller. This battle will only end when the society can get rid of the oppressors’ front with America at the head of it, which has expanded its claws on human mind, body and thought. This requires a difficult and lengthy struggle and need for great strides.’ The Daily Caller’s translation of a Fars News Agency report is by a reporter pseudonymously bylined Reza Khalili, who claims to be a former CIA agent in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard.”

The report said, “Khamenei’s address to Parliament on Sunday continued with veiled references to the actions of the West and Arab states as he justified Iran’s continued defiance of international sanctions against its nuclear programme. ‘Logic and reason command that for Iran, in order to pass through a region full of pirates, needs to arm itself and must have the capability to defend itself,’ he said. ‘They should stop demanding too much’: Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who says the impasse in nuclear talks is not his fault.  Today’s world is full of thieves and plunderers of human honour, dignity and morality who are equipped with knowledge, wealth and power, and under the pretense of humanity easily commit crimes and betray human ideals and start wars in different parts of the world’.”

Sharif Challenges India’s Nuclear Prowess

Never doubt Pakistan’s defence: PM

Indian “Justice”

Islamabad National

Congratulating the nation on the 16th anniversary of “Youm-e-Takbeer”, Prime Minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif has assured that Pakistan has a strong defence against any aggression.

“Our nuclear assets that are guarantee of national security are in safe hands and the same fact has been expressed and reiterated by numerous international institutions,” he said in his message on the occasion being celebrated today.

The prime minister, however, emphasised that Pakistan being a responsible nation was playing a vibrant role in the comity of nations.

“Let me state on this occasion that our nuclear capability should not be a point of concern for anyone as it is only for peaceful purpose and for the welfare of our people,” he added.

The premier said that Pakistan was cooperating with international organisations for peaceful uses of nuclear technology for the benefit of mankind.

“Pakistan has already expressed its willingness to provide this assistance and know-how under the aegis of IAEA in various aspects of peaceful application of nuclear technology to any country needing the same. We have expressed this resolve at many international forums,” he maintained.

Wake Up America: This Is a JIHAD

Iran’s Supreme Leader: Jihad Will Continue Until America is No More

Khamenei Calls For Jihad Against the US

1:54 PM 05/25/2014

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, all but said on Sunday that negotiations over the country’s illicit nuclear program are over and that the Islamic Republic’s ideals include destroying America.

“Those [Iranians] who want to promote negotiation and surrender to the oppressors and blame the Islamic Republic as a warmonger in reality commit treason,” Khamenei told a meeting of members of parliament, according to the regime’s Fars News Agency.

Khamenei emphasized that without a combative mindset, the regime cannot reach its higher Islamic role against the “oppressors’ front.”

“The reason for continuation of this battle is not the warmongering of the Islamic Republic. Logic and reason command that for Iran, in order to pass through a region full of pirates, needs to arm itself and must have the capability to defend itself,” he said.

“Today’s world is full of thieves and plunderers of human honor, dignity and morality who are equipped with knowledge, wealth and power, and under the pretense of humanity easily commit crimes and betray human ideals and start wars in different parts of the world.”

In response to a question by a parliamentarian on how long this battle will continue, Khamenei said,“Battle and jihad are endless because evil and its front continue to exist. … This battle will only end when the society can get rid of the oppressors’ front with America at the head of it, which has expanded its claws on human mind, body and thought. … This requires a difficult and lengthy struggle and need for great strides.”

Khamenei cited the scientific advancement of the country. “The accelerated scientific advancement of the last 12 years cannot stop under any circumstances,” he said, referring to the strides the regime has made toward becoming a nuclear power.

As reported on May 19 on The Daily Caller, Iran has put up new roadblocks to reaching a deal with the P5+1 world powers over its illicit nuclear program. The powers are the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, plus Germany.

Three days of negotiations in the fourth round of Geneva meetings ended recently without concrete results when the Iranian team presented the country’s new “red lines” — diminishing any hope by the Obama administration to claim victory in its approach to Iran’s nuclear ambitions, according to reports from Iran.

The Obama administration had hoped that with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Javad Zarif showing an eagerness to solve the nuclear issue and address the West’s concerns, there would be a possibility for a negotiated solution. An interim agreement penned last November in Geneva was touted as an “historic nuclear deal.”

Under that agreement, Iran, in return for billions of dollars in sanctions relief, limited its enrichment activity to the 5 percent level with a current stockpile of over 10 tons (enough for six nuclear bombs), converted much of its 20 percent enriched stock to harmless oxide, and agreed to allow more intrusive inspections of its nuclear plants by the International Atomic Energy Agency, whose inspections were limited to only agreed-upon facilities.

The Iranian delegation last week presented new red lines that could not be crossed, including the expansion of the country’s research and development for its nuclear program, the need of the country to continue enrichment, and the fact that the country’s ballistic missile program — despite U.N. sanctions — is not up for negotiation.

At the same time, IAEA officials met again with their Iranian counterparts last week in Tehran to discuss information on the work on detonators and needed collaboration by the regime to clear outstanding issues on its nuclear program as part of seven transparency steps Iran had agreed to fulfill by May 15, which has yet to take place.

Reza Kahlili is a pseudonym for a former CIA operative in Iran’s Revolutionary Guards and author of the award winning book “A Time to Betray” (Simon & Schuster, 2010). He serves on the Task Force on National and Homeland Security and the advisory board of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran (FDI).

Syria Will Be A Catalyst For Global Jihad

Iraqi Minister Sees Syria as A US-Israeli Scenario for All Muslim States

The Poisoning of Syrian Children

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iraq’s transportation minister warned that the US and Israeli scenario for the Muslim and Arab countries will not come to an end in Syria and it will spread to other countries as well.

“The Zionists and Americans want to destroy the armies of the Arab countries like Syria, Iraq, Libya and Yemen,” Iraqi Transportation Minister Hadi Farhan al-Amiri said, addressing the 7th General Assembly Meeting of the Islamic Radios and Televisions Union on Sunday.

He noted that the armies of Egypt, Libya and Yemen are confused because they do not know how to fight against the terrorists, and added, “This bewilderment is part of the West–Zionist scenario for those countries.”

Yet, the Iraqi minister saw the Syrian crisis as a strategic miscalculation for the US, saying, “The United States’ miscalculated scenario in Syria is a repetition of its earlier strategic mistake in Afghanistan.”

In relevant remarks in April, Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei warned against the plots hatched by the enemies to create rift among different Muslim sects.

“The goal of the enemy is to bring Islam to its knees and prevent the Shiite community from becoming a role-model,” Ayatollah Khamenei said, addressing a group of eulogists on the occasion of the birth anniversary of Hazrat Fatemeh (AS), the beloved daughter of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH), the wife of Shiite Islam’s first Imam and the mother of Shiites’ second and third Imams.

The Supreme Leader underlined that the Shiism has access to unique possibilities and tools to confront the enemy’s plots.

Ayatollah Khamenei pointed to the attempts made by the enemies to harm Muslim unity and sow discord between Shiite and Sunni Muslims, and said, “Creating rifts among Muslims is like a sword in the hands of the enemies of Islam …”

Iran has always attached crucial importance to paving the way for the enhancement of interaction and cooperation among Muslim nations in a bid to strengthen Muslim unity throughout the world.

In June 2013, Ayatollah Khamenei asked Muslim nations to grow united against the arrogant powers, warning that gaps in the Muslim community will create an opportunity for the Zionist regime to implement its plots against them.

“Unity and companionship among Muslims is an urgent obligation,” Ayatollah Khamenei said in Tehran at the time.

He pointed out that massacre, bloodshed, blind terrorism and its related catastrophes as well as the opportunities created for the occupying Zionist regime are all outcomes of division and difference in the Islamic Ummah.

India Prepared To Nuke Pakistan

Narendra Modi will have to ‘press the nuclear button’ if Pakistan does not ‘mend its ways’, says Shiv Sena chief Uddhav

The India-Pakistan Dilemma

Thackeray

Sunday, 25 May 2014 – 11:27pm IST | Place: Mumbai | Agency: PTI

NDA constituent Shiv Sena on Sunday said with Narendra Modi at the helm, it is expected that good days will come in respect of Pakistan and there will be peace in Kashmir and the entire country but maintained it was difficult to trust the neigbouring country.

In a statement issued in Mumbai, Sena president Uddhav Thackeray said, “So far only India has taken initiative of forgetting the past and starting afresh. Hence, it is difficult to trust Pakistan. But we trust Modi’s leadership and hence we do not want to create hurdles for him. If Pakistan does not mend its ways, Modi will have to press the nuclear button.”

Reacting to Congress’ allegation that it was silent over the invitation to Pakistan premier Sharif for Modi’s swearing-in tomorrow, Uddhav said, “It is as if only Shiv Sena is concerned about Pakistan’s involvement in terrorism activities in India and others have nothing to do with it.” He said a strong government led by a decisive leader has been brought to power to ensure that issues of national security, terrorism and infiltration from neighbouring countries are settled once for all.

Sena has been very vocal in its opposition to Pakistani cricketers playing in India, or artistes from that country performing here.

“What is important is sentiments of the martyrs in India.

Kargil happened during Sharif’s tenure. The cries of their mothers, wives and sisters are bursting our eardrums. The manner in which Sarabjit was killed is not how a good neighbour behaves. Terrorism in Kashmir valley has not ended.

Still now with Modi at the helm, it is expected that good days will come in respect of Pakistan and there will be peace in Kashmir and the entire country,” Uddav said.

“Is (Nawaz) Sharif coming to India to assure Modi of this,” he asked.

Earlier in the day Maharashtra Congress spokesman Sachin Sawant said, “Arrival of Pakistan prime minister for the swearing-in is a big event. It was expected that Shiv Sena would make its stand clear on presence of Nawaz Sharif but its silence shows that its earlier anti-Pakistan stand was just for political convenience.”

“Inviting the Pakistan PM is not wrong. But had it been done by Congress, what would BJP and Sena have done?” he asked.

The Great Jihad

Iran Extends Nuclear Program, Vows Jihad Will Continue

This Is The Great Jihad

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, intimated on Sunday that negotiations over the country’s illicit nuclear program are over and that the Islamic Republic’s ideals include destroying America.

“Those (Iranians) who want to promote negotiation and surrender to the oppressors and blame the Islamic Republic as a warmonger in reality commit treason,” Khamenei is reported to have said a meeting with members of Iran’s parliament, according to a report from the regime’s Fars News Agency.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei emphasized that without a combative mindset, the regime cannot reach its higher Islamic role against the “oppressors’ front.”

Iran continues to lead the world in executions and detention without trial.

“The reason for continuation of this battle is not the warmongering of the Islamic Republic. Logic and reason command that for Iran, in order to pass through a region full of pirates, needs to arm itself and must have the capability to defend itself,” he said.

“Today’s world is full of thieves and plunderers of human honor, dignity and morality who are equipped with knowledge, wealth and power, and under the pretense of humanity easily commit crimes and betray human ideals and start wars in different parts of the world.”

In response to a question by a member of Iran’s parliament on how long the jihad will continue, the Ayatollah Khamenei replied,”Battle and jihad are endless because evil and its front continue to exist. … This battle will only end when the society can get rid of the oppressors’ front with America at the head of it, which has expanded its claws on human mind, body and thought. … This requires a difficult and lengthy struggle and need for great strides.”

Khamenei cited the scientific advancement of Iran. “The accelerated scientific advancement of the last 12 years cannot stop under any circumstances,” he said, referring to the strides the regime has made toward becoming a nuclear power.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in 2012 said that Iran would help any nation or group that confronts the “cancer” Israel, and that Israel is a “cancerous tumor that should be cut and will be cut.”

The Obama administration had hoped that with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Javad Zarif demonstrating an eagerness addressing U.S. concerns over Iran’s nuclear program, there would be a possibility for a negotiated solution. An interim agreement penned last November was touted as a “historic nuclear deal.”

Under that agreement, in return for billions of dollars in sanctions relief, Iran would limit its enrichment activity to the 5 percent level with a current stockpile of over 10 tons (enough for six nuclear bombs), convert much of its enriched stock to harmless oxide and allow for more comprehensive inspections of Iran’s nuclear plants by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

However, last week Iran presented new red lines that could not be crossed, including the expansion of R&D for its nuclear program, the need to continue enrichment, and the fact that Iran’s missile program is not up for negotiation, despite sanctions

At the same time, IAEA officials met again with Iranian delegates last week in Tehran to discuss needed collaboration by the regime to clear outstanding issues on its nuclear program as part of seven transparency steps Iran had agreed to fulfill by May 15.

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/1266936/iran-extends-nuclear-program-vows-jihad-will-continue/#LTZqSiTvLeF8ZzS7.99

Iranian Lies

Defense Minister: WMDs Not in Iran’s Defense Doctrine

Iranian Propaganda

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan reiterated Tehran’s extreme opposition to the proliferation of the Weapons of Mass Destruction, stressing that WMDs have no room in the country’s defense doctrine.

Addressing the 3rd International Security Issues Conference in the Russian capital, Moscow, on Friday, the Iranian minister warned against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

He underlined the vital importance of Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei’s Fatwa (religious decree) on the prohibition of the development of the WMDs, and voiced Iran’s strong opposition to such arms.

The Iranian defense minister also stated that indiscriminate fight against the development of the WMDs worldwide, particularly across the Middle-East, to guarantee restoration of security to the region.

On February 22, 2012, Ayatollah Khamenei said the Islamic Republic considers the pursuit and possession of nuclear weapons “a grave sin” from every logical, religious and theoretical standpoint.

Dehqan left Tehran for Moscow on Friday to discuss mutual cooperation with senior Russian defense officials and also take part in the International Security Conference in there.

Brigadier General Dehqan’s visit to Moscow takes place at the invitation of his Russian counterpart Sergey Shoygu.

The Third International Security Issues Conference is slated to end work on May 24.

New York … We Have A Problem

Minor earthquake centered in Powhatan felt in Northeast U.S.

Minor quake centered in Powhatan was felt as far north as N.Y.

The Big One: The Sixth Seal

Posted: Thursday, May 22, 2014 10:30 pm | Updated: 11:40 pm, Fri May 23, 2014. BY MARK BOWES Richmond Times-Dispatch

A relatively minor earthquake centered in Powhatan County was felt as far north as New York, but aside from jarred nerves and shaking buildings, the tremors caused no major problems, emergencies, damage or injuries in central Virginia, authorities said.

The magnitude-3.2 quake that occurred at 9:47 p.m. Wednesday was too small to cause any serious damage, said Don Blakeman, a geophysicist with the U.S. Geological Survey’s Earthquake Center in Golden, Colo.

“The only kind of damage that would happen with something like this would be if there was something in someone’s house that was very precariously located — like something on the edge of a shelf,” Blakeman said. “You would not get structural damage or window breakage or anything like that.”

The quake’s epicenter was near the 1800 block of Nichols Road (state Route 650), just south of Deep Creek in Powhatan, according to latitude and longitude coordinates calculated by the agency.

“We can get these kind of quakes almost anywhere in the U.S.,” Blakeman said. “And they can happen every year or two, easily.”

Earthquakes of such magnitude can alarm residents who rarely experience them, Blakeman said, “but in terms of effects, it’s not a big deal.”

As of 5:30 p.m. Thursday, more than 1,900 people had posted responses about the quake on the agency’s website, which offers a “Did you feel it?” section. The large majority were Virginia residents, the most coming from Powhatan with 240 responses.

But three dozen people reported experiencing the quake in New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Delaware, West Virginia, the District of Columbia and North Carolina.

Several central Virginia residents said what made Wednesday’s quake a little different than ones they previously experienced was the loud booming noise at the end of it. Residents said they felt tremors or rumbling lasting from a few seconds up to 20 seconds.

“Things started shaking like you’d think it was an earthquake or a heavy truck going down the road,” said Powhatan Undersheriff Chris DeHart. “But right at the end of it, there was kind of like a loud boom.”

Dehart said he initially believed something had exploded. But when he contacted Powhatan emergency communications he learned that residents from all over the county had called. That, he said, “pretty much” confirmed it was an earthquake.

“It was a little unnerving … (but) a little exciting,” said Tracy Cifers, manager of the County Seat restaurant across from the Powhatan Court House.

Cifers said she heard and felt a rumbling noise that lasted about five seconds.

Catherine Callis said she was home when she noticed a collection of dolls shaking on a shelf, and then her children ran from their rooms. Her boyfriend, James Garrigan, said the tremor lasted about 20 seconds and sounded like “heavy thunder or a freight train rolling by.”

“I definitely knew what it was,” Garrigan said.

Lindsay Tharp, an employee of the Four Seasons restaurant across from the Powhatan Courthouse, said she was closing the business with other workers when the quake rumbled. At first she thought the sound was a co-worker rolling a mop bucket across the floor, and then noticed that the bucket was bouncing.

“What did you do,” Tharp said she asked her co-worker. He said, “I didn’t do anything. Did we just have an earthquake?”

“Maybe,” Tharp replied. “Or your mop bucket is just really, really loud.”

Tharp said she didn’t think it was an earthquake until after the shaking stopped.

Powhatan Sheriff’s Investigator Jason Tackett said he heard a loud roar as his house shook for 15 to 18 seconds. “That’s about the fourth or fifth time we’ve had that out here in the last five or ten years,” he noted.

Melissa Jones, a clerk at KB’s Pit Stop on Clementon Road in Amelia, said she was home with her three children when she heard a loud boom and the house began to shake. “I thought somebody ran
off the road and hit the house,” she said.

Jones said it wasn’t until she called her husband that she realized an earthquake had struck.

Blakeman said central Virginia could experience a few aftershocks in coming days or weeks, but it’s not a given.

“We very often see quakes this size that are individual (events) — they are just single quakes and that’s all you see for a while,” he said. “But it is certainly possible that there could be a couple of aftershocks after this … that are smaller in magnitude than the main quake.”

Blakeman said it’s also possible that a larger quake could occur, “but that chance isn’t necessarily increased by (Wednesday’s) quake.”

“But that’s not something that I would worry about,” he added. “The fact that this one happened doesn’t mean that something else is imminent.”

Iranians Trade Uranium For Time

Iranian Delay Tactics

The clerics who hold a tyrannical grip over Iran have done it again — hoodwinked the West while buying more time to develop nuclear weapons.

The United States must put the Islamic republic back on the front burner before it’s too late.
Last November, the regime accepted an interim agreement in Geneva with the so-called “P5+1” world powers — the United States, China, Russia, Britain and France plus Germany — in which some international sanctions would be eased if Iran moderated its illicit nuclear program. The goal was to achieve a formal agreement by July 20 that would prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons (while accepting peaceful nuclear development) in exchange for a formula to remove sanctions as each agreed-upon step is fulfilled by Iran.

The Antichrist Makes Them Take The Mark on Their Hand (Revelation 13)

Shopping for guns in Sadr City

 

Guns In Sadr City

Weapon dealers display illegal weapons at a black market in Iraq, Sept. 1, 2010. (photo by REUTERS/Jamal Penjweny)

Who would imagine that a country with 1.5 million people in the army, police and intelligence apparatuses, would have a black market where weapons such as handguns and machine guns are sold like vegetables in the market?

 

Summary In the Sadr City neighborhood of Baghdad, a weapons market opens its doors every night to tribesmen who buy all kinds of arms, while the government claims to be unaware of the situation.

Author Omar al-Jaffal

Posted May 21, 2014

 Translator(s)Steffi Chakti

This is what is happening in Iraq. Every night, a number of young men set up stands in Sadr City, east of Baghdad, displaying various types of arms and munition.

This market is located in the Mredi area of Sadr City, which constitutes the stronghold of the Sadrist movement led by Muqtada al-Sadr. The area is also known for being home to the leaders of Shiite militias that emerged during the period of heavy sectarian clashes in 2006-2008.

Children practice aiming their guns into open space at the market, while their fathers stand next to them, proudly smiling. Arms are sold just like any permitted goods. The residents of Sadr City even know the opening and closing hours of the bazaar, which is simply known as “the weapons market.”

Al-Monitor met with vendor Rahim, who said, “This market is old, dating back seven years. … The majority of customers are tribesmen who own arms in case fighting erupts between the tribes.”

Sadr City is considered one of the most staunchly tribal areas, where tribal customs are enforced more than state laws. Vendors can provide all types of unavailable arms, including heavy weapons.
“The demand focuses on rifles and guns. Yet, some try to buy PK machine guns, or grenades, which we don’t have,” Rahim said. According to weapon vendors Al-Monitor met, arms are available through buying from and selling to the public who continuously replace their weapons or sell them due to financial hardship. “We buy some arms from soldiers or officers in the Iraqi Ministry of Interior,” Rahim said.

The demand is focused on the popular Glock pistol that is largely made out of plastic and is used by members of the ministries of interior and defense. The Glock pistol is considered a good-quality gun and sells for $2,500.

A security source in the Ministry of Interior told Al-Monitor, “This market is hard to control, given the cohesive social fabric in Sadr City. … The market does not pose a threat to security because the majority of those buying arms are not terrorists, but rather tribesmen who solve their fights among themselves.”

Rahim said, "Every now and then, the army and police raid the market. But they are not able to arrest any vendors, because we have watchers who inform us before they reach the market. By the time they get to the market, we have run away.”

Iskandar Watwat, a member of the parliamentary Security and Defense Committee, told Al-Monitor that he had “no information about this market.” However, Watwat called for “filming this market using mobile phones, so that the required measures can be adopted to arrest the vendors.”

The Fallacy Of Nuclear Containment

Why Israel Fears Containment of a Nuclear Iran

The Fallacy of Nuclear Containment

“For Israelis, their country is too small to comply with existing mutual-deterrence models, because only two or three bombs are what it would take to wipe out their entire country.”

Avner GolovUri Sadot

May 21, 2014

The past seventy years have taught Americans that nuclear weapons can promote stability, but Israel learned a different lesson. While scholars and policy makers in Western capitals contemplate containment scenarios in Iran, Israeli leaders defiantly state: before containment, we will choose preemption.

For containment advocates, Israel’s insistence seems combative and hegemonic. Astute scholars such as Robert Jervis argue that a nuclear Iran might not be disastrous at all, and if handled correctly, may even stabilize the region. After all, North Korea became nuclear, and no nuclear arms race or war has resulted. A nuclear standoff between Israel and Iran, the line goes, would instill more caution into these regional rivals, as has happened between India and Pakistan or the two Cold War superpowers.

But in Israel, a different history was written. In their region, the Cold War wasn’t cold at all, but rather an era of bloody proxy wars against Soviet-backed Arab countries. Regardless, Israelis are predisposed to believe that their enemies are irrationally bent on destroying the Jewish state, even at the face of nuclear retaliation. For Israelis, their country is too small to comply with existing mutual-deterrence models, because only two or three bombs are what it would take to wipe out their entire country.Nuclear deterrence theory requires a “stable nuclear dyad”. But Israelis see themselves as faced with not a single enemy that can be deterred, but rather with a broad league of states and nonstate entities who are out to get them. Such a quantitative asymmetry, Israeli doctrine goes, can only be balanced by securing an overwhelming qualitative advantage. A nuclear-capable Iran, from that perspective, would unravel the existing balance and would leave Israel defenseless against various types of provocation.

In the summer of 1981, Israel attacked Iraq’s nuclear program for precisely those reasons. Israel’s leaders chose the risks of confrontation over the potential loss of Israel’s qualitative advantage. Internal records of the Israeli decision-making process demonstrate how integral this calculus was in leading Israel to strike. “We did the [right] deed, not to allow these crazy Arabs to possess nuclear weapons,” said Rafael Eitan, the Israeli Chief of Staff, as he reflected back on the operation. “Three Hiroshima-type bombs could have destroyed Jerusalem.. Tel Aviv.. [and] Haifa” wrote the Israeli prime minister in a private letter to Ronald Reagan, a day after his jets bombed Iraq.

Israel’s uncompromising approach may be rooted in its particular culture and history, but for Israeli realists, it is the result of a clear-eyed, pragmatic analysis. There are major challenges in applying deterrence theory in the context of the Middle East, and a historical view of Iraq’s nuclear ambitions aptly demonstrates that. Records seized in Saddam Hussein’s palace now validate some of the exaggerated suspicions Israel was accused of in that era. While advocates for Iran’s containment refute some of Israel’s basic assumptions today, it is worth noting that these assumptions turned out being right about Saddam and should at least be seriously considered.

From Pharaoh to Khamenei

Israel’s hypersensitivity is commonly attributed to the tragedies of the Second World War, but its origins run even deeper. Jewish and Israeli children are taught a historical sense of being eternally persecuted and hated just for being Jews. Every year, around the Passover table, Jewish families recite a verse in the Haggadah that asserts: “In every generation, they rise against us to annihilate us,” and even Israel’s secular school curriculum includes the reading of similar biblical tales.

In middle school, Israelis are taught the horrible history of the Holocaust, and many students make trips to the death camps. When the Nazis were faced with their defeat, it is emphasized, their leaders sent more troops to the camps rather than to reinforce the front lines. The underlying lesson is that Nazi hatred of the Jews ran so deep and was so irrational that they would pursue it even over self-preservation.

To the average Israeli, the Islamist regime in Tehran is but a continuation of that mystically unending pattern. They view Iran’s leaders as fundamentally opposed to the Jewish state’s very existence, to such an extent that the Ayatollahs would be willing to take high risks and pay a substantial price in order to annihilate it. Statements by Iran’s Supreme Leader that “Israel must be burnt to the ground,” or Ahmadinejad’s “Israel must be wiped off the map,” only serve to reaffirm these entrenched Israeli preconceptions.

These fears are at the core of the Israeli public’s refusal to accept containment of a nuclear Iran, with polls showing a two-third support among Jewish Israelis for a “preemptive” strike as a final resort. In a nation whose military consists of conscripts from all strata of society, and whose homefront is vulnerable to retaliatory attacks, it is the public that expects to carry the full brunt of the war. Yet, believing their enemies will not be deterred by mutually assured destruction, Israelis have shown steady willingness for over a decade to pay a meaningful price before entering a standoff with a “contained” nuclear foe.

One Against Many

Geography also differentiates how Israelis and Americans think of nuclear deterrence. When Kennan formulated “containment” as a strategy to balance the USSR he considered an equal-sized adversary, while Israel faces a broad coalition of disparately larger rivals. In 1948, it was a coalition of Arab states which threatened the creation of the Jewish state; Israel fought a coalition again in 1967, and again in 1973. Each of the countries Israel was fighting was larger than Israel in both size and in population. And today, such coalitions may include nonstate actors such as Hezbollah, or stateless Jihadi elements that cannot be deterred by potential nuclear retaliation.

These conditions drive Israel to seek a qualitative military edge over any realistic combination of enemies, in order to balance their quantitative advantage and secure its own survival. Whereas the American, Russian, Chinese, British, French, Indian, and Pakistani nuclear programs were designed to respond to a nuclear threat, Israel’s nuclear capability was primarily conceived to cope with conventional threats. Stability in the Middle East, as far as Israeli doctrine goes, will not be attained through nuclear parity but through a relative parity, in which quality balances quantity.

This logic is very much active today in Israel’s dealings with Iran. Setting aside Iran’s proxies and allies, its landmass is approximately eighty times larger than Israel’s, and its population about ten times greater. Hardliners in Iran point to these facts, calling for Iran to lead the Muslim world’s struggle against the Zionist implant.

Invoking Israel’s size and vulnerability, Iran’s former president Hashemi Rafsanjani said the following in his 2001 “Quds day” speech: “when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate…application of an atomic bomb would not leave anything in Israel, but the same thing would just produce damage in the Muslim world.”

The message received in Israel is clear—if Iran gets the bomb, forces within it would seek to lead a coalition of Muslim countries against Israel. No less importantly, in a potential nuclear confrontation between the two sides, Iran’s leadership believes it will prevail. Is this notion entirely far-fetched? Israeli planners openly say that escalation into nuclear war is highly unlikely. They still refuse to tolerate the risk, however, as the costs of such a catastrophic outcome would be even higher.

If America openly chose containment, it would drive the region into a dangerous period. For Israel and Iran a transition to a mutual-deterrence mindset, considering their size disparities, would create incentives for both countries to assume greater risk. Knowing it would, at worst, suffer damage, Iran may feel emboldened to pressure and confront Israel in more aggressive ways. Predicting this, Israel might choose the risky option of striking at Iran first, preempting such developments, but risking war.

Echoes of History

The Middle East has been through this dynamic before, when the possibility of an Iraqi-Israeli dyad began to take form in the late 1970’s. It was in 1974 that Israel’s external intelligence first detected precursors of a nuclear program in Iraq. Over the course of the next seven years, Israel would wage a long campaign of diplomacy, sabotage and subversion against Iraq, which culminated in the 1981 bombing of its nuclear reactor, Osirak.

A close look at the policy-formulation process within Israel’s security cabinet in the years leading up to the strike shows that it was premised on two main assumptions: Saddam Hussein might risk his own survival in order to destroy Israel; and that Israel would be incapable of defending itself against a coalition led by a nuclear-armed Iraq.

According to one Mossad estimate, reported by a close aide to the Prime Minister, Saddam Hussein was assessed to be “a hard-headed megalomaniac, cunning, sophisticated and cruel… Willing to take high risks and drastic action… His possession of a nuclear weapon would enable him to threaten and strike Israel and, thereby, win supremacy over the Arab world.” The report added that Saddam would be “prepared to act at an early opportunity, even in the awareness that retaliation might follow.”

According to Yaakov Amidror, Israel’s former National Security Adviser, who in 1981 was a case officer in the Israeli intelligence corps, Menachem Begin’s thinking was guided by a belief that “Israel’s fate must not be gambled with” and that “any threat to Jewish existence should be firmly treated.”

The belief that Saddam Hussein may act irrationally to harm Israel was not unique to Begin’s government, and represents persistent views that are widespread in Israel. During the Gulf War of 1991, then-Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir often referred to Hussein as a “madman.” The Israeli Military’s Chief Of Staff, Dan Shomron, argued that Saddam was an irrational player who “even thinks in terms of suicide.” He publicly stated that “Saddam Hussein is not deterred, not only by Israel but by a superpower such as the United States.”

Alarmist Realism

Although Israel’s unwillingness to accept containment and nuclear parity may seem paranoid, documents seized by American forces in 2003 indicate that Israel’s reading of Iraq was not at all inaccurate. Recordings of Saddam’s intimate strategy-planning meetings reveal a line of thinking which closely mirrors Israel’s qualms. In the Spring of 1979, Saddam would tell his advisers: “We are willing to sit and refrain from using it… so that we can guarantee the long war that is destructive to [Israel], and take at our leisure each meter of land and drown the enemy with rivers of blood. We have no vision for a war that is any less than this.”

This and other discussions paint a picture of Hussein’s two-stage plan: The first phase in it was to achieve nuclear parity with Israel; the second phase was to use nuclear deterrence to confront Israel on the conventional plain, a level in which Iraq and its allies would enjoy considerable advantages. In one discussion, Saddam explains that unless nuclear parity is reached, Israel would simply drop a bomb on Baghdad if it were to feel existentially threatened.

Despite accusations of alarmism, it turned out that in Iraq’s case, Israeli assessments were realistic in their understanding of Saddam’s thinking. This does not mean that the same logic should automatically be applied to Tehran, of course, and even senior voices within Israel’s security establishment argue that the Iranian leadership is “pragmatic”. However, the Iraqi experience teaches us that alarmism does not necessarily exclude realism, and that in the Iranian case as well, Israel’s pronounced fears should not be dismissed off-hand.

From Containment to Confinement

The risk that the positive American experience with containment will not repeat itself in the Middle East is great. Ironically, by opting for containment, America may increase the incentives for both Israel and Iran to take greater risks. For Americans who believe their national interest is better served by containment of a nuclear Iran than by its preemption, it would be prudent to adapt their strategy to the context of the Middle Eastern.

The geographical disparity between Israel and its rivals could be eliminated by stationing a permanent American military presence in Israel, backed by a nuclear umbrella. In the same vein, a reinforcement of Israel’s “second strike” capabilities would further eliminate disparities caused by the geographic and demographic gap. Another option would be to establish an American-Israeli security treaty, which would reduce the appeal to Iranian hardliners of forming a countering coalition against Israel.

In sum, those who call for containment of a nuclear Iran should think carefully on what a transition to such a reality might actually entail. If the ultimate American interest in the region is stability—and to avoid another Middle Eastern war—opting for an American policy of containment may, ironically, produce the diametrically opposed result.

Avner Golov is a researcher at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies. Uri Sadot is a Research Associate at the Council on Foreign Relations’ program for Middle East Studies.

Antichrist Training International Terrorists (Revelation 13)

Terror suspects ‘trained in Iraq’
By NOOR ZAHRA ,  Posted on » Wednesday, May 21, 2014

Moqtada al Sadr’s Men

FOUR Bahrainis received militia training in Iraq to prepare them to support an invasion by foreign fighters, a court has heard.They reportedly travelled to Iraq in December, 2012 to receive weapons training from Shi’ite strongman Moqtada Al Sadr’s Mahdi Army, according to case files.A fugitive cleric in Iraq related to one of the defendants, 23, allegedly invited the four suspects to a military camp in Karbala where they received firearms training along with 11 other unknown men.However, three of them were later arrested in Bahrain while the fourth, who is being tried in absentia, and the cleric are still at large.The defendants in custody told prosecutors the training was conducted for a “zero hour” when the Mahdi Army would enter Bahrain to carry out terrorist attacks, according to court documents.They said a militia soldier named Ra’ad trained the defendants and told them the Mahdi Army was awaiting orders from Moqtada Al Sadr to enter Bahrain – and that the suspects would be needed “in future” to help stage a coup.

All four have been charged with conspiring with a foreign country, joining the Al Sadr movement, recruiting others and being part of a terrorist cell.

They have also been charged with receiving weapons and explosives training, but the three in custody have pleaded not guilty to all charges.

The High Criminal Court yesterday adjourned the trial until May 29 to summon prosecution witnesses.

“My relative is a famous religious cleric in Iraq and he is wanted in connection with security cases,” the 23-year-old defendant told prosecutors.

“My friends told me that they were going to Iraq and I paid BD2,000 to travel with them.

“I called him (the religious cleric) and told him we were coming to Iraq. He said that was great news because he could train us in weapons.

“We then met a soldier from the Iraqi army named Ra’ad in a coffee shop.

“We met him again the following day at a checkpoint in Karbala before he took us to the military camp, which had flags of Bahrain, Iraq and Moqtada Al Sadr’s army.

“He told us that he was a soldier in Moqtada Al Sadr’s army.

“We then received training in how to fire weapons when crouching, kneeling and other positions.

“He (the soldier) then told us that he loved Bahrain and that ‘we will use you in the future’.

“He said he wanted to help the Bahraini revolution and was waiting for orders from Moqtada Al Sadr for the army to enter Bahrain.

“He meant that when outsiders entered Bahrain, we would use weapons at that time to help overthrow the government.

“We then went shopping and to religious processions before we travelled back to Bahrain. “I was then arrested in Bahrain City Centre mall.” noorz@gdn.com.bh

IT’S TOO LATE

We Must End the Madness of Nuclear Weapons

Tuesday, 20 May 2014 10:34 By Desmond Tutu and David Krieger, Truthout | Op-Ed

The Bikini Atoll

Some five decades ago, world leaders came together on an urgent mission to avert “the devastation that would be visited upon all mankind” in the event of a nuclear war. The five then-existing nuclear weapon states – the United States, Soviet Union (now Russia), United Kingdom, France and China – signed the international nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). They agreed to negotiate in good faith to end the nuclear arms race at an early date and to achieve a world without nuclear weapons.
Five decades later, the nuclear threat has only increased. Four more states – Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea – now have nuclear weapons. The world is more dangerous because the signatories of the NPT have failed to keep their promises and have undermined the rule of law.

Until now, no one has held them accountable. Last month, the Republic of the Marshall Islands courageously took the nine nuclear weapons-wielding Goliaths to the International Court of Justice to enforce compliance with the NPT and customary international law.

This tiny Pacific nation’s firsthand experience with nuclear devastation compelled it to take a stand. The United States exploded 67 nuclear weapons there between 1946 and 1958, including a bomb 1,000 times more powerful than the one dropped on Hiroshima. Marshall Islanders still suffer high cancer rates and environmental poisoning as a result. They are not seeking compensation; in fact, their bold stance could potentially jeopardize the essential funding and protection the US provides them. Yet their desire to protect their fellow humans from the pain and devastation wrought by nuclear weapons outweighs fear of retribution.

Nuclear weapons are fundamentally immoral because they have only one purpose: to indiscriminately destroy human life at the push of a button, without regard for whether they kill innocents or combatants, children or adults. In 1996, the International Court of Justice warned, “The destructive power of nuclear weapons cannot be contained in either space or time. They have the potential to destroy all civilization and the entire ecosystem of the planet.”

No government, army, organization or individual should have the ability to impose nuclear devastation on other humans. This truth is enshrined in Article VI of the NPT: “Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.”

The five original nuclear weapon states signed onto this statement, but have failed to honor their commitments. The four more recent nuclear weapon states – Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea – have followed their lead in defying international legal obligations.

Instead of working to end the insanity of the nuclear age once and for all, these nine countries waste trillions of dollars on their nuclear arsenals, in violation of both the treaty and customary international law. We can no longer afford this perilous game of nuclear roulette. Every day that world leaders delay action on disarmament, they impose the unacceptable menace of nuclear devastation upon every human on the planet.

Addiction to nuclear weapons costs us all in other ways as well. The price of these weapons keeps rising. The nuclear nations spend a combined $100 billion on them every year. Imagine how far this amount could take us in providing access to education, health care, food and clean water for the people of the world.

The people of the Marshall Islands are standing up to say that it’s time to end the era of nuclear madness. They are joined by Nobel Peace Laureates, and leaders and experts from every field who support this historic legal action.

We call on President Obama and the leaders of the other nuclear weapon states to fulfill their legal obligation to negotiate in good faith to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons. It is not unrealistic to ask that the world’s most powerful governments start obeying the law and keeping their promises.
Nothing good has ever come of nuclear weapons. Nothing good ever will. For the sake of all humanity, current and future, it’s time to respect the law and keep the promise.